Open Forum

  • 1.  Employee Deduction Maintenance - Tax Garnishment/Levy

    Posted 15 days ago
    Good afternoon,

    My question today relates to how you might recommend going about setting up a new tax garnishment/levy for an employee who has previously been subject to a tax garnishment/levy, but has previously paid off that initial tax garnishment levy (i..e several years ago)?  For context, the levy is from the same taxing agency, just this new one is several years after the first one.

    To give you an idea, we have a generic "TAXGAR" deduction code setup in our GP system (version 18.3).  We're a relatively small employer (30-40 employees).  This "TAXGAR" deduction code was applied to an employee years ago to cleanup a state tax garnishment/levy notice.  Over the course of several bi-weekly payrolls, that old balance was paid off in full several years ago.  Therefore, when you go into the "Employee Deduction Maintenance" window, the that old original tax garnishment/levy (let's call it $2,500) is still showing in the "Original Amt." field.  Because it was withheld and paid to the state taxing agency, the "Taken" field also has $2,500,leaving 0.00 in the "Remaining" field.

    We just received a new notice (several years after that old notice) instructing us as the employer to withhold $1,000 (subject to a 25% of gross wages maximum).  We anticipate needing several pay periods to resolve this new tax garnishment/levy notice.

    With that in mind, our initial thought was to overwrite the $2,500 in the "Original Amt." field with the new $1,000 amount, but the "Taken" field is greyed out as not being editable, so it remains at the old $2,500 and the "Remaining" field is a calculated field that adjusts to ($1,500.00) - i.e. negative $1,500.  This doesn't seem correct to us, so the next thought is to just add the new tax garnishment/levy amount ($1,000) to to the old tax garnishment/levy amount ($2,500) which would result in a new "Original Amt." field of $3,500 with the old "Taken" amount still showing $2,500, leaving the "Remaining" field amount as $1,000 which ties back to the new tax garnishment/levy notice amount.

    My gut tells me this second way (add the new amount to the old amount in the "Original Amt." field to net the new amount in the "Remaining" field) is probably the way people handle this, but I wanted to ask the GPUG forum if I'm missing anything.

    We are getting a popup when we try to save the combined amount (old + new) in the "Original Amt." field that says "Human Resources is registered.  You may want to save changes in Human Resources first or run the Update Benefit Setup reconcile.  Do you want to continue?"  To my knowledge, we've never really used the Human Resources module to a deep degree.  I think it used to be a module you had to pay extra for, so we didn't initially include that module when we initially rolled out GP in our organization.  But then later, I believe the Human Resources module started to be included as part of the standard GP license.  In any event, I think we are going to ignore that popup (unless one of you let us know we'd be making a fatal mistake by doing so), by selecting "Yes" to continue.

    I do see that we previously had a "Start Date" (required field) and "End Date" entered in the Employee Deduction Maintenance window.  Those dates are several years back.  I'm thinking we just need to uncheck the "Inactive" box and leave the End Date blank for now until this new tax garnishment/levy is resolved.

    Would you suggest we create a new deduction code instead?  Something like "TAXGAR2" in order to track those completely separately?

    If you see a blind spot, please let me know.


    Ashton Blocker
    Joint Municipal Water and Sewer Commission
    Academy - Online Interactive Learning from Experts

  • 2.  RE: Employee Deduction Maintenance - Tax Garnishment/Levy

    Posted 14 days ago


    We have done, as you suggest, in that adding old + new limit, and taking out the end date, and activate.  We have someone, who has had 4 garnishments in a row, to take, as each reach their maximum.  You might add a comment in the note field, so you will have a reference on what you have done, for future reference.  The continue on the HR question, didn't cause any issues, either.



    Pamela Stephenson
    Director of Accounting and Finance
    Ashley Ward, Inc.
    Mason OH

    Academy - Online Interactive Learning from Experts

If you've found this thread useful, dive deeper into User Group community content by role