Regions

Italian state returns to the steel sector with Arcelor-Mittal

Italian state returns to the steel sector with Arcelor-Mittal
Authors: Giorgio Cherubini, Giancarlo Cherubini The article published in INSOL Europe’s Eurofenix magazine last issue,…
Read full article

How Big Can the Carrot Be? The EEOC’s New Proposed Rules Regarding Permissible Level of Incentives in Health-Contingent Workplace Wellness Programs

Many employers have established wellness programs to promote employee health and, in doing so, help counter the ever increasing costs associated with employer-sponsored health benefit plans. Often employers want to establish programs that provide employees with incentives to achieve certain health outcomes, such as smoking cessation or weight loss. Employers must exercise caution in creating such health-contingent wellness programs, which necessarily require employees to disclose health information, because the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (“GINA”) prohibit medical inquiries unless there is a demonstrated business necessity or responding to the health inquiry is voluntary.

Read full article

DoD Codifies NISPOM and Incorporates Other Industrial Security Changes

Readers involved in the defense industry who deal with classified information will be familiar with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (“NISPOM”), the manual that establishes procedures for government contractors to manage and safeguard classified information in their possession during the performance of contracts, programs, bids, and research and development projects.

On December 21, 2020, the Department of Defense (“DoD”) published a final rule with request for comments (the “Final Rule”),[1] effective on February 24, 2021, codifying NISPOM in Title 32, Part 117 of the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”). In addition to codifying the NISPOM, the Final Rule makes other changes relevant to industrial security. Read more…

Read full article

Video: Biden’s “American Rescue Plan,” Incentivizing Employee Vaccination, EEOC Conciliation Process – Employment Law This Week

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, President Biden takes office, making combatting COVID-19 his top priority. Employers are also planning ways to incentivize employee vaccination.

Read full article

Howard & Howard Names Class of 2021 Shareholders

ROYAL OAK, Mich., January 19, 2021 – Following the end of a uniquely challenging year, our commitment to our clients, the firm, and each other has remained of utmost importance. As such, Howard & Howard is pleased to recognize a group of attorneys who have exemplified that commitment through and through—the 2021 class of shareholders. “We are delighted to welcome this group of exceptionally talented young attorneys to our partnership and the next level of their careers,” said Mark A. Davis, president and CEO. “Our new partners practice in a wide range of areas and share our firm’s commitment to helping our clients succeed.”

Read full article

WEEKDAY UPDATE: MORATORIUMS ON EVICTIONS AND DISTRAINT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST COMMERCIAL TENANTS

In a bid to assist commercial tenants, there are currently two moratoria in place on the exercise of eviction and distress rights against commercial tenants, one which relates to the now defunct Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance (“CECRA“) program and the other which is tied to the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy (“CERS“) program. A summary of each is contained below:

Read full article

Change of Plans: Planning for the Biden Presidency and Potential Customs Transfer Pricing Opportunities During a Pandemic

As January 20, 2021 approaches and the advent of a new president and presidency emerges, what can we expect from a Biden administration and its Customs and Border Protection (“CBP” or “Customs”) Transfer Pricing policy? What opportunities are available for global companies to manage and make retrospective inter-company Transfer Pricing adjustments? Different customs options and opportunities exist depending upon each companies’ analysis and needs. Read more…

Read full article

2020 Year End Review: CFIUS Regulations & Export Controls Impacting CFIUS Scrutiny

In 2020, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) issued several final regulations to implement the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (“FIRRMA”), which as readers will recall expanded the jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) to review and take action to address national security concerns arising from certain investments and real estate transactions involving foreign persons. Read more…

Read full article

U.S. Government Imposes Additional Export Controls on China Trade

Towards the end of its term, the Trump Administration continues to strengthen regulation of trade with China, even when it means leaving implementation of the new controls to the Biden Administration.

For companies doing business in and with China, the increased export controls and economic sanctions – a recent executive order prohibiting transactions with popular Chinese mobile payment apps, a new ‘Military End Use’ list that tightens export licensing for designated items, and a ban on securities investments in Chinese military entities – call for enhanced due diligence to ensure compliance. Read more…

Read full article

California Supreme Court Concludes That Dynamex Applies Retroactively

As we have previously written here, the California Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court dramatically changed the standard for determining whether workers in California were properly classified as independent contractors, creating a new “ABC” test that has subsequently been codified as AB 5. A significant question left open was whether Dynamex would apply retroactively.

In Vasquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc., the California Supreme Court has concluded that Dynamex indeed applies retroactively.  Rejecting an argument that the “ABC” test created new law and therefore should not be applied retroactively, the California Supreme Court determined that the decision did nothing more than provide an authoritative definition of what it means to “suffer or permit to work.”

Read full article