Bloomberg News on 1/27/2011 released the findings of its report on a proposal to require every U.S. employer to use E-Verify to confirm the legal status of all new hires.  The report  revealed that businesses with less than 500 employees would undoubtedly bear the greatest burden, spending about $2.6 billion a year to use the government’s “free” web-based program, compared with less than $100 million for the 4% that used it in 2010.

A study conducted in December 2010 by Westat that was commissioned by the government as part of a multi-year evaluation of the E-Verify program represents the result of their 2009 findings of a nationwide survey of 511 respondents that encompassed nonusers (companies that have never signed a Memorandum of Understanding) to participate in E-Verify, focus groups of nonusers, surveys of users, and interviews with employees that received TNC’s (Tentative Non-Confirmations).

The primary finding of the survey and the principal barrier to participation in E-Verify appears to be a lack of awareness of the Program. Among the case study participants, 63 percent were not familiar with E-Verify. Case study participants were often positive about the characteristics of E-Verify, and among the 101 who answered a question concerning their future plans, 23 percent definitely planned to participate in E-Verify in the future (while 32 percent would not participate unless mandated to do so).

For those employers who have heard of E-Verify, the information often came from professional associations, media outlets and government materials or publications.

The other primary reasons for not participating were not perceiving a benefit from participating, and thinking it would be too costly or time-consuming to participate.  The perception of burden is based in part on employers’ negative experiences with other government Internet-based programs (such as the Social Security Administration/Business Services Online Website).

Large employers were much more likely to be familiar with E-Verify than small employers. A majority of large employers in the case study (56 percent) were familiar with E-Verify, compared with 29 percent of medium-sized employers and 17 percent of small employers.

The case study participants supported many program changes to E-Verify, with the most popular including the increased use of technology to identify fraudulent documents and to verify identity, allowing a formal appeal by an employer and/or employee of a final case finding, and allowing verification of job applicants before a job decision is made.

Some participants who decided not to use the program did so because they did not perceive any benefit in using it compared to the cost, the manpower, training and the logistics required to use the program.  Others were not using it because they felt that it was a government priority rather than a business priority.  Some felt that it wasn’t their responsibility to control illegal immigration and that it should be the government’s responsibility.

One insightful response came from a business owner who stated, “Hold me, personally, and my company harmless from any loopholes in the system that become exploited by the undocumented population . . . bottom line . . . I don’t want to make the 5 o’clock news by complying with a broken system.”

In summary, E-Verify is not perfect – it doesn’t identify identity theft issues, but it is immigration compliance best practice and should carefully be considered and the pro’s and con’s discussed with an immigration attorney that is informed and specializes in employer compliance issues prior to enrollment.

We link to the Westat Study here.  More on E-Verify Strengths and Weaknesses

We link to our I-9 Employer Compliance Resource Center here.

The Meg Whitman scenario playing out in the news the last few days, is a good opportunity to address this issue and just how exactly the SSA No-Match Letter process works.

If the combination of name and SSN on a Form W-2 can not be matched to an SSA record, SSA is unable to attribute the earnings to a worker’s record. There are a number of reasons why reported information may not agree with our records, such as typographical errors, unreported name changes, inaccurate or incomplete employer records or misuse of an SSN.

What is a No-Match Letter?

After SSA processes the wage reports submitted by the employers, they attempt to resolve items that cannot be matched by sending letters to employees, employers and self-employed individuals to inform them when a reported name or SSN does not match SSA’s records. These letters are referred to as “no-match” letters and their purpose is to obtain corrected information to help SSA identify the individual to whom the earnings belong so that the earnings can be posted to the individual’s earnings record.

No-match letters fall under two categories:

• Employer No Match Letters — These letters may also be referred to as Employer Correction Request or Educational Correspondence (EDCOR) letters; and

• No Match Letters sent to workers whose earnings could not be credited to SSA’s records are referred to as Decentralized Correspondence or DECOR letters.

SSA began sending no-match letters to workers in 1979 and to employers in 1994.

Who gets a No-Match Letter?

When SSA processes wage reports, it notifies every worker whose name and SSN could not be matched to SSA’s records. This letter is sent to the address on the worker’s Form W-2. If there is no address or an address is not found in the Postal Service database of valid addresses, this letter is sent to the employer. The new DHS regulation does not address these letters.

Employer Notices (EDCOR)

Approximately two weeks after the release of the worker letters, SSA sends employer no-match letters. Currently, these are sent to any employer who reported more than 10 no-matches that represented more than 0.5% of the W-2s submitted by that employer.

The Employer notice advises of the no-matches and asks for corrected information.

Employer notices can list up to 500 SSNs (no names) that could not be matched (the employer can contact SSA for a full list if there are more than 500 errors). The employer is asked to prepare Forms W-2c (Corrected Wage and Tax Statement) for each of the SSNs listed in the Employer notice that the employer is able to correct.

If you are enrolled in E-Verify and receive a TNC

When a Tentative Non-Confirmation (TNC) is issued, the employer must notify the employee of the TNC and give the employee the opportunity to contest that finding.  If the employee chooses to contest the SSA TNC, he or she has eight business days to visit an SSA office with the required documents to initiate the process to prove identity and support the correction of the SSA record. Until the TNC is resolved, even if it takes longer than eight days, the employee must be allowed to keep working and cannot be fired or have any other employment-related action taken against him or her because of the TNC.  If the employee fails to contact SSA within the eight day contest period, the employee is considered a no show and a final non-confirmation is issued by E-Verify.  At this point, the employer should discuss this situation with their immigration attorney and seriously consider terminating employment.  A recent electronic business process enhancement, EV-STAR, allows SSA to use the E-Verify system to inform the employer of the case resolution once the employee visits SSA and resolves the issue.

For employees who successfully resolve a TNC, correcting SSA records is a useful result of the E-Verify process, helping individuals identify and resolve problems with their Social Security records. The work done to update records to resolve an E-Verify mismatch would need to be done at the time the individual applies for Social Security benefits.

Here is a sample of the E-Verify Referral Notice to the Employer when there is an SSS No-Match.  For more information on this topic, we link to our website where we have our employer compliance resource center and list of services and solutions for employers.