Unemployment Trust Fund

The Unemployment Trust Fund (UTF) is composed of 59 accounts in the United States Treasury related to unemployment insurance program. Specifically, there are 53 state accounts, 4 federal accounts, and 2 accounts in connection with Railroad Retirement Board.

State accounts

There is one account for each state (plus District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands). Each state account consists of the contributions and reimbursements collected by the state. Interest earned on these amounts are credited to the state accounts. Money is withdrawn from state accounts mainly to pay unemployment benefits, with limited statutory exceptions.

States sometimes use the term "Unemployment Trust Fund" to refer to their own state account.

Federal accounts

There are four federal accounts in the UTF that are used to provide federal financing.

1. The Employment Security Administration Account (ESAA) is used to fund the administrative costs of the UI system and of other related programs. Virtually all of the income to this account is from FUTA tax.

2. The Extended Unemployment Compensation Account (EUCA) pays for the federal share (50%) of benefit outlays under the federal-state EB program. EUCA is also used to fund temporary recessionary benefit programs, such as the Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) program.

3. The Federal Unemployment Account (FUA) provides loans to states under Title XII of the Social Security Act. All state loan repayments, either voluntary or through FUTA credit reduction, are deposited in this account, and so are loan interest payments.

4. The Federal Employees Compensation Account (FECA) finances benefit payments to former federal civilian and military employees.

gollark: It's easy to say that if you are just vaguely considering that, running it through the relatively unhurried processes of philosophizing™, that sort of thing. But probably less so if it's actually being turned over to emotion and such, because broadly speaking people reaaaallly don't want to die.
gollark: Am I better at resisting peer pressure than other people: well, I'd *like* to think so, but so would probably everyone else ever.
gollark: Anyway, I have, I think, reasonably strong "no genocide" ethics. But I don't know if, in a situation where everyone seemed implicitly/explicitly okay with helping with genocides, and where I feared that I would be punished if I either didn't help in some way or didn't appear supportive of helping, I would actually stick to this, since I don't think I've ever been in an environment with those sorts of pressures.
gollark: Maybe I should try arbitrarily increasing the confusion via recursion.
gollark: If people are randomly assigned (after initial mental development and such) to an environment where they're much more likely to do bad things, and one where they aren't, then it seems unreasonable to call people who are otherwise the same worse from being in the likely-to-do-bad-things environment.I suppose you could argue that how "good" you are is more about the change in probability between environments/the probability of a given real world environment being one which causes you to do bad things. But we can't check those with current technology.

See also
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.