DocketNumber: Appeal, No. 2237 C.D. 1976
Citation Numbers: 42 Pa. Commw. 553
Judges: Blatt, Craig, Crumlish
Filed Date: 5/11/1979
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 6/24/2022
Opinion by
The sole issue raised by this petition for review is whether a fellowship grant in the amount of $11,250 paid to Richard Sharvy by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), a federal governmental agency, constitutes “wages” within the meaning of Section 4(x) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Act).
Sharvy had been employed by Swarthmore College as a researcher from October, 1972 until mid-April, 1973, at a salary of $250 per month. On February 10, 1974, Sharvy applied to the Bureau of Employment Security (Bureau) for unemployment benefits which
It is Sharvy’s contention that the Bureau improperly excluded the fellowship award from his base year wages when computing the amount of benefits he was eligible to receive and further argues that his contention is supported by the fact that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has declared amounts received from an NEH fellowship grant taxable as compensation for services includable in gross income.
In determining whether the amounts at issue in this litigation are wages, we must look to the definition of “wages” found in subsection (x) of Section 4 of the Act which provides in pertinent part: “ ‘Wages-’ means all remuneration (including the cash value of mediums of payment other than cash) paid by an employer to an individual with respect to his employment. . . .” The issue is thus whether the scholarship grant represented “remuneration” under Section 4(x) of the Act and whether or not such payments are taxable by the IRS as gross income is not controlling in the determination. The terms “income” and “wages” obviously are not synonymous. Section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (Code)
Under federal law
We conclude, therefore, that the Bureau was bound by the information supplied by the federal agency that the payments in question did not constitute wages within the meaning of the Act and that the Board
Accordingly, we
Order
And Now, this 11th day of May, 1979, the decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review numbered B-137058, dated November 19, 1976, is hereby affirmed.
Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §753 (x).
26 U.S.C. §61 (a).
See Title 5, Chapter 85 of the U.S. Code.
An amendment deleting the provision of 5 U.S.C. §8506 regarding the conelusiveness and finality of a federal agency’s findings upon a state agency became effective October 20, 1976, with respect to findings made after that date. It is, therefore, inapplicable to the case at bar.