TO ANSI ASC X12G TG2 and TIGERS Attendees
FROM Dan Cornwell
Illinois Department of Revenue
ASC X12G TG2 Secretary
DATE April 24, 1998
SUBJECT: ANSI ASC X12G TG2/TIGERS Meeting Minutes
April 1 - 3, 1998 Orlando, FL Interim Meeting
Included as a text document attachment are the minutes for the last
meeting. They are also being included as text below for those of you
that have trouble receiving attachments. There are 11 pages in this set.
This information should also be available shortly on DISA's
web site at http://www.disa.org. If you have any questions, my
phone is 217 785-8798 or E-mail at "dcornwell@revenue.state.il.us".
***************************************************
Document No:: ASC X12G/TG2/98-094
ASC X12G TG2 Tax Information Interchange Task Group and
Tax Information Group for EDI Requirements Standardization
(TIGERS) Interim Meeting Minutes
Orlando, FL
4/1/98 - 4/3/98
Prepared by: Dan Cornwell - TG2 Secretary
Illinois Department of Revenue
Wednesday April 1, 1998 - Tax Information Group for EDI
Requirements Standardization (TIGERS)
---------------------------------------------------
Terry Garber opened the meeting with the tentative agenda.
The planned agenda:
Wednesday 4/1/98
* Guest Speakers
* Mapping Presentations - Sales, Withholding
Thursday 4/2/98
* TS 521 Implementation Guide
* TS 540 Implementation Guide
* Lockheed Martin 521 Implementation
* TS 248 Account Matches
* National Child Support Reference Model
Friday 4/3/98
* Motor Fuel Combined Mapping
* PBI Uniformity Status Report
* TXP Banking Convention Update
* IL IFTA Map
Jonathan Lyon (FTA) introduced the first guest speaker, Tom
Pate (Consolidated Information Systems, Inc.), who was
formerly with Disney EDI IS staff. Tom noted he started at
Disney as their only EDI person.
Tom said EDI involves not only the technical aspect but the
business issues which make up the EDI Infrastructure. The
challenge is in balancing management, the business
community and technical areas. It was stressed that the
management and business areas must be addressed. In doing
this other resources can be leveraged and you can also find
the internal barriers that may exist.
Tom said some goals are reduction in cost and meeting or
exceeding customer expectations. He noted EDI is not a
short term IS project but a company commitment. This
concept must be conveyed to management. EDI must be
constantly nurtured within a company. You must understand
your cost of doing business to be effective. You need to be
able to put a dollar value on savings with EDI and convey
why EDI is important.
From a business perspective, you can reduce errors, enable
redeployment of staff, and reduce hiring new staff. Tom
indicated IS isn't really where things happen, but rather in
the business areas. The more EDI people can become team
players in the business area, the better. You must add
values to the business area and you should publicize your
EDI successes.
Tom said that the technical perspective involves many issues
such as responsiveness requirements, partnering with
business areas, providing leadership and keeping informed on
new technologies. Tom said in providing leadership, you
need to recruit EDI champions. You need to be the focal
point for the business areas for EDI.
Tom had several humorous ways of pointing to trouble with
your EDI program such as when your entire EDI staff has left
for Year 2000 consulting. In summary Tom said the EDI
Infrastructure is more than a technology issue, it is an
issue which must embrace both the business and technical
areas.
The next presentation was from Ray Penn (TranSettlements
Network Services). Ray said he is Manager of Sales Support.
He said his job is very challenging in meeting customers'
expectations. He noted that for the first time in history,
we have the ability to offer a product, and proceed through
all the business steps to delivery of the product to the
customer without exchanging one piece of paper. Ray said
his background is in the transportation industry, which was
one of the first industries to use EDI.
Ray noted that there is now no single source solutions to
Information Technology problems. Combinations of
technologies must be used as a well managed team to satisfy
customer needs. There are no more single source solutions.
The Internet is a new technology that is a tool to utilize.
This global network of networks is one of the technologies
whose ease of use is definitely a plus.
EDI over the Internet can be implemented by just using the
Internet as a pipe to carry data by utilizing File Transfer
Protocol (FTP). A file transfer that used to take over an
hour on dial-up communications may now take about 60
seconds. Ray noted FTP is extremely fast and also does data
integrity checking. He noted a term "Internet Year" is
about 6 months and soon will be 3 months. In addressing
security, Ray said in todays environment the pipe is
encrypted, not the data file. Ray feels FTP is far superior
to dial-up communications.
The other method of EDI over the Internet is doing some sort
of document or process while on the Internet.
One approach is a third party with software. Ray indicated
that mainly the Fortune 1000 companies are doing EDI. Most
smaller companies don't. Forcing a particular software can
help ensure accurate data, but can be prohibitive for some
trading partners to implement. Ray says he doesn't think
this is an advantage by forcing software use by a trading
partner, whether issued by you or a third party. He said a
new approach is where the third party becomes an intelligent
gateway, managing your traditional EDI or Web based forms.
Ray said one of the new ways to do EDI is Web based forms
which only require using a Web browser. Ray noted that we
as a taxing agency can develop a web form that incorporates
all of our EDI requirements. The output could then be an
EDI file delivered into our mailbox.
A discussion was held on what are taxing authorities
responsibilities in offering electronic data delivery
alternatives. The general concensus was that many
alternatives will have to be offered in the future,
including Web forms, EDI dial-up, fax, etc. Web based forms
only require a PC and Internet access. Ray said this will
not guarantee accurate data, because keying errors can still
occur. He said the number of trading partners will
definitely increase. One advantage to Web based forms is
that changes to the form can occur instantly to all, instead
of each trading partner's software having to be updated.
Ray said the Internet offers a new and inexpensive global
communication medium to trading partners of all sizes. He
noted our jobs are to find the technologies and manage them
to the advantage of our customers.
After the TIGERS meeting adjourned, Jonathan Lyon (FTA) held
an informational meeting for states currently using
TaxConnect. This was to brief members of the current status
of the TaxConnect VAN. Additional information can be
obtained from Jonathan Lyon (FTA).
Thursday April 2, 1998 - Tax Information Interchange
Development (TG2)
---------------------------------------------------
Terry Garber (Task Group Chair/SC) went over the revised
agenda with some item rearrangements to fit participant
schedules. Evelyn Lopez (PA) and Debbie Wise (PA)
distributed their Employer Withholding EDI mapping. Dan
Cornwell (IL) noted that at the last X12 meeting, Jill
Maloney (PA) had indicated she would take a look at the New
York mapping model of multiple filers per one 813. This
uses multiple TFS loops, one per taxpayer. Debbie indicated
their mapping does not accommodate this. She said she will
go back and research, talk to payroll providers, and
possibly change to this method if the need is there.
For the benefit of some new attendees, a discussion was held
on what TG2 and TIGERS strive to do in standardizing
implementations of tax related transaction sets.
Next, Ray Grim (WI) went over the EDI Combined Reporting Map
for Motor Fuel. He said he represents the FTA's Motor Fuel
Uniformity Committee. Ray went through a brief history of
developing the standard Motor Fuel forms and the progress of
EDI for Motor Fuel Uniformity. He said recently they have
developed a Combined Reporting Map. A brief overview was
given of the former three individual Motor Fuel mappings
which have been combined into this new mapping. The new
mapping uses the 813 with a Terminal Operator, Supplier, or
Carrier information being carried at the TFS level of Table
2. The Table 1 content identifies who is reporting,
identification numbers, etc. If there is no activity, a
corresponding TFS loop must be sent showing no activity.
This mapping reduces the amount of data by eliminating
redundancy in reporting. There is also one TFS looping
structure which will accommodate schedules. Stan Whaley
(FL) and Jonnathan Lyon (FTA) indicated there are additional
codes that will be needed for the schedules.
Ray said this new structure will accommodate all levels
required. Ray said they may want to develop guidelines such
as if you are a terminal operator/supplier, which data
segments are required for this specific case. Ray then went
briefly through the combined mapping document. Ray said
this group is the first to see this combined mapping. Ray
said there is an effort to create a combined paper document
to enable filing all three returns. Ray said he "forged
ahead" to produce the combined EDI mapping. He said this
effort to combine these is in response to industry
representative requests. Ray will be contacting some of
these people to get feedback on his work. Ray said
Wisconsin plans to implement this mapping by January 1,
1999. A discussion of what version/release to base this on
was held. Jonathan Lyon said that because of the delay in
implementation time, it possibly should be based on version
004010. Ray said he may spell out in the documentation the
differences for using 003070 and 004010 standards.
Ray said his intention was to present this map for our
feedback, hopefully soon. Terry Garber (SC) said she thinks
the group needs to take this back and study before we can
comment. Ray said he would like to test this mapping with
trading partners during May, June, and July and implement in
production in Wisconsin in January 1999. Wisconsin would
probably be the lead state in implementing this mapping.
Terry Garber (SC) asked if this combined effort is being
done under the auspices of the FTA Uniformity Committee, and
Ray said yes. Ray said that in April and May, he would like
comments supplied and changes completed. He noted that if
the FTA Uniformity Committee adopts the mapping, states will
be encouraged to upgrade or implement using this mapping.
Terry Garber (SC) encouraged everyone to take this back and
review for Ray.
The next topic was Child Support Enforcement. Laurie Rhea
(CA) introduced herself and gave a recap on the use of the
521 Income or Asset Offset for wage garnishment. She noted
that new legislation has prompted the formation of a new
working group to come up with a model of all the pieces
involved in Child Support Enforcement. This would include
new hire reporting, wage garnishment and financial matching
among others. It was noted that Child Support Enforcement
stems from the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 " termed PRWOA.
The work group came up with a high level overview of what
this process involves. This overview handed out will be
incorporated in the Reference Model for Child Support
Enforcement. This model will include the new hire
requirements at the state and federal level as well as the
financial institution data match requirements. It was noted
that there are many paths data can flow. In financial
matching, data can flow from the state agency to the
financial institution, with a response coming back from the
financial institution. Data can also go from the state to
the federal level. It was noted that child support case
information can be shared among the states involved.
Wage garnishment is also included. This is where an agency
can issue a notice of wage garnishment to an employer. A
levy could also be issued to a financial institution to levy
financial assets. The work group is concentrating on new
hire reporting, financial institution data match, and the
wage garnishment. It is not addressing as yet, the data
exchange between states. Jonathan Lyon (FTA) also
distributed several handouts from Pat Hagen (Office of Child
Support Enforcement) as well as other supporting
documentation. Jonathan noted he has attended two meetings
of Pat Hagen's Financial Institution Work Group. Pat's
group has developed data formats for the bank match
process, based on batch 1099 reporting formats. Jon is
interested in seeing whether these data formats can be
mapped into EDI transaction set format, possibly the 248.
Terry Garber (SC) gave a brief overview of the development
of the 521 Income or Asset Offset as a garnishment vehicle.
Jonathan Lyon (FTA) noted that the Financial Match
Specifications Handbook is what we need to take a look at to
determine if this data could be mapped to the 248 Account
Assignment/Inquiry and Service/Status transaction set.
Laurie Rhea (CA) said she will distribute a task list that
their work group has developed. Jonathan Lyon (FTA) noted
that it varies from state to state on who is responsible for
administering the New Hire regulations.
After lunch, Mike Teller (Lockheed Martin) gave a
presentation on their child support enforcement activities.
They run child support activities in a number of states.
Their goal is to cut in half the amount of time it takes to
get payments to the custodial parent. The problem is there
is a large amount of variation among states in implementing
child support enforcement.
Lockheed Martin is developing an application that takes
various inputs from the 50 states and using a set of rules,
putting wage assignment orders into a database, resulting in
a 521 Income or Asset Offset format which will go to the
Employer. If the employer cannot accept the 521, Lockheed
Martin will try to accommodate them in the format they need.
Mike said their database will be driven by the data supplied
by the states, therefore the closer the states map to the
same 521 format, the better. In this scenario, Lockheed
Martin is serving as a router for wage withholding orders.
This aspect is termed the Electronic Processing of Wage
Assignments. This is being created for a pilot right now
for the Defense Department and it is hoped that it can be
rolled out to the state Child Support Enforcement offices.
Mike gave a brief overview of how the Child Support
Enforcement Office works. The current process is very paper
intensive, involving many parties such as lawyers, parents,
etc. The "back room" is where the payments are received.
They could be very large checks or relatively small checks.
EFT payments are also used. Some research has to be done on
unidentified payments. Funds must be posted, deposited, and
clients records have to be updated. Child Support payments
must then be printed and mailed. This illustrates some of
the complexity of the process involved in the process.
The last part of the process is capturing the direct
deposit. A direct deposit file is sent to the bank and
finally distributed to the obligee's (custodial parent)
bank. Mike said he could be contacted for presentation
copies at E-mail: f.michael.teller@lmco.com
Virginia, Maryland, Defense Financing and Accounting Service
(DFAS) and Lockheed Martin are all involved in a pilot of
this program. Mike indicated that they currently do new
hire reporting for Paychecks and the State of Maryland. He
indicated they would like to move to the 540 Notice of
Employment Status transaction set for this function.
Bonnie Walters (DFAS) said that they have gone through a
consolidation of garnishment work into one center which is
for all D.O.D., with a population of 5.6 million people.
They have done some reengineering to develop an integrated
garnishment system. They are hoping in the future to get
garnishment information electronically from the states to
populate their data fields and drive their process. They
have been starting to take a look at the 521 Income or Asset
Offset. Paul Sullivan (DFAS) said they are working on
looking for automation opportunities. He noted the Defense
Information Systems Agency (DISA) is the hardware entity
that must be used.
It was noted that the pilot would be with withholding orders
going through Lockheed Martin, which is a trading partner
with DFAS, to get the DOD wage garnishment. However,
individual states in the future could go directly to DFAS.
This would be in the DFAS established 521 format.
Next, Laurie Rhea (CA) went over some information that was
sent from Christine Wilder (ADP). This document included a
list of tasks and assignments for work. Laurie solicited
suggestions or additions to the listed tasks. She noted
Marcia Larson (ICESA) will probably not be directly involved
due to her work load. Laurie Rhea (CA) and Jonathan Lyon
(FTA) were tasked with developing an overview of the
process. This overview was handed out earlier today.
Laurie asked for any comments on the overview to be back to
her by the end of April. She noted this is just the
beginning of the business model. It was agreed that
business scenarios should be added to the reference model
educational document. Terry Garber (SC) suggested that
other related issues be included, such as various reporting
time requirements be included in the document.
The next section of work is specifically on the 540 Notice
of Employment Status implementation guide that Christine
Wilder sent out as a first draft. Terry Garber (SC)
suggested including business scenario mock-ups and data
mapping examples. She also suggested a flowchart be
included to refresh in peoples' minds where the 540
transaction set fits in. Laurie said that this set of
information will be repeated for the 521 and 248 transaction
sets. Laurie noted the 820 Payment/Order Remittance Advice
transaction set would also have to be included in the
document.
Stan Farmer (MO) suggested a "big picture" flow be included
with the overview. Terry Garber (SC) suggested that a set
of "recommendations for startup" be developed to aid people
that are new to the process. Terry suggested in the
startup recommendations there are references to third party
processors. Laurie Rhea (CA) said Byron Warren (Finance
Center, U.S. Treasury) had agreed to take the 521 Income or
Asset Offset maps and map them into an 820 Payment
Order/Remittance Advice. In the past Byron had noted that
financial institutions would probably not send back a 521s,
only 820 transaction sets. Byron will also try to map Pat
Hagen's (Office of Child Support Enforcement) Financial Data
Match information into the 248 transaction set.
Terry Garber (SC) suggested that we assign tasks to people.
The new hire process overview could logically go to
Christine. The bank match overview could possibly be
done by Byron Warren. Stan Whaley (FL) will work on
developing an overview of the related issues regarding state
to state data exchange of information. Buster Pfaender (FL)
will also help work on this. Individual case scenarios will
be developed by the people doing the individual data
mappings. Christine Wilder (ADP) for the 540, Laurie Rhea
(CA) for the 521, Mike Teller (Lockheed Martin) for the 820,
and the 248 is still to be assigned. The "big picture"
flowchart may be developed by Laurie. Terry Garber (SC) and
Mike Teller (Lockheed Martin) will work on the
recommendations for start-up.
Terry Garber (SC) said it would be good to have the various
pieces together to have something to hand out. Hopefully by
June, we will have a first draft of the pieces of the
product.
Next the Child Support Enforcement summary document of which
Laurie Rhea (CA) and Jonathan Lyon (FTA) had worked on was
reviewed. Some wordsmithing, elimination of redundant
wording, and reorganizing of paragraphs was done. An
overview of the X12 will also be incorporated, along with
developing the "sales pitch" aspect of the document. Laurie
will make the suggested changes and distribute them for
review well before the June meeting in Columbus, OH.
Laurie will modify the 521 Tutorial document to make it
compliant for the standard version release 004010. This
will include the new date format and delete the century data
element. This will be changed by the June meeting.
Friday April 3, 1998 - Tax Information Group for EDI
Requirements Standardization (TIGERS)
---------------------------------------------------
Dan Cornwell (IL) presented the Illinois IFTA mapping. He
noted in reviewing the mapping that the TRN Trace segment
was in the segment list but not in the segment details. Dan
said he would check to see if this was indeed needed. Terry
Garber noted that not all the filing status options were
covered that appeared on the form. Dan said he would check
on the specific ones that were required.
Dan Cornwell (IL) presented the 151 PBI01 Error Code
uniformity work done to date. Dan noted that he had
contacted Lissa Henderson (NM) to solicit the Petroleum
Industry Data Exchange (PIDX) views on supporting the
development of one error code list. Lissa had E-mailed Dan
supporting the development work and saying she had forwarded
Dan's proposal to some PIDX folks. At the time of the
meeting, no response had been received back.
Dan gave a brief overview of the PIDX error code structure
that the modified structure is based upon. The error code
structure is comprised of a system major and minor codes
combined to indicate general and specific error conditions.
Dan explained he had used this basis and tried to determine
the changes required for expansion to other state's tax type
needs. Basically the changes included expanding the major
code length from 3 to 4 total digits, renumbering, and
adding two new major error categories; "Payment Errors" and
"General Data Errors". There was an expansion of the minor
code length from 1 to 2 digits, renumbering, and the
addition of two minor error codes; "10" for Duplicate, and
"11" for Tolerance.
Dan illustrated how the Illinois Sales Tax error codes could
be converted into this new structure, which should lend
itself to other state's needs. The general concensus was
the expansion was needed. Dan said by the next meeting, he
will try to contact the PIDX people to get their response to
his E-mail that Lissa Henderson (NM) had forwarded. Other
states were asked to take a look at their error code needs
and see if this PBI01 error code structure works for them.
Stan Whaley (FL) presented their Sales Tax mapping. Stan
noted the TIA codes presented are not from the standardized
list. He said they will contact Brooks Knight (TX) to get
the standard codes to use. This mapping is based on version
release 003030. Stan has presented the proposed changes to
bring the mapping up to version release 003070. The main
difference with the upgrade would be the use of the
standardized error codes. Another addition will be using
the BPR for EFT purposes, instead of the older version which
relied on separate TIA segments to convey EFT information.
Stan said he will have the completed revised sales tax
structure done by June.
Terry Garber noted that she will be attending the TAS
meeting next Wednesday to answer questions on the 283 and
154 transaction sets.