HomeMy WebLinkAbout91-569 CollinsMr. William J. Collins, Jr. 91 -569
M.S.A.D.P. Inc.
Act 511 Tax Collectors and Administrators
106 Dekalb Street
Bridgeport, PA 19405
Re: Public Employee /Official, FIS, Corporation, Consultant,
Independent Contractor, Data Processing Services, Tax
Collections and Administration
Dear Mr. Collins:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
August 20, 1991
This responds to your letter of July 10, 1991, in which you
requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the manager of a corporation which acts as an
independent contractor in providing data processing services
including tax collections and administration to various school
districts and municipalities located within the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania is to be considered a public official /employee under
the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), and
therefore, required to comply with the financial reporting and
disclosure provisions of the Ethics Law.
Facts: You seek the advice of the State Ethics Commission
regarding the status of M.S.A.D.P. Inc. relative to filing a
Statement of Financial Interests under Act 9 of 1989. (It is
noted that your letter referenced former Act 170 of 1978, and you
are advised that the present Ethics Law is embodied in Act 9 of
1989, 65 P.S. 5401 et sect.) Although your letter did not state
your relation to M.S.A.D.P. Inc., in a telephone conversation
with Assistant Counsel for the Commission on August 16, 1991, the
contents of which conversation are incorporated herein by
reference, you clarified that you are employed as the manager of
M.S.A.D.P. Inc. You further clarified that you have submitted
your inquiry on your own initiative, without any express
authorization to inquire on behalf of M.S.A.D.P. Inc. or other
persons involved with that corporation.
M.S.A.D.P. Inc. is a corporation which for twenty years has
provided data processing services as an independent contractor to
Mr. William J. Collins, Jr.
August 20, 1991
Page 2
various school districts and municipalities located within the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Chief among those services
provided is that of Act 511 tax collections and administration,
including Earned Income Tax, Occupational Privilege Tax, and
Business Privilege /Mercantile Tax.
Noting that you have reviewed two Opinions of this
Commission, specifically Opinion 80 -016, issued March 12, 1980
and Opinion 80 -033, issued August 20, 1980, you state your belief
that you fall under the holding of the former Opinion and would
not, therefore, be considered a public official as defined in the
Ethics Law. You seek the advice of this Commission in this
regard.
Discussion: It is initially noted that your inquiry may only be
addressed from your perspective as manager and an employee of
M.S.A.D.P. Inc. To the extent your inquiry regarded the
corporation itself, you are advised that the financial reporting
and disclosure provisions of the Ethics Law apply to individuals,
not corporations. To the extent your inquiry regarded
individuals other than yourself, such would be a third party
request which could not be answered by this Commission.
Considering your request from your perspective, the issue is
whether, in your capacity as an employee and manager of
M.S.A.D.P. Inc., you would be considered a public
official /employee as defined in the Ethics Law. It is noted
that this response relies primarily on your description of
M.S.A.D.P. Inc. and its role as set forth in your letter of July
10, 1991.
The focus of the inquiry is necessarily directed to
M.S.A.D.P. Inc., and its role as an independent contractor in
providing data processing services, including tax collections and
administration, to various school districts and municipalities
located within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. M.S.A.D.P. Inc.
would indeed appear to fit more closely within the parameters of
the Commission's Opinion in Fraas, Opinion 80 -016, which also
involved a private, independent contracting tax collection agency
with no discretionary duties or authority, employed by many
school districts and municipalities for collecting taxes. In
contrast, in Flower, Opinion 80 -033, the Commission considered
the Carlisle Area Earned Income Tax Bureau which was actually
formed by various governmental bodies to employ an Earned Income
Tax Officer, to make rules and regulations, and to see that the
local Earned Income Tax was collected and distributed to the
member districts. The Bureau was composed of one representative
from each of the taxing bodies. Furthermore, the Bureau
functioned in more than an administrative capacity by exercising
Mr. William J. Collins, Jr.
August 20, 1991
Page 3
discretion in compromising claims and authorizing legal action.
In Flower, the Commission determined that the Carlisle Area
Earned Income Tax Bureau itself was a governmental body and
therefore was within the parameters of the Ethics Law.
Although Fraas and Flower were both decided under former Act
170 of 1978 and would therefore not be controlling, the reasoning
of the Commission as set forth in those Opinions would appear to
continue to apply under present Act 9 of 1989. In light of
M.S.A.D.P. Inc.'s nature as set forth above, you are not to be
considered a public official /employee as defined in the Ethics
Law. This conclusion is based upon an objective review of the
information you have provided from which it appears that
M.S.A.D.P. Inc. would not be a governmental body but rather would
be a private entity acting as an independent contractor. This
conclusion is also consistent with Rogers v. Com., State Ethics
Commission, 80 Pa. Commw. 43, 470 A.2d 1120 (1984).
Thus, because you are not a public official /employee as
defined by the Ethics Law, you would not be subject to the
financial reporting and disclosure requirements of the Ethics
Law. Accordingly, you would not be required to file the
Statement of Financial Interests in your capacity as manager of
M.S.A.D.P. Inc.
Although you are not subject to the financial reporting and
disclosure requirements of the Ethics Law, you are subject to
Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law which apply to everyone.
For your information, Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law
provide in part that no person shall offer to a public
official /employee anything of monetary value and no public
official /employee shall solicit or accept any thing of monetary
value based upon the understanding that the vote, official
action, or judgement of the public official /employee would be
influenced thereby.
Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been
addressed under the Ethics Law; the applicability of any other
statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct
other than the Ethics Law has not been considered in that they
do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Law.
Conclusion: As manager of M.S.A.D.P. Inc., a corporation which
acts as an independent contractor in providing data processing
services including Act 511 tax collections and administration to
various school districts and municipalities located within the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, you are not to be considered a
public official /employee as defined in the Ethics Law.
Accordingly, you would not be subject to the reporting and
Mr. William J. Collins,_ Jr.
August 20, 1991
Page 4
disclosure requirements of the Ethics Law and need not file a
Statement of Financial Interests. Sections 3(b) and (c) of the
Ethics Law are applicable to everyone. Lastly, the propriety of
the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics
Law.
Pursuant to Section 7(11), this Advice is a complete defense
in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and
evidence of good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal
proceeding, providing the requestor has disclosed truthfully all
the material facts and committed the acts complained of in
reliance on the Advice given.
such.
This letter is a public record and will be made available as
Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any
reason to challenge same, you may request that the full
Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance before the
Commission will be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the
Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be in writing
and must be received at the Commission within 15 days of the date
of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code 52.12.
'ncerely,
t^%t,-- cy,,,,Ak
Vincent J. Dopko,
Chief Counsel