Royal

DEVELOPMENT OF INTEREST: State Lawmakers to Push for Student Loan Tax Exemption Amongst Private Employers

January 25, 2022

Many employers are facing challenges in finding and retaining staff during the pandemic. A new legislative proposal may help with both.


Earlier this month, Massachusetts lawmakers, led by Rep. Katie Lipper-Garabedian, argued for the implementation of a new tax exemption for private Massachusetts employers who assist their employees with paying off student loan debt.


Capped at $2,000 per employee, lawmakers argue the exemption would provide much needed relief for student loan borrowers. Similar programs utilized by companies like Fidelity and PwC, which have had great success, serve as an attractive employee benefit. They have shown to be effective at retaining employees, which employers have spent much time and energy into training and recruiting highly qualified candidates. As we are the amid the “Great Resignation,” with millions of open jobs across a wide array of industries, implementing a program to this effect could help employers lure employees back into the workforce.


Currently, there are nearly 872,000 Massachusetts employees straddled with a collective student loan debt of $36 billion. The Department of Revenue estimates the tax exemption would have a “modest” cost, but a “resounding economic impact for years to come.”


Whether the legislation ends up passing remains to be seen. Even still, it may be worthwhile for private employers to start thinking about implementing a student loan assistance program, as it does have its benefits. 


If you have questions about this topic, or any other general employment issues, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Massachusetts’ Superior Court Judge Rules Recording in Workplace Admissible

February 19, 2025
The Massachusetts Superior Court found that Massachusetts’ wiretap statue does not bar employers from using allegedly illegally obtained recordings in civil proceedings. In a recent case, an employee claimed she was forced to resign. Plaintiff’s coworker recorded an argument between the Plaintiff and her supervisor without her consent and shared it with supervisors. The employee then sued for discrimination and retaliation, along with two counts for violation of the wiretap statute. Massachusetts is a two-party consent state but, in this case, it was found that the consent of only one party was needed because nothing in the Wiretap Statute bars the use of an allegedly illegally obtained communication in a civil proceeding. The court found that the provisions about the use of illegally obtained communications in evidence are limited to criminal trials. However, depending on the court, results may differ, as this recording was central to proving and/or disproving the Plaintiff’s claim, and as such, the recording was indispensable as a piece of evidence. Issues with unauthorized recordings have been arising all the time in civil proceedings because recording devices are everywhere, whether they be a cell phone, laptop or other recording device. This ruling is good for employers, as if there is an otherwise inadmissible recording that is made that disproves an employee’s claims, it can be admissible as evidence if meets the same scenario above. However, employers must be careful to use these recordings as they may be inadmissible and may not show the same thing that the employer believes in the court’s eyes. This being said, it is prudent to consult an attorney before utilizing a recording for any employment action or in legal action to avoid unwanted consequences. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

After the DEI Executive Order

February 14, 2025
What Are the Compliance Requirements for Private Employers?
Share by: