The department, after public hearing, may issue general orders forbidding methods of competition in business or trade practices in business which are determined by the department to be unfair. The department, after public hearing, may issue general orders prescribing methods of competition in business or trade practices in business which are determined by the department to be fair.
Section 704.95 Practices regulated by the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection (as amended by Act 76).
Practices in violation of s.
704.28 or
704.44 may also constitute unfair methods of competition or unfair trade practices under s.
100.20. However, the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection may not issue an order or promulgate a rule under s.
100.20 that changes any right or duty arising under this chapter.
4. Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
DATCP estimates that it will use approximately 0.20 FTE staff to develop this rule. That includes time required for investigation and analysis, rule drafting, preparing related documents, coordinating advisory committee meetings, holding public hearings and communicating with affected persons and groups. DATCP will use existing staff to develop this rule.
5. Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
This existing rule affects residential rental property owners, managers and tenants.
6. Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
Federal law does not generally regulate landlord and tenant relationships. The Federal Fair Housing Act of 1968, however, does prohibit a landlord from discriminating because of a renter's race, sex, national origin, or religion.
Many states, including all of Wisconsin's neighbors, have statutes or regulations that regulate landlord and tenant relationships.
7. Anticipated Economic Impact
DATCP expects the proposed rule to have no economic impact statewide and locally. DATCP proposes to make relatively minor changes to existing rule to bring the existing rule into conformity with recent statutory changes.
Contact Person
Kevin LeRoy, Program and Planning Analyst, DATCP; Phone (608) 224-4928
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on January 14, 2014.
Rule No.
Relating to
Leaf tobacco, buying and selling.
Rule Type
Permanent
1. Description of the Objective of the Rule
DATCP is proposing to repeal Chapter
ATCP 104, which regulates transactions between tobacco growers and the buyers who purchase their product.
2. Description of Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule and of New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives; the History, Background and Justification for the Proposed Rule
Ch.
ATCP 104 prohibits leaf tobacco buyers from engaging in certain practices:
• Attempting to induce another tobacco buyer to engage in specific activities that would artificially manipulate the market price for tobacco.
• Refusing to negotiate with any grower for the purchase of tobacco because such tobacco was previously graded or submitted for grade.
• Falsely representing in negotiations with a grower that any particular lot or crop of tobacco was purchased at less than the price actually paid, or that another tobacco buyer has or will cease buying tobacco.
• Purchasing tobacco under any contract which does not include a specific time within which delivery and payment are to be made.
• Giving or offering to give any grower any secret or separately stated bonus, commission, payment or other consideration.
Chapter
ATCP 104 also prohibits tobacco growers or sellers from soliciting or receiving any secret or separately stated bonus, commission, payment or other consideration.
This rule was initially promulgated in the 1950s when tobacco farming was a prominent business in Wisconsin, and much of the crop was sold in cash markets at the conclusion of the growing season. This rule was necessary to ensure fair transactions between growers and buyers.
Today, the crop is generally produced and sold under contract (as opposed to a cash market at the end of the season). This means that ch.
ATCP 104, as it is currently written, is not relevant to the current industry.
Proposed policies
• DATCP proposes to repeal ch.
ATCP 104 in its entirety. This will allow for a simplification of the overall administrative code.
• Alternatively, if the public hearing process reveals that the rule does or could play an important role in the tobacco growing industry, DATCP may consider either of the following:
• Maintain the rule in its current form.
• Modify the rule to bring it into alignment with current tobacco leaf buying and selling practices.
Policy alternatives
• Do nothing.
3. Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
Section 93.07 Department duties. It shall be the duty of the department:
(1) REGULATIONS. To make and enforce such regulations, not inconsistent with law, as it may deem necessary for the exercise and discharge of all the powers and duties of the department, and to adopt such measures and make such regulations as are necessary and proper for the enforcement by the state of chs.
93 to
100, which regulations shall have the force of law.
The department, after public hearing, may issue general orders forbidding methods of competition in business or trade practices in business which are determined by the department to be unfair. The department, after public hearing, may issue general orders prescribing methods of competition in business or trade practices in business which are determined by the department to be fair.
4. Estimate of the Amount of Time that State Employees will Spend to Develop the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
DATCP estimates that it will use approximately 0.15 FTE staff to develop this rule. That includes time required for investigation and analysis, rule drafting, preparing related documents, coordinating advisory committee meetings, holding public hearings and communicating with affected persons and groups. DATCP will use existing staff to develop this rule.
5. Description of all Entities that may be Impacted by the Rule
DATCP's initial analysis shows that the existing rule is obsolete. Therefore, the proposed repeal of the rule will have no impact on any entities.
6. Summary and Preliminary Comparison of any Existing or Proposed Federal Regulation that is Intended to Address the Activities to be Regulated by the Rule
There are a number of federal regulations that relate, generally, to the tobacco industry. For example, the IRS enforces regulations that control the manufacture and distribution of tobacco products. Further, the 2010 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act grants FDA authority to write rules that may require growers and brokers to disclose certain information to manufactures about the type of tobacco, levels of certain chemicals, and curing methods used. However, our search does not reveal any federal law or regulation that regulates the transaction between tobacco growers and buyers comparable to ch.
ATCP 104.
7. Anticipated Economic Impact
DATCP expects the proposed rule to have no economic impact locally or statewide.
Contact Person
Kevin LeRoy, Program and Policy Analyst, DATCP; Phone (608) 224-4928.
Health Services
Community Services, Chs.
30—
Medical Assistance, Chs.
101—
This statement of scope was approved by the governor on December 30, 2013.
Rule No.
Relating to
Medical Assistance coverage for outpatient mental health services.
Rule Type
Permanent
1. Finding/Nature of Emergency
Not applicable.
2. Detailed Description of the Objective of the Proposed Rule
The objective of the rulemaking is to update rules to reflect current policy and to conform rules to statute concerning MA reimbursement for outpatient mental health services.
3. Description of the Existing Policies Relevant to the Rule, New Policies Proposed to be Included in the Rule, and an Analysis of Policy Alternatives
Section
DHS 35.16 (4) (b) requires as a condition for MA reimbursement a physician's prescription for psychotherapy services. Similarly, ss.
DHS 107.02 (2m) (a) 7. and
107.13 (2) (a) (intro.) and
2. and
(b) 4. b., require a physician's prescription for mental health services, alcohol and other drug abuse services, and psychotherapy services as a condition for MA reimbursement. Pursuant to ss.
49.45 (30f) and
49.46 (2) (b) 6. f.,
fm.,
k., and
Lr., Stats., the department is prohibited from requiring a prescription from a physician or other health care provider for psychotherapy services, medical day treatment services, or mental health and alcohol and other drug abuse services as a condition for MA reimbursement. Thus, the department proposes to conform ss.
DHS 35.16 (4) (b),
107.02 (2m) (a) 7., and
107.13 (2) (a) (intro.) and
2. and
(b) 4. b. to existing state law.
2013 Wisconsin Act 20 included funding to expand MA outpatient mental health coverage to in-home psychotherapy services for children. See,
LFB Budget Summary. To effectuate this, the department proposes to revise s.
DHS 107.13 (2) (a) 4. and
(d) 3. to authorize in-home psychotherapy services as a covered service for children.
3.b. Alternatives
4. Detailed Explanation of Statutory Authority for the Rule (Including the Statutory Citation and Language)
The department's authority to revise the referenced rules is as follows:
Section
49.45 (10), Stats., reads:
Rule-making powers and duties. The department is authorized to promulgate such rules as are consistent with its duties in administering medical assistance.
Section
227.11 (2) (a) 1. to
3., Stats. reads: Rule-making authority is expressly conferred as follows:
(a) Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute, but a rule is not valid if the rule exceeds the bounds of correct interpretation. All of the following apply to the promulgation of a rule interpreting the provisions of a statute enforced or administered by an agency:
1. A statutory or nonstatutory provision containing a statement or declaration of legislative intent, purpose, findings, or policy does not confer rule-making authority on the agency or augment the agency's rule-making authority beyond the rule-making authority that is explicitly conferred on the agency by the legislature.
2. A statutory provision describing the agency's general powers or duties does not confer rule-making authority on the agency or augment the agency's rule-making authority beyond the rule-making authority that is explicitly conferred on the agency by the legislature.
3. A statutory provision containing a specific standard, requirement, or threshold does not confer on the agency the authority to promulgate, enforce, or administer a rule that contains a standard, requirement, or threshold that is more restrictive than the standard, requirement, or threshold contained in the statutory provision.
5. Estimate of Amount of Time that State Employees Will Spend Developing the Rule and of Other Resources Necessary to Develop the Rule
The department estimates it will take 22 hours to develop the rule. No other resources will be necessary.
6. List with Description of all Entities that may be Affected by the Proposed Rule
