Tigers Working Group

4.x Schema review

Participants

Scott Mueller, Wisconsin Richard Rogers & JoAnn Costa, California Toraino Owens, Florida Penny Berman, Maryland Angela Gridley & Preston Barnett, Ceridian Jenine Hallings, PayChex Joyce Inouye, ADP Winston Stein, BSWA Faye Shea, Intuit

Meeting Goals

General Schema review, including alignment with MeF Packaging

Support for FTP and. Web Services Allow transmission packaging to support larger service providers

Support for Acknowledgements Support for PDF attachments The Question of a Manifest

New Hire and Contractor Reporting Enrollment and Data Exchange Schema Updates Gateway update

Need for new service to support Data Exchange Response Progress on creating a Reference WSDL for use in developing a

Web Service solution Accompanying documentation

Including Standard Error messaging

4.x Alignment with MeF• WH, UI and Combined filings and payments review is complete

• New Hire and Contractor reporting

• Verified initial Schemas provided

• Scott will evaluate latest version against 4.x standards – To be done before Orlando

• Data Exchange and Enrollment

• Verified alignment with MeF

• Questions from Tucson meeting

• TimeStamp – Concern that this may be a reserved word

• Tag is used in MeF, and is also in the other filing schemas.

• Team recommendation - Leave this tag as is and address all schemas if the decision is made to change it.

• Length of tag names

• Team recommendation - Tag names are consistent with MeF and other filing schemas

Packaging

Packaging: One to Many Submissions per transmission

HTTPS/FTP

• Transmission sent with Transmission and Transmission header

• Include 1 to many submissions of Return State

Web Services

• Each submission is a separate instance documents

• Submissions can be zipped and transmitted together

Packaging – AcknowledgementsSupport for Acknowledgements

• Message Receipt for transmission

• Each return has a submission id allowing acknowledgements for each submission

Packaging – PDF Attachments• Utilize existing MeF mechanism to provide support for Binary Attachments

• Consists of 4 elements

• Reference (Form & Line number)

• Document Type (PDF)

• Description (Text – for example POA)

• Attachment Location (File Name, for example SubmissionId.pdf

• 2 Folders inside zip file

• Separate folders for XML and PDF

• Naming Standards

• xml

• attachment

Example Enrollment1.xml

Enrollment1.pdf

…

Enrollment99.xml

Enrollment99.pdf

The Question of a Manifest

Purpose – IRS identification and minimal validation of state filings

• Identify Jurisdiction

• FEIN, Name Control Check

• Determine Link v. Unlinked submission

• Designed to allow IRS to read and react without reading state return

Team Recommendation

– No need for a manifest until FSET is included in MeF. We can add at that time.

New Schemas for 4.x

New Hire and Contractor Reporting

Added to Return State Structure

Enrollment Schema Updates

Modifications to Enumerated List A,C,D to Add, Change, Delete EML, FAX, USP to E-mail, Fax, USPS

Restructured to support: Multiple Enrollment per transmission Separate Acknowledgement for each

enrollment Support for PDF Attachments

Enrollment Schema• Support for FTP and. Web Services

• Allow transmission packaging to support larger service providers

• Support for Acknowledgements

• Support for PDF attachments

Data Exchange Schema Update

Categorization of Data Requirement

Provide ability to send separate data exchange requests This could be required for agencies with multiple back-end

systems (Today CA has 3 separate data exchange formats), or for WH data vs. UI data

Proposal Addition of 3 optional tags

EFT, Rates, and Applied for If Agency chooses to use the tags, implementation

documentation will provide instructions on how to populate this field and what fields will be returned for each option.

This also allows for one submission All tags could be checked, or the tag could be omitted

Data Exchange Schema UpdateOne v. Two Schemas

Requirement Determine optimal schema format to allow:

Only required fields to request data to be sent to agency Separate Request and Response elements Allow for repetition of Request elements in Response – while minimizing

complexity of maintenance (if the tags are changed in either it is changed for both)

Proposal RequestExchangeDataState.xsd

Contains only the elements to be sent when sending a request ResponseExchangeDataState.xsd

Includes RequestExchangeDataState.xsd as well as all possible response elements

Data Exchange Schema Update

• Packaging

• Support for FTP and Web Services

• Allows for Transmission packaging to support larger service providers

• Support for Acknowledgements

• Support for PDFs? Is this required?

Gateway Update

Gateway Methods

Recommended Gateway Services can be used for this new structure

SendSubmissions GetAcks GetNewAcks ChangePassword

Additional Gateway Service required to Get Response for Data Exchange

GetResponse, GetNewResponse?

Gateway – Next Steps

Creation of ‘Reference’ WSDL for state use Documentation for implementation

Update WSDL recommendation to reflect decisions Include supported services Name for new services

GetResponse, GetNewResponse Document Mandatory vs Optional Services

For example ChangePassword may be optional How to implement Gateway Include flowchart of how the process works Include ‘Lessons learned’

Volunteers to work with Richard Faye will help with documentation Scott will help with technical part Other volunteers welcomed!

Still To Be discussed . . . .

Recommendation for Standardized error messages

Recommendation for Supporting documentation

Actions from February Discussion

Open State Contractor Schema name to long – can’t be longer than 30 Verify persontype is consistent with other 4.x schemas in New Hire

and contractor reporting Location of submission id on various schemas

Working group to discuss, document both options and send with pros & cons for group vote

Closed Packaging - folders

Recommendation included in this PPT Is there a need for the gateway to handle submissions through one

gateway to send to other agencies in the state This will not be supported in Version 1

We can reopen if the need arises If we extend the gateway to support this, it may reopen the question of the

manifest