A member is looking for some assistance with an unusual issue involving social security. They have a paid fire department that they believed was exempt from social security because they are subject to a mandatory firefighters retirement system, but they just received a determination from the social security administration concluding that their firefighters are in fact covered and that they need to be contributing to social security on their behalf (both retroactively and going forward). What makes this an unusual situation is that the determination relies on the size of their city at the time the Sec. 218 Agreement was executed (70 years ago), rather than the size of the City at the time the fire department was established. Has anyone dealt with anything remotely similar to this? Or any tips on how to appeal such a determination? The member would appreciate any insight. Please pass along your responses to me at akarras@imla.org<mailto:akarras@imla.org> and I will forward them along. Amanda Kellar Karras Executive Director / General Counsel Direct Phone: (202) 742-1018 IMLA Main: (202) 466-5424 Email: akarras@imla.org [facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/InternationalMunicipalLawyersAssociation/>[twitter icon]<https://twitter.com/imlalegal>[linkedin icon]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/international-municipal-lawyers-association-inc./> [logo]<https://imla.org/> 51 Monroe St. Suite 404 Rockville, MD, 20850 www.imla.org<http://www.imla.org/> Plan Ahead! Take a look at all of IMLA's upcoming events<https://imla.org/events/>! IMLA's 2022 Annual<https://imla.org/annual-conference/> Conference, October 19-23, 2022 in Portland, OR! Check out our On-Demand webinar library<https://netforum.avectra.com/eweb/shopping/shopping.aspx?site=imla&webcode=shopping&cart=0&shopsearchCat=Merchandise&productCat=Webinar> with 100+ webinars at your fingertips!