Where a corporate officer is employed by a covered employer and becomes unemployed and is not subject to disqualification, he is entitled to unemployment insurance benefits. (See Matter of Farr [Catherwood], 28 A.D.2d 1168; Matter of Voss Co. [Lubin], 2 A.D.2d 626. ) Also, with the repeal of section 517 (subd 2, par [d]) of the Labor Law by chapter 212 of the Laws of 1972, effective Januray 1, 1972, compensation paid to an employee who was also a principal stockholder was no longer excluded remuneration so that principal stockholders are entitled to benefits, if not subject to other disqualification (cf. Matter of Murphy [Levine], 42 A.D.2d 650). It is noteworthy that the repeal of section 517 (subd 2, par [d]) and the amendment of section 524 were designed to bring New York's Unemployment Insurance Law into conformity with relevant provisions of Federal law (see N Y Legis Ann, 1972, p 246). By Public Law 91-373 (84 US Stat 696), subdivision (a) of section 3306 of title 26 of the United States Code was amended, effective January 1, 1972, to extend coverage to almost all employees. These changes in Federal and State law clearly evince a desire to extend coverage. Claimant's second contention, that its election to be treated as a subchapter S corporation (US Code, tit 26, ยง 1371 et seq.), places its president in the same position as a self-employed individual for whom unemployment insurance premiums need not be paid, is without merit.