Unlike the collection $L$ of Lebesgue measurable sets, the collection $J$ of Jordan measurable sets do not form a Sigma algebra. (A set is Jordan measurable if and only if its characteristic function is Riemann integrable, and the characteristic function of a singleton is Riemann integrable, but the characteristic function of the rational numbers is not.) But we can still talk about $\sigma(J)$, the Sigma algebra generated by $J$.

Now in this 1993 journal paper, K.G. Johnson shows that the Borel Sigma algebra is a proper subset of $\sigma(J)$ which is a proper subset of the Lebesgue Sigma algebra, and that a set is in $\sigma(J)$ if and only if it can be written as a union of a Borel set and a subset of a measure $0$ $F_\sigma$ set. But Johnsons says there are two questions he doesn’t know the answer to:

Where does $\sigma(J)$ stand relative to the analytic sets ... and relative to the universally measurable sets[?]

My question is, have either of these questions been answered in the two decades since this paper was published? Is it known whether there are analytic sets which are not in $\sigma(J)$ or vice versa? Is it known whether there are universally measurable sets which are not in $\sigma(J)$ or vice versa? Or are these still open problems?