employee pay

TTS · April 16, 2009

The problem here 2Cool is you obviously have not bothered to read irs.gov rules and regulations in respect to employee classification.

It is NOT 'he said she said slip of the tongue'... There ARE very clear cut and defined rules to distinguish between the two....

Back on the short bus... this time grab a text book so you can study.. :lol2

April 16, 2009

Dj Kustoms · April 16, 2009

off sub. but I almost tinted for this guy in my area who wanted to pay me 5.50 pr hour.lmao..thats a 1.25 below minimum wage.he said he dont care.so I walked out with my middle fingure in the air

April 17, 2009

Maybe I'm not making myself clear enough so I'll preface this a little deeper. In this industry it is common practice for window tinters to take as long of breaks as they want, bring their own tools, and they are free to find work in other places without fear of reprisal. Therefore, they are subcontractors or "independent contractors" as the IRS refers to them. Because it is common industry practice to use subcontractors it should not raise any red flags when you classify these people as independent contractors. I'm not saying that the OP doesn't have an employer-employee relationship by its substance because it may very well be the truth.

What I'm saying is that as long as you keep your statements within some basic guidelines you will not have an issue proving in an audit that these people are indeed independent contractors and not employees, thats assuming you only provide them with compensation for work done without benefits of any kind. The rules are not as clear cut and defined as you would like to believe. In fact, they are filled with loopholes big enough to pull a window tinter through.

but hey, keep being a d-bag you'll just drive home my point further and further

April 17, 2009

Sounds like some shady %&$# right there..........................d-bag :dunno

watchdaride · April 17, 2009

I use W-2

TTS · April 17, 2009

Maybe I'm not making myself clear enough so I'll preface this a little deeper. In this industry it is common practice for window tinters to take as long of breaks as they want, bring their own tools, and they are free to find work in other places without fear of reprisal. Therefore, they are subcontractors or "independent contractors" as the IRS refers to them. Because it is common industry practice to use subcontractors it should not raise any red flags when you classify these people as independent contractors. I'm not saying that the OP doesn't have an employer-employee relationship by its substance because it may very well be the truth.
What I'm saying is that as long as you keep your statements within some basic guidelines you will not have an issue proving in an audit that these people are indeed independent contractors and not employees, thats assuming you only provide them with compensation for work done without benefits of any kind. The rules are not as clear cut and defined as you would like to believe. In fact, they are filled with loopholes big enough to pull a window tinter through.

but hey, keep being a d-bag you'll just drive home my point further and further

:lol2 It is VERY clear that you came into a battle of the brains completely un-armed.... That's ok....

What really matters is that a business owner get all of the facts before they get stuck with a bill from the IRS for past due tax obligations that could have been totally avoided.

Bumbling along thinking you can just say a couple key phrases and it will all go away is ignorant.

I see you have ignored my advice to run along to the irs.gov website and get your facts in order before throwing out a 'd-bag' comment....

I'll just pretend the 'd' is for doughnut bag... which sounds kinda good right now! :dunno :dunno

April 18, 2009

Oh, how sad you are, my friend... Your ignorance and one-way thinking have come out again and again in this thread. Obviously there is no way to get through that thick skull of yours on this issue. Just to be clear, I have read literature from the IRS's website and much more on related subjects. I'm not worried a bit about my knowledge in these subjects, but you seem to defend something you couldn't explain if you tried. The sad thing is that I wouldn't risk getting nipped for not matching employee holdings, and as a business owner I would find it prudent to avoid as many gray areas when it comes to taxes. Personally, I would find it unethical to classify an employee just to save a few bucks that can be used as a deduction later on to help reduce taxable income.

Anywho, keep telling yourself that you know everything, but anyone can see that it is your ignorance that blinds you...

:dunno :dunno

TTS · April 18, 2009

I guess I am in a pretty fortunate position where I am able to rely on professionals in their respective fields for solid advice.

Some day the world may revolve around some wet behind the ears 24 year old jackass and his opinions... but until then.. I will stay with more proven methods..

Now that doesn't mean we can't still be friends :lol2

flat rock stan · April 18, 2009

I guess I am in a pretty fortunate position where I am able to rely on professionals in their respective fields for solid advice.
Some day the world may revolve around some wet behind the ears 24 year old jackass and his opinions... but until then.. I will stay with more proven methods..

Now that doesn't mean we can't still be friends

We should all be da friends on TD! TTS I did just sent TriMet a check for over a thousand for a transportation tax payment. For you guys out of the area it is just a extra tax we get to pay in P town for the bus and train :lol2 You play you pay now or ......... :lol