SUBSCRIBE BY EMAIL

Your email:

PSC Blog Train

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

U.S. Cracks Down on ‘Contractors’ as a Tax Dodge

  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook | Submit to Digg digg it |  Add to delicious  delicious |  Submit to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn | Submit to Reddit reddit 

Please weigh in on this one...it's a hot topic!!!Tax Collector for Employment Taxes
 
As many of you have been reading the PSC Blog Train has been addressing and warning that the US Government is "circling up the wagons" to attack corporations who misclassified employees to recover "lost tax".
 
Below we have recapped today's NY Times article that gives greater detail on the movement by the Obama Administration to crack down on Independent Contractor Payroll Tax avoidance.  However, what troubles PSC is how the administration is going about this.  We feel that clearly the rules of engagement of these workers has to be cleared up.  The IRS 20 Point Test lends itself to a lot of ambiguity and makes enforcement and compliance difficult.  We would like to see the Administration first address the policy surrounding Independent Contractors/1099 in order to simplify the classifications with the tax laws.  This would enable businesses who employ such resources the ability to comply and pay the appropriate tax.  Compliance is a far less expensive way to get the tax revenue than law suits and penalties.
 
Here is a recap of the article that ran in today's The New York Times (Click the link for the complete article):
  • Federal and state officials, many facing record budget deficits, are starting to aggressively pursue companies that try to pass off regular employees as independent contractors.
  • Federal estimates are that the crackdown will yield at least $7 billion over 10 years.
  • Companies that pass off employees as independent contractors avoid paying Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes for those workers.
  • Companies do not withhold income taxes from contractors’ paychecks, and several studies have indicated that, on average, misclassified independent workers do not report 30% of their income.
  • Misclassifying can mean a 20 or 30% cost difference per worker.
  • A Harvard study found that 4.5 percent of Massachusetts workers were misclassified, while a Cornell study concluded that 10 percent of New York’s private-sector workers were.

These are some of the highlights of the article.  I hope you will let us know how you feel and take advantage of our Risk/Reward Assessment to help determine if you might be subject to this type of decision.

 


Comments

In a country with 300+ million people in it, I am sure that there are some people who are consultants who should not be classified that way. Yet, like often happens in stories like this, the problem is made to seem pervasive and to justify the cost of investigation against all those evil consultants. Lord knows, The Times retains "stringers" to write stories for it. Certainly, while the stringer is writing, they look like an employee but, once the article is over, they can be disposed of . . . and are. Same with a lot of people they will attempt to re-classify in an effort to increase revenue.
Posted @ Friday, February 19, 2010 4:16 PM by Jeff Altman, The Big Game Hunter
Thanks Jeff! Great point. 
 
I didn't think of that but you are right. I'm sure the writer could be a freelancer and if not, I'm positive that the NYT uses freelancers, who have their own "corporation" that may or may not qualify as a corporations. 
 
The reason the Gov't is going to pursue the corporations to collect this money is because it's easier to go to the source than to try and track down each individual IC/1099 worker. And it's better P.R. to attack the greedy corporations vs. the innocent workers. 
 
So, to my point. Let's not spend any tax payer money chasing the problem. Let's fix the problem. Gov't has to redefine the employment status classifications and create a mechanism that will enable fairness in the taxes. 
 
Posted @ Friday, February 19, 2010 4:37 PM by Ted Weyn
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics