1099 contractor or regular employee

Status
Not open for further replies.
However, recently a company I do subcontract work for was audited by workers comp. They said that even tho I wasn't required to have WC, because I didnt, the other company had to have me on their policy. I am going to get a second opinion on that from my lawyer/accountant.

That's why you would normally get a WC policy for your company. You don't have any employees so you don't pay a percentage of payroll you just pay a set amount for the policy. Then you get audited to see if you sub contracted to anyone without WC.
 
Like Dennis said , In NC you're not allowed to use 1099's . Unless the person is Licensed. The NC State Board of Electrical Contractors started this about 10 - 15 years ago. Some in and out of state contractors with NC Electrical License were hiring one guy not licensed. That guy might hire 20 more.

The work was so sloppy. On a two bedroom apartment. The bigger company would supply the material. They would pay the 1099 contractor $275. for the rough in, $250 for the trim out. Some 1099s were doing 15-20 apartments a day. First the Board tried to penalize them if you failed to many inspections. That didn't work. So that's when they implemented the no 1099s any more.
I've got to hand it to them. NC does have high standards.

i don't see there is anything wrong with paying employees by the piece work method.
 
BTW, Obamacare may figure into the equation as well. There are penalties to be paid if people do not have health insurance. They are not that bad right now but they are scheduled to get worse over time. I don't know what happens if someone is retroactively determined to be an employer WRT Obamacare fines.
 
i don't see there is anything wrong with paying employees by the piece work method.

They could pay based on piece work but the guy they hired would be a W-2 employee.

So they would have to cover him on workman's comp, cut taxes, unemployment, Social security.He would end up in a very high tax bracket.
 
Here's how it works in the state of Ohio if you tell this person where to show up each day and what time he is supposed to be there then he is considered an employee Per the IRS. Also as stated earlier by someone else any subcontractor must carry his own workers comp insurance or liability insurance because if he gets hurt on your job they will come back on you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
that's an interesting way of avoiding liability.

It is an idea in its infancy at present.

It is not just about avoiding liability, although some of the other benefits are less obvious to me. It will be interesting to see what happens over time with some of this stuff as businesses try to adapt to government meddling.
 
It is an idea in its infancy at present.

Not really. It's been going on for a fair while. I did some work in the 1980s for a large real estate management company- they had a separate LP to own each building and created new corporations for building every new one (with an LP to own it), then they had other corporations to manage them and do tenant improvements. The legal offices had a whole closet full of corporate & partnership seals.
 
General Contractors have been doing this forever and still are. As someone pointed out the IRS has a list of criteria required to meet, which decides to them if someone is a sub contractor or an employee. IRS doesn't care if you're a GC or an EC or an auto mechanic.

Every GC I know has laborers and other non-skilled labor working for them. All Subbed out.
These guys are not licensed in anything. The GC tells these guys where to go and what to do everyday. They provide instruction and tools and sometimes transportation.
All of which are part of what will cause the IRS to consider this person is an employee not a sub.

I have been subbing extra license journeyman for years along with my full time employees and will never stop, just like the GCs have been doing for years. When a sub is on my job or sent to a customer by me, he is under my comp anyway as any yearly insurance payroll/1099 audit will determine unless he has his own and provides a COI. Some do and some don't.

I make sure I cover the IRS criteria when subbing. It's an art form like anything else today. Of course I do the type of work that allows me to accomplish this. If a business couldn't put someone to work and 1099 them then almost every GC is wrong. I haven't found different IRS employee/sub rules for GCs yet and I've looked. Usually the only people on their insurance and workers comp are their office people.
 
I don't recall if it was mentioned earlier, but there enough employee leasing and payroll companies out there to deal with the paperwork. As I understand, the leasing companies will even deal with WC and health insurance if you want them to. Sure, there's a cost, but there is, anyway (dollars or time). I've worked for a couple of companies where the entire staff were officially employees of a different one; hugely simplified the main company's paperwork.

Might be worth investigating, even if you find out it won't work in your situation.
 
I don't recall if it was mentioned earlier, but there enough employee leasing and payroll companies out there to deal with the paperwork. As I understand, the leasing companies will even deal with WC and health insurance if you want them to. Sure, there's a cost, but there is, anyway (dollars or time). I've worked for a couple of companies where the entire staff were officially employees of a different one; hugely simplified the main company's paperwork.

Might be worth investigating, even if you find out it won't work in your situation.

Employee leasing is legitimate way of dealing with the paperwork but it doesn't shift some of the tax costs from the employer to the employee which is the whole purpose of paying via 1099.
 
Employee leasing is legitimate way of dealing with the paperwork but it doesn't shift some of the tax costs from the employer to the employee which is the whole purpose of paying via 1099.
You just submit a 1099 to the leasing company instead of the employee, you will reimburse them for those costs plus some extra for their profit on the whole deal. The benefit is someone else deals with payroll issues.

Also if someone isn't working out, you don't have to fire them, you just ask for a replacement.
 
My wife is a tax cpa
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/smal...ependent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee

a couple of key points
do you determine what he is paid or does he? And when? Will he invoice you?
do you control when, where and how he works? ie direct him
does he provide a bid up front? Can he lose money?
is there a contract?
what % of his time is spent working for you? Annually and year to year
does he have another full time job?

the irs targets sham 'contractors'

I have an llc for side engineering work
I use a few guys for work I can't (or don't want to do)
cad, surveying, documentation(spec duplication, etc
no more than 200 hrs/year for any of them
my wife requested a determination from the irs
I have it in writing they are considered contractors
 
Last edited:
You just submit a 1099 to the leasing company instead of the employee, you will reimburse them for those costs plus some extra for their profit on the whole deal. The benefit is someone else deals with payroll issues.

Also if someone isn't working out, you don't have to fire them, you just ask for a replacement.

I would bet you wouldn't even have to do a 1099 for a legitimate Leasing Company.
 
My wife is a tax cpa
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/smal...ependent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee

a couple of key points
do you determine what he is paid or does he? And when? Will he invoice you?
do you control when, where and how he works? ie direct him
does he provide a bid up front? Can he lose money?
is there a contract?
what % of his time is spent working for you? Annually and year to year
does he have another full time job?

the irs targets sham 'contractors'

I have an llc for side engineering work
I use a few guys for work I can't (or don't want to do)
cad, surveying, documentation(spec duplication, etc
no more than 200 hrs/year for any of them
my wife requested a determination from the irs
I have it in writing they are considered contractors
You seem to have gone to a lot more trouble to make sure that you're following the rules than some of these people are though. From what I can tell around here a lot of the contractors and other people paying on 1099s are seriously flouting the actual rules about such things and hoping they don't get caught. I think they have been emboldened because so many people have been doing it for so long that they think that no one's ever going to catch up with.

I may have told the story once before because it's kind of humorous. It's not exactly a 1099 story but it's basically another tax Dodge story. A friend of mine decided he was going to buy a diner. He had absolutely no experience running any kind of restaurant or service business at all, although his wife was a waitress.

I'm not even sure how he found out about this Diner that was for sale. But he told me it was a cash business. He said it had been run by an old man who passed away and the son didn't want to run the business anymore. He told me that the guy that was selling the diner kept referring to it as a cash business and winking when he said cash. He showed him the tax returns for the place for the last few years which didn't show a whole lot of profit but he kept referring to it as a cash business and winking.

So my friend decided to buy this Diner. he got it for next to nothing which should have told him something but it didn't. So the first week comes and goes and he goes to pay the cook. According to the books The Cook was being paid $300 a week. So he writes out a check for 300 bucks. Now you would think that there would be some kind of clue that something was wrong when you're just writing a check to the guy and not deducting income taxes and such but this is what the guy told him to do. The cook says where is the other $300? My friend says huh? Turns out that the owner of the diner was paying him $300 on a 1099 every week by check and another $300 cash under the table.

My buddy decided he couldn't afford $600 a week for a cook so the cook left and went someplace else. He brought his wife to be the hostess. The two waitresses that worked there did not like this one bit and promptly quit and moved to a diner down the street taking most of the business with them.

Eventually the place had to be closed down and my friend learned some kind of lesson I hope.
 
I would bet you wouldn't even have to do a 1099 for a legitimate Leasing Company.
Unless the company is a sole proprietor organization, I don't think you even have to give them a 1099. Some businesses issue them to everyone they make payments to even if not required.

Even supply vendors can be subject to you needing to issue them 1099's but in most cases they are a corporation or LLC and not required.

Just like you have a true "employee" fill out a W-4 for your records, any non W-4/W-2 entity you make more then $600 (I think) of payments to in a year you should get a W-9 from. Information on that form will also help determine if you must issue them a 1099.

W-9 is not sent to IRS, it is for files of the person making the payments, and can help support that entity in any kind of audit should the person filling out the form give false information - you simply followed what was provided on that form.

Now if you trick someone that should have been treated as an employee to fill this out I don't know where that goes during any audit. Obviously if the employee unexpectedly finds out at tax time that they owe a lot of taxes because the so called employer wasn't paying any, there is all sorts of possible outcomes to how that progresses and gets back to the "employer" being in the wrong here.
 
You seem to have gone to a lot more trouble to make sure that you're following the rules than some of these people are though. From what I can tell around here a lot of the contractors and other people paying on 1099s are seriously flouting the actual rules about such things and hoping they don't get caught. I think they have been emboldened because so many people have been doing it for so long that they think that no one's ever going to catch up with.

I may have told the story once before because it's kind of humorous. It's not exactly a 1099 story but it's basically another tax Dodge story. A friend of mine decided he was going to buy a diner. He had absolutely no experience running any kind of restaurant or service business at all, although his wife was a waitress.

I'm not even sure how he found out about this Diner that was for sale. But he told me it was a cash business. He said it had been run by an old man who passed away and the son didn't want to run the business anymore. He told me that the guy that was selling the diner kept referring to it as a cash business and winking when he said cash. He showed him the tax returns for the place for the last few years which didn't show a whole lot of profit but he kept referring to it as a cash business and winking.

So my friend decided to buy this Diner. he got it for next to nothing which should have told him something but it didn't. So the first week comes and goes and he goes to pay the cook. According to the books The Cook was being paid $300 a week. So he writes out a check for 300 bucks. Now you would think that there would be some kind of clue that something was wrong when you're just writing a check to the guy and not deducting income taxes and such but this is what the guy told him to do. The cook says where is the other $300? My friend says huh? Turns out that the owner of the diner was paying him $300 on a 1099 every week by check and another $300 cash under the table.

My buddy decided he couldn't afford $600 a week for a cook so the cook left and went someplace else. He brought his wife to be the hostess. The two waitresses that worked there did not like this one bit and promptly quit and moved to a diner down the street taking most of the business with them.

Eventually the place had to be closed down and my friend learned some kind of lesson I hope.

Most people get caught when the 'contractor' seeks unemployment, comp or has tax issues with, or goes to, the irs

my wife takes no chances
for an intentional violation the irs can go back forever
some types are limited to 3 or 7 years
it's not worth the chance
it's not fair
imo it's not right
but to each their own
 
for an intentional violation the irs can go back forever
some types are limited to 3 or 7 years

and that... is all she wrote.

the "intentional" is the key aspect of this.
intentional constitutes tax fraud, and there
is no statute of limitations on tax fraud.

the irony is that most folks assume there is
no time limit on tax liability, period.

in the absence of fraud, just a simple debt,
the statute of limitations on a tax debt being
collectable is 36 months.

two tests on that:

the tax return must have been filed in a timely
manner. extensions are a timely manner, btw.

the liability cannot be discharged until 36 months
after the lien has been recorded. not assessed,
but recorded at the registrar of the county in which
the taxpaying entity resides or maintains their business
address.

that can be years after the collection process starts.

-1984 bankruptcy code, article 802, subparagraph C1, iirc.

i'm pretty sure that is still the law in these matters.

my ex wife's ex husband got himself and her in a shale oil tax
shelter in TY 1984. after the divorce, the IRS began collection
after disallowance. it was a long and painful process. she was
able to discharge a tax liability of $1,950,000 in 1990, 37 months
after the lien was filed at the county level.

the short version is, taxes are nothing to screw with. my ex's ex,
to prevent the collection process, waived his right to the statute
of limitations on that tax year, thinking he'd beat it. he never did.

after he left the country over this, and returned to his native france,
that liability hounded him until his death. then the liability took
precedence over any heirs claims on his estate.

the treasury took it all.

the takeaway? don't screw with your taxes.... or anyone else's. like
employees.
 
congress changed the law WRT the so called "innocent spouse". If you can credibly claim you were not privy to the tax fraud your spouse was engaged in your tax and criminal liability is removed.
 
congress changed the law WRT the so called "innocent spouse". If you can credibly claim you were not privy to the tax fraud your spouse was engaged in your tax and criminal liability is removed.

Notice that Fulthrotl used the term "disallowed". As I hazily recall, these sorts of things were set up so the general partner (con men) got the cash and the limited partners (suckers) got the deductions. When they disallow the deductions, you own a piece of the revenues even if you didn't get one red cent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top