Prev: March of the Titans (brief video re: White Race, 1 min, 30sec)
Next: What the heck is Tiger doing?
From: Jack Hollis on 1 Jun 2010 15:34 On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:50:28 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >As I said, I don't know about your specific situation, but all those who >posted that she must be an employee in the eyes of the IRS are simply >wrong. No one, as far as I know said she had to be an employee, but the way he explained it it's very likely that she is. However, either way the money paid to her, once it passes a certain amount (used to be $600 a year) has to be reported to the IRS.
From: Alan Baker on 1 Jun 2010 15:42 In article <b2oa06laafgju7v1438dbvsmempedb8r14(a)4ax.com>, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:50:28 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> > wrote: > > >As I said, I don't know about your specific situation, but all those who > >posted that she must be an employee in the eyes of the IRS are simply > >wrong. > > No one, as far as I know said she had to be an employee, but the way > he explained it it's very likely that she is. However, either way the > money paid to her, once it passes a certain amount (used to be $600 a > year) has to be reported to the IRS. No, that's simply not so. If you pay an independent contractor to work for you, you *do not* have to report it to the IRS as anything. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: dene on 1 Jun 2010 16:05 "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-6F1721.12425801062010(a)news.shawcable.com... > In article <b2oa06laafgju7v1438dbvsmempedb8r14(a)4ax.com>, > Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:50:28 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> > > wrote: > > > > >As I said, I don't know about your specific situation, but all those who > > >posted that she must be an employee in the eyes of the IRS are simply > > >wrong. > > > > No one, as far as I know said she had to be an employee, but the way > > he explained it it's very likely that she is. However, either way the > > money paid to her, once it passes a certain amount (used to be $600 a > > year) has to be reported to the IRS. > > No, that's simply not so. > > If you pay an independent contractor to work for you, you *do not* have > to report it to the IRS as anything. Both of you are right. You do not have to report payments to an independent contractor, unless it's a deductible expense exceeding $600. For example, I pay other agents for joint accounts. They receive a 1099 from me so that I can deduct it against my business income. -Greg
From: Alan Baker on 1 Jun 2010 16:10 In article <86l77vFrm4U1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > news:alangbaker-6F1721.12425801062010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > In article <b2oa06laafgju7v1438dbvsmempedb8r14(a)4ax.com>, > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:50:28 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >As I said, I don't know about your specific situation, but all those > who > > > >posted that she must be an employee in the eyes of the IRS are simply > > > >wrong. > > > > > > No one, as far as I know said she had to be an employee, but the way > > > he explained it it's very likely that she is. However, either way the > > > money paid to her, once it passes a certain amount (used to be $600 a > > > year) has to be reported to the IRS. > > > > No, that's simply not so. > > > > If you pay an independent contractor to work for you, you *do not* have > > to report it to the IRS as anything. > > Both of you are right. You do not have to report payments to an independent > contractor, unless it's a deductible expense exceeding $600. For example, I > pay other agents for joint accounts. They receive a 1099 from me so that I > can deduct it against my business income. > > -Greg Correct. If you're a business, you can deduct business expenses, but that doesn't hold in the context of having work down around or on one's home. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: BAR on 1 Jun 2010 18:51
In article <e6533f7e-1747-4842-b207-be8dc8aca5b9 @u7g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > On May 31, 10:11�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > In article <n1m806l2pbng2aq0nd75k3or5grun1p...(a)4ax.com>, > > �Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 30 May 2010 19:12:55 -0700, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> > > > wrote: > > > > > >You don't even know if his housecleaner is an employee or an independent > > > >contractor, yet you confidently declare as if you did. > > > > > It doesn't really matter. �If you're paying an individual or a > > > contractor the payments must be reported to the IRS. �It's a lot less > > > complicated hiring someone who qualifies as an independent contractor > > > but the IRS still wants to know about it. > > > > You're quite wrong. > > > > You should read the appropriate IRS pamphlet on the subject: I have. > > > > -- > > Alan Baker > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> > > As for the regulation itself, which Bobby posted and I read, I think > Jack is probably right. But I doubt the IRS cares about payments to > someone who works one half-day per week. It's not the time stupid, its the money. |