From: Jack Hollis on
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
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

"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
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
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.