Biden coming after the working man's money

[raleighherdfan]

PRO ACT screws the working class

The study uses IRS data from a Treasury study to calculate taxes on a sample of independent contractors. The sample comprises the four different types of independent contractors most likely to be reclassified if the PRO Act became law. The population size is 13.81 million independent contractors with 1099 income, with a sample size of 1 percent. The study assumes that both the independent contractor and the employee take the standard deduction and computes the tax differences from there.

The results are striking. Based on the sample, a nationwide ABC test would lead to 7,749,443 workers paying more in tax as W-2 employees than independent contractors. It is important to note that independent contractors already pay taxes — the reclassification would lead to them paying a different mix of taxes resulting in a higher overall tax burden.

 

[HerdandHokies]

It would be a sign of good faith in their research had they factored in the benefits the workers would be entitled to as employees. Of course, they didn’t.

 

[raleighherdfan]

It would be a sign of good faith in their research had they factored in the benefits the workers would be entitled to as employees. Of course, they didn’t.

As someone who has been self employed and chosen to be a “contractor” a couple of times throughout my career….”benefits” aren’t a factor in such a decision. Benefits in many cases aren’t necessary and the tax benefits far out way “benefits”. Someone who has been an employee their entire career doesn’t understand that.

 

[HerdandHokies]

As someone who has been self employed and chosen to be a “contractor” a couple of times throughout my career….”benefits” aren’t a factor in such a decision. Benefits in many cases aren’t necessary and the tax benefits far out way “benefits”. Someone who has been an employee their entire career doesn’t understand that.

If you’re genuinely self employed this wouldn’t apply to you anyway. But there’s a trend of companies listing actual jobs as being “independent contractors” to skirt liabilities. This is going after that.

 

[i am herdman]

If you’re genuinely self employed this wouldn’t apply to you anyway. But there’s a trend of companies listing actual jobs as being “independent contractors” to skirt liabilities. This is going after that.

So, it is the feds job to force companies to hire people and put them on their payrolls? Shouldn't that be a decision between the independent contractor and the employer? Why is that the fed's business?

 

[HerdandHokies]

So, it is the feds job to force companies to hire people and put them on their payrolls? Shouldn't that be a decision between the independent contractor and the employer? Why is that the fed's business?

Legislature sets labor laws. One of those is the definition of “independent contractor.”

When we are installing a new piece of equipment and call in a wielding guy, he’s an independent contractor and should be treated as such. If we decided to tell all our packers “we’re a bread BAKING company, not a bread PACKING company, so you all are independent contractors now, but also you need to be here from 6am-4:30pm every day and follow all of our rules etc” then we would and should be in violation of the labor laws.

 

[i am herdman]

Legislature sets labor laws. One of those is the definition of “independent contractor.”

When we are installing a new piece of equipment and call in a wielding guy, he’s an independent contractor and should be treated as such. If we decided to tell all our packers “we’re a bread BAKING company, not a bread PACKING company, so you all are independent contractors now, but also you need to be here from 6am-4:30pm every day and follow all of our rules etc” then we would and should be in violation of the labor laws.

That'a deal between the independent contractor and the company. Nobody forces the independent contractor to take that deal. There are advantages to independent contractor and companies. Maybe they don't want to be on a company payroll and tied to one company. Many there is a monetary incentive for them to do so.

 

[HerdandHokies]

That'a deal between the independent contractor and the company. Nobody forces the independent contractor to take that deal. There are advantages to independent contractor and companies. Maybe they don't want to be on a company payroll and tied to one company. Many there is a monetary incentive for them to do so.

In your opinion, what should the difference between an independent contractor and employee be? Should there be any rules to say which is which besides what the company says the job is?

 

[i am herdman]

In your opinion, what should the difference between an independent contractor and employee be? Should there be any rules to say which is which besides what the company says the job is?

Well, just like any other situtation.

Company: We are hiring an independent contractor

Me: I am either interested or not.

Problem solved.

Again, the company in some cases might want independent contractors in some cases they might want their payrolled employees.

Nothing everything is the damn government's business.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Well, just like any other situtation.

Company: We are hiring an independent contractor

Me: I am either interested or not.

Problem solved.

Again, the company in some cases might want independent contractors in some cases they might want their payrolled employees.

Nothing everything is the damn government's business.

But you think that a company should be able to classify any job it wants as “independent contractor”?

 

[i am herdman]

But you think that a company should be able to classify any job it wants as “independent contractor”?

I guess if they wanted to. But, it might be hard for them to compete in the marketplace if they totally did that. Yes that is what I call a deal between two people.

For some jobs and companies it makes sense. For others it does not. But, again they would have to compete.

If Company A says we are hiring all independe contractors but Company B is offering benefits, a 401k plan, paid vacation, etc. they might find it difficult to do so.

 

[murox]

But you think that a company should be able to classify any job it wants as “independent contractor”?

Yes. You don't? Why should how YOU feel have any bearing on an agreement between two entities who aren't you? Mutually agreed-upon, voluntary arrangements don't need a third party to determine what's "fair," which is completely subjective.

 

[HerdandHokies]

I guess if they wanted to. But, it might be hard for them to compete in the marketplace if they totally did that. Yes that is what I call a deal between two people.

For some jobs and companies it makes sense. For others it does not. But, again they would have to compete.

If Company A says we are hiring all independe contractors but Company B is offering benefits, a 401k plan, paid vacation, etc. they might find it difficult to do so.

This would mean you’re effectively against any employee protections, right?

 

[raleighherdfan]

If you’re genuinely self employed this wouldn’t apply to you anyway. But there’s a trend of companies listing actual jobs as being “independent contractors” to skirt liabilities. This is going after that.

You’re naive or just uninformed. It may apply. Depends on how the law is written. Will ultimately depend on how you set yourself up legally (LLC, S corp. etc) and what jobs you hire out for. The fact is most people who choose to contract out their services don’t want to be an employee because of the tax benefits associated with it. The gig economy (think beyond Uber driver) is multi billions $$ a year across the economy. As I said. Most who choose this route don’t want to be employees and don’t want company benefits. This law potentially snags them.

 

[i am herdman]

This would mean you’re effectively against any employee protections, right?

You are going from point A to point Z. As I stated being an independent contractor is an agreement between a person and a company. I gave you reasons that it in some cases in benefits both.

Guess what my base pay is every month? Zero. I work for a commission. Why? First it is an incentive to bust your ass. Second, it can also be very lucrative. Our company attracts talent for sales people that way. For me, it is far more lucrative than being on a salary. Is there risk? Yes. But, I make that decision to accept that deal. I would make far less money on a guarnateed salary. I am not an independent contractor.

But, there are some parallels. The person agrees to it up front. What protections? The indpendent contractor knows going in they are not on that company payroll. They are hired to do a job or task. They likely get no benefits but, they are rewarded with payments for their services. There advantages for some people to do that. Nobody is forcing anyone to do it.

PGA Tour players are independent contractors. They are required to play a certain number of tournaments, qualify, keep their status, show up for their tee times, certain behavior, etc.

Our company has hire some independent contractors because they bring a certain skill or expertise. They chose to do it because of their taxes, working for mutliple organizations, they can cut ties easier, etc.