Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OP, ....there's the being paid in cash.
And there's declaration of the income.
Two separate issues.
Being paid in cash is not an issue.
It is not an issue for the recipient who declares. It could be for the employer, some of whom pay cash to avoid being declared an employer and paying in to the unemployment ins. system. For ex, anyone doing a small PT one-time gig, such as lighting or set design in a small theater co., can legally declare unemployment after that gig is over. If the employer is "caught" not declaring payroll, there could well be a problem.
It is not an issue for the recipient who declares.
It's not an issue for someone who doesn't declare...UNLESS they get caught.
And the truth is the chances of that are next to nil.
If you pay a handyman 700.00 to.... oh I don't know....do some various repairs to get your house ready for sale...WHO even knows that took place...if neither one of you TELLS ANYBODY? If you pay someone a total of 800 a year to mow your grass, or fix your toilet, move some furniture for you, watch your house while your on vacation...or WHATEVER. again WHO EVEN KNOWS ABOUT THAT, if one of you doesn't talk about it.
Again. I'm nor arguing for or against it. But the fact is there are millions of small PRIVATE transactions that take place between people everyday.
Quote:
If I were working for cash, I wouldn't be talking about it on the internet.
You know, we moved from NJ to ME and had to pick a moving company. I only received bids from reputable, nationwide moving companies. I picked one and you and I have seen their trucks on the roads for decades.
While unloading in ME, I got into a discussion with the 2 guys. Their company, a number of years back changed the status of the driver/movers from employees to "independent contractors".
One guy was young, with 2 little kids. One guy was older- I would say in his 50's, but strong like a bull. Hefting those pieces of furniture onto his back and climbing up and down stairs to put it in various rooms.
Both guys were no longer declaring their income or at least paying into SS. The older guy was "on the books" for what he considered a good amount of years, and he thought he didn't have to contribute any more- or whatever rationale he gave himself, so when the company stopped paying in for him, he stopped as well.
The younger guy was clueless. Had no idea he should be paying into SS, and I have no idea how they deal with the 1099's the moving company gives them. Maybe they put it on the "miscellaneous income" line, or some other line on the 1040 where they don't pay SS. I have seen accountants do that numerous times.
My reaction, first, I was furious with the company. I had no idea these guys weren't employees. I have seen this trend in the U.S. of shifting all these employees to "independent contractors" at my job at SSA, but didn't realize it had come down to moving companies. It is one thing if the driver was an "owner/operator"- they are self employed. But, these guys, were under the thumb of the employer - the employer had the control- which is the test of whether you are an employee or not".
Second, I was upset with the guys- how their initial short term gain is at the detriment of their long term situation.
This job, with hours on the road, day after day, could result in death or disability in an instant. A car crash, falling down, having something fall on you etc. etc.
By being off the books- no workers comp, no health insurance, no SS disability or survivors benefits etc. etc.
Who ends up paying- the rest of us- by the kids getting welfare, if he dies, instead of a SS survivor benefit which would be too high for welfare. By us again, if he survives, getting Medicaid instead of employer based health care. By us again, if he survives and gets SSI (taxpayer funded disability) instead of payroll funded SS disability for him and his kids.
It just really upsets me. Because, I have seen the difference when a parent dies or becomes disabled, and the parent had paid into SS. Those survivors get a check every month that can pay for rent, food, clothes. I would have surviving parents weep at my desk- in gratitude, for the check their kids would be receiving.
And, I have seen the result for the working off the books- switch them over to the SSI rep- to take a claim for a lousy, fixed SSI benefit and send the mom to the welfare office for $64.00 a month for AFDC.
Last edited by ilovemycat; 05-30-2015 at 03:12 PM..
Reason: edit writing
Lots of seniors work off the books. Babysitting, pet sitting, handyman, yardwork, pool service. Of course the government might feel differently but I have never thought this was a big deal. Probably won't even remember at tax time that I watched your ankle biter for 2 hours and you paid me $5. Added all together it wouldn't even be enough money to be required to file a return anyway. I don't feel at all guilty about that $5.
The government doesn't seem to care about all those corporations avoiding US taxes completely so I doubt they are really interested in my 50 cents.
Wow this is right up there with God Bless America and Land of the Free toss in a few stars and stripes and a Sarah Palin quote or two and I think its about perfect..
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdflk
You'd be surprised what you can get away with in life...if you just keep your mouth shut.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.