The 1099 Fracas and Income Tax Evasion 101

We are a nation of tax cheats. In 2001, the difference between what Americans and businesses owed in taxes and what they actually paid voluntarily was $345 billion.

The enormous amount, known as the “tax gap” has been vexing politicians and IRS bureaucrats ever since it was quantified in 2005. Of course, one way to increase U.S. tax revenue is to raise taxes; another way is to better collect taxes already due.

The most effective tool in the government’s quiver to do the latter is not an IRS agent – it’s information dissemination. Creating paper trails and telling people and businesses that the government has a copy of those paper trails is amazingly effective in curbing cheating. Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over tax policy, said in a floor speech on Tuesday, “research demonstrates that voluntary compliance doubles when information reporting is in place. The rate rises from 46 percent compliance to 95 percent compliance.”

And this is what the current fight over small businesses, health reform and 1099 forms is all about.

The new Affordable Care Act (ACA) includes a provision requiring that all businesses send a 1099 tax form to any vendor from whom they purchase at least $600 in goods and services in a year. A copy of this 1099 also goes to the IRS. The provision has nothing to do with health care, except that the $17 billion in revenue generated by this new paper trail will help pay for costs associated with the new law. The idea is basically to remind vendors that hey, the government knows you sold $600 or more in goods and services, so you better pay the applicable income tax.

Health reform critics have blasted the new requirement, saying it will cost small businesses time, money and jobs. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a reliable ACA foe, says these new reporting rules amount to “oppressive regulations” that will lead to “an avalanche of new paperwork for small business owners.”

But there’s nothing in the 1099 rule that would affect small businesses specifically. In addition, even before the Affordable Care Act, Democrats and Republicans – including George W. Bush – were looking for ways to help close the tax gap with the use of 1099s. Under the Bush Administration, a rule existed requiring businesses to file 1099s for cumulative annual purchases over $600, but the rule only applied to services – not goods – and excluded purchases from corporate entities. All the Affordable Care Act did was eliminate these two exceptions.

A Senate Democratic aide said lawmakers didn’t except the new rule would cause a backlash, figuring since companies – including small businesses – already had systems in place to issue 1099s for services, adding a few new categories wouldn’t be very onerous. Since the ACA was passed, however, lawmaker have realized just how many businesses were out of compliance with the old rule, making the new expanded rule doubly hassling. (This is why the tax gap is so very vexing.)

“We found out that a lot of people didn’t even know about it,” said the aide. It’s hard to understand why this was such a mystery. A January 2009 GAO report said:

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) does not know to what extent payers fail to submit required 1099-MISCs, but various sources point to the possibility of a significant problem. For tax year 2005, 8 percent of the approximately 50 million small businesses with assets under $10 million submitted 1099-MISCs, but IRS does not know how many of the other 92 percent were required to report payments but did not. Many business payments, such as payments to corporations, are not subject to 1099-MISC reporting. If even a small share of the businesses that did not submit a 1099-MISC should have, millions of 1099- MISCs could be missing with significant amounts of unpaid taxes by payees.

Amid the backlash of the ACA’s tighter 1099 rules, two senators introduced related amendments this week. One from Republican Sen. Mike Johanns would have repealed the provision altogether; another introduced by Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson would have exempted businesses with 25 or fewer workers and raised the reporting threshold from $600 to $5,000. Both amendments were defeated. According to Politico, a third 1099 amendment has already been filed by Democrat Sen. Mark Begich that would repeal the new rule.

The 1099 fracas is interesting for two reasons. First, it represents a glimmer of bipartisanship in an age when such a thing is elusive at best. Senators from both sides of the aisle agree the new 1099 rule puts a burden on small businesses. Second, the new rule seems destined to be at least scaled back. Baucus, who voted in favor of the Nelson amendment, said yesterday, “We do need to address this requirement…The bottom line is this: We have heard the concerns of small businesses. And we intend to work diligently to address and mitigate those concerns..” The White House has also said it supports scaling back the rule.

This amounts to conceding that, despite an annual tax gap equal to half of the Pentagon’s entire budget, closing it completely is just too hard and will never happen. In other words, we will remain a nation of tax cheats unless the tax code itself becomes simpler, cleaner and easier to comply with.

“Those who are going to cheat on their taxes are still going to do it,” says Giovanni Coratolo, vice president of small business policy for the Chamber. “When you impose Draconian measures on the backs of compliant taxpayers, in their minds, they can be justified in trying to cut corners.”

Related Topics: affordable care act, Health Care, health reform, irs, Max Baucus, tax, Health Care
  • Latest on Swampland

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

  • newfreedomblog

    “This amounts to conceding that, despite an annual tax gap equal to half of the Pentagon’s entire budget, closing it completely is just too hard and will never happen. In other words, we will remain a nation of tax cheats unless the tax code itself becomes simpler, cleaner and easier to comply with.”

    .
    Now why would we be a “Nation of tax cheats”, Ms Pickert? Do you suppose that the IRS Tax Code is so convoluted and almost impossible to enforce as the problem?
    .
    Could it be that people like Timothy Geitner, a known tax cheat simply thumb their noses up at paying their fair share of the taxes? Or, is it someone like Charlie Rangel, also a tax cheat extrodinaire is evading paying taxes simply because he knows he can and will get away with it?
    .
    Among many things contained in ObamaCare aka Affordable (my-a$$) Care Act is the worst legislative law ever passed by any Congress in our history.
    .
    Don’t you have any numbers on the cost of implementing this one item in the ACA? Is it in the BILLIONS of dollars?

  • nflfoghorn

    TG paid his taxes so he’s not – if he ever was – a “cheat.” You continue to obsess over Rangel, who’s getting adjudicated. RE ACA it’s obvious you have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • grape_crush

    …another introduced by Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson would have exempted businesses with 25 or fewer workers and raised the reporting threshold from $600 to $5,000.

    And why did this seemingly common-sense amendment fail? Oh yeah; Begich, Landrieu, Lincoln, and the rest of the GOP minority overrriding the 56-42 majority.

    But there’s nothing in the 1099 rule that would affect small businesses specifically.

    So the US Chamber of Commerce is being less than honest in its complaints, yes?

  • charlieromeobravo

    People cheat on their taxes because 1) they’re too hard to do, and 2) they’re following in the alleged example of elected officials?
    .
    You’re really reaching here Rusty. The compliance data points to one very very big reason: they cheat because they can get away with it. Neither party has a monopoly on virtue and honesty. There’s no need to get partisan or conspiratorial about this particular topic.

  • allthingsinaname

    “In other words, we will remain a nation of tax cheats unless the tax code itself becomes simpler, cleaner and easier to comply with.”
    .
    In other words you mean a regressive value added tax where we will have all those complicated tax codes, exclusions that mean businesses and, wealthy will not pay any tax. After all how is one going to sell a boat if the price is too high.

  • ohiolibb

    By all means, continue your racist, ignorant, hateful ramblings, rustyblog. Just don’t get confused and think that any sane person takes you seriously.

  • charlieromeobravo

    I say this semi seriously: drop the income tax and just go with a national sales tax. It would simplify things for everyone and make collections much much easier. Obviously it’s not “just that easy” but there’s got to be a better way to collect taxes than what we’re doing now.

  • moderatelyinterested

    Ms. Pickert: “This amounts to conceding that, despite an annual tax gap equal to half of the Pentagon’s entire budget, closing it completely is just too hard and will never happen.”

    Your post and your conclusion imply that the annual tax gap of $345 billion (1/2 of the annual Pentagon budget) would not be addressed if the provision of ACA requiring expanded filing of Form 1099-MISC is repealed or amended. However, this provision of ACA was only designed to genereate $17 billion (stated by you) over an 8 year period (2012-2019) with only $400 million in 2012 (not explained by you, but included in the analysis of ACA).

    The reality is that this new filing requirement would generate a mere pittance toward eliminating the overall tax gap. It would be more meaningful if you were to provide an analysis of the estimated “cost burden” to American business that will be necessary to generate this additional revenue.

    In addition, your statement that “We are a nation of tax cheats” is at odds with the 2005 statement of IRS Comissioner Mark W. Eveson quoted in your linked statement that “The vast majority of Americans pay their taxes accurately….”

  • freeinpa

    “TG paid his taxes so he’s not – if he ever was – a “cheat.”
    .
    Yoiu have crossed the line from merely delusional to out and out stupid. There was not a question he was a tax cheat that ordinary citizens would have gone to jail. He signed an agreement that he understood it was his responsibility to pay taxes on the income he received. Or are you saying he could not read what he signed. Either way not a great quality for someone to oversee the IRS.
    .

    Yes Rangel keeps getting mentioned as long as Demos elect the corrupt politician while they impugn the characters of others.

    Or have these guys cheated because they could get away with it as one of your fellow posters offered.

  • allthingsinaname

    Oh? Would there be a sales tax on a cruse ship? How about an airplane? How about your home? How about your car? How about all those sales taxes you pay the State and now add the Federal tax? Would it include tools you buy for your job? If I put a horse on the land I buy is it agriculture now and no tax? Would it include a tax on services? Would it include a tax on eggs but not butter? When we need a stimulus what products do we exclude from the tax?

  • Ivy_B

    The problem for me with the national sales tax or VAT is that my state tax would be added on top of it. For example, I just replaced my second refrigerator. Cost of appliance = $864.97; PA sales tax = $51.90. Now you add another 20% sales tax or VAT on top of that? Another $173? Think of 20% (and I think that’s a low estimate of what it would be) on top of EVERYTHING you spend. I’m sure people in states with no or low sales tax have a different view.

  • stuartzechman

    Kate Pickert:
    .
    there’s nothing in the 1099 rule that would affect small businesses specifically
    .
    Have you actually looked into this at all?

    Right now, the IRS Form 1099 is used to document income for individual workers other than wages and salaries. Freelancers receive them each year from their clients, and businesses issue them to the independent contractors they hire.
    .
    But under the new rules, if a freelance designer buys a new iMac from the Apple Store, they’ll have to send Apple a 1099. A laundromat that buys soap each week from a local distributor will have to send the supplier a 1099 at the end of the year tallying up their purchases.

    That’s crazy, isn’t it?
    .
    Are you sure you want to lead with “We are a nation of tax cheats?”
    .
    Here’s what liberal blogger Mithras had to say about it in July of this year:

    http://mithras.blogs.com/blog/2010/07/mindless-paperwork-one-aspect-of-the-health-insurance-reform-law-that-needs-to-change.html
    .
    As I said, this is insane. The bookkeeping requirements alone are impossible. Tracking expenditures by vendor is just beyond the ability of most small businesses, not to mention getting and recording taxpayer ID numbers. Can you imagine? “Who was that guy we hired to paint the outside of the building? I can’t remember. Wasn’t he somebody’s cousin?”
    .
    If this isn’t repealed, the net result is that hundreds of millions of additional tax documents will be generated every year. As far as I know, even that number might be understated. This means that before filing a tax return, every business will have to wait for their 1099s to come in from every business customer – even if they don’t anticipate a 1099 from a particular person because they didn’t know they were buying for a business purpose!
    .
    The example of a coffeeshop is illustrative. If I buy coffee for clients throughout the year and expense it, eventually I will get over $600. I have to issue a 1099 to Starbucks?? Apparently so. Okay, so it’s February and I need the taxpayer ID number and corporate mailing address from the coffeeshop. Right now, in a 1099 situation, you have the payee complete a form giving you that info, and it isn’t onerous because it’s rare. Is every Starbucks going to have that info posted in the window now? Because remember, I have to repeat this process with every vendor, and every vendor has to provide the information to every customer.
    .
    I can’t just rely on the name of the place to determine whether I have to issue a 1099. Some restaurants are owned by franchisees, others owned by the franchisor. If I go to 19 different places with the same name on the door throughout the year, I’d have to figure out which are owned by whom to determine if they get a 1099! And businesses change hands all the time. What if the taxpayer ID number changes during the middle of the year because the place got sold? Assume I spent $400 there when it was owned by the first company and another $400 when it was owned by the second. Total expenditures for the year at that place are over $600, but the corporate identity of the vendor has changed. Issue a 1099 or not? Also, the first company has gone out of business. What’s the point?
    .
    Either businesses will spend thousands of dollars dealing with this crap or they will just ignore the whole thing and pray they don’t get caught. I don’t know what’s worse. Of course, if any small business with a decent amount of income doesn’t file thousands of 1099s, the IRS will immediately suspect something is up. It’s like the Form 27B/6 from Brazil.


    .
    Here’s what liberal blogger/economist Duncan Black (Atrios) had to say about it:

    Fix it
    .
    The 1099 reporting requirements in the health care bill are absolutely insane, forcing businesses to track purchases by vendor, obtain tax ID information, and file 1099s to the IRS and vendor any time you do more than $600 worth of business with that vendor over the year. It’ll be an absolute nightmare for any small business, for the tracking, the paperwork, and come tax season when you have to wait around for all those 1099s which may or may not show up because compliance will of course be spotty… because it’s nuts.

    These opponents of the new requirements aren’t in the Chamber of Commerce, Kate Pickert. They’re just not academics, administration flacks or ideologue economists in important political positions. They’re practical people who are close enough to the ground to know policy lunacy when they see it.
    .
    Just because the Administration can point to the language of the law and proclaim “Look, there’s nothing that specifically contains the words ‘small business’, so it shouldn’t affect them specifically” doesn’t mean that this isn’t the worst piece of news for small businesses (and consultants and free-lancers) in a long, long time.
    .
    Prior to you blithely declaring “Creating paper trails and telling people and businesses that the government has a copy of those paper trails is amazingly effective in curbing cheating,,” perhaps you might want actually look into what other important economic disadvantages accrue from said “Draconian measures,” and whether or not “amazingly effective” is the proper term for the result.
    .
    Requiring all airline passengers to disrobe and submit to full body-cavity searches prior to boarding might be “amazingly effective” at preventing hazardous material from entering airplane cabins, but we also might expect to notice subsequent deleterious effects on the overall activity of consumer travel, don’t you think, Kate Pickert?
    .
    Seriously, have you thought about this policy at all?
    .
    Do you know anyone who runs a business that grosses, say, $150,000 a year?
    .
    Could you perhaps look into the real world for some perspective, instead of printing up the proclamations of academics, and balancing them with responses from the press handlers of the Chamber of Commerce, please?
    .
    Thanks so much in advance for some due diligence, Kate Pickert.

  • moderatelyinterested

    Stuart-

    You always say it better than me (even if a bit longer)!

  • newfreedomblog

    Now why in the world would Ms Pickert do something like what you suggest? This does not fit into the liberal spin of the Affordability Care Act of 2009, let alone make a lick of common sense.

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks so much for taking the time and effort to read through all of that.
    .
    In my mind, at least, when I ask a reporter for due diligence, it’s incumbent upon me to provide an example.
    .
    Or I’m just a big bag of wind, take your pick (here we go).

  • newfreedomblog

    Keep asking stuart, but I doubt you will get many answers from the likes of Kate Pickert. She is simply following the talking points she is handed by the Obama Administration.
    .
    But, great comment none-the-less.

  • newfreedomblog

    stuart is one of the most sane, and intelligent liberals I know, moderately. I also appreciate his comments as well, and the time he takes to write up such well thought out rebuttals to someone like Kate Pickert who really needs to do more homework before she regurgitates crap into the swamp.

  • allthingsinaname

    Oooops see my response at post 5

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks for reading through all of that, Rustyblog.
    .
    I hope that I have provided you with more evidence that movement liberals like me are some of the most pro-small business activists out there.
    .
    Third Way Democrats are anti-little gal/guy in practice, but not us.
    .
    A great part of why they are bad for small business is not because New Democrats somehow hate freelancers and venture capital-less start-ups, but because their ideology blinds them to the practical results of their policies –and they won’t ever admit that they’re wrong about anything.
    .
    Kate Pickert’s piece here is an example of that kind of blindness. She and the ideologues on which she reports apparently don’t have enough stake in the real-world effects of policy to know for themselves what does or doesn’t works.
    .
    Movement liberals care about the real-world problems of small businesses, because we actually are the people those problems affect.

  • destor23

    Not sure why you’re all jumping on New on this particular issue. I think it’s fair to say that our tax system is too complex, whatever your politics are. Good people who made honest errors (or who the IRS says made errors, these are open to interpretation) get dinged with fees and penalties all the time. For mistakes! It looks like this 1099 requirement just adds another level of complexity that we don’t need.

  • destor23

    We are not “a nation of tax cheats.” We have a broken tax system that people do their best to comply with.

  • newfreedomblog

    Thank you destor. I was truly still stuck back on ohiolibbys rant about my supposed racist rants in my comment.
    .
    He truly is in his own world no doubt.

  • newfreedomblog

    Said simply, and very well. Good job!

  • stuartzechman

    That’s what I meant to say, thanks.

  • newfreedomblog

    Well when movement liberals decide to go less with regulations on business you just may convince me more stuart.
    .
    You are starting to scare me, in a way you are sounding like the Koch Brothers which little kevie has vilified in another thread and attempted to make it sound like they are the major financial backers of the Tea Party movement which is nothing but a bald faced lie.

  • nflfoghorn

    Granted. That’s why FreepRust or anyone can’t automatically label someone a “cheat” like he arbitrarily did with Geithner.

  • formerlyjames

    sz, as is often the case, you provide more insight and education regarding the issue presented than the blogger does.
    .
    My thought here is that while I would agree that the federal tax system is a mess, I certainly would not agree that more paper and reporting requirements would serve as a solution.
    .
    Anyway, thanks again.

  • nflfoghorn

    Hey, I had a movement today – can I join? :)

  • stuartzechman

    when movement liberals decide to go less with regulations on business
    .
    See, that’s where you and I –movement conservatives and movement liberals– disagree, Rustydog.
    .
    Respectfully, the reason for that disagreement seems to be your determined inability to recognize that small business is a separate kind of entity altogether from big business, i.e. gigantic, multinational finance and industry.
    .
    Seeing that difference between “business” (J.P. Morgan-Chase, Verizon, General Electric) and “small business” (me, you, the dry cleaners) the way that we movement liberals do, we’re fine with “regulation” as it applies to big finance and industry, since liberal (not Third Way) regulation on those kinds of giant organizations tends to keep them from exploiting their size and power to trample on consumers and small competitors.
    .
    Movement liberals are for the state regulating Goliath in order to free up David, in other words.
    .
    We don’t want less regulations on “business,” unless it’s the kind of “regulation” that Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Mary Landrieu, Diane Feinstein, Tim Geithner or Larry Summers finds useful –the kind of “regulation” that entrenches the biggest players, and shields them from both competition with the little shops, and accountability to consumers (and tax-payers, ultimately).
    .
    That’s where we seem to disagree: you want an end to any business regulation, and we want an end to rent-seeking, big-player protective regulation, and incentive-crushing small-gal/guy regulation.
    .
    When it comes to regulation, movement liberals can see the difference between David and Goliath, Rustydog.
    .
    Make sense?

  • m0mentom0ri

    “Well when movement liberals decide to go less with regulations on business you just may convince me more stuart.”
    .
    I’m curious, Rusty, which regulations would you do without? Is it all tax stuff or are there other regulations, beyond fiscal, you would ditch?
    .
    Oh and btw, I’m an independent contractor with my own LLC. You’d be surprised how many movement liberals are small businesses, too.
    .
    And yes, the new 1099 requirements are giving me conniptions. I do a lot pass-through billing of services, in addition to material purchases. This requirement is gonna kill me with paperwork, if its as bad as it looks.

  • http://forgottenlord.livejournal.com forgottenlord

    Huh. That list of insanity would make the chore insanely difficult even for large corporations. Thanks SZ for the update.

  • newfreedomblog

    stuart:
    .
    Mega-rich companies like Verizon……et al, should be regulated to the point that due to their size they should not have a monopoly against smaller mom and pop types of businesses, of course we have anti-trust laws to take care of that, and not more regulations as we are seeing put into the healthcare bill with this 1099 crap no less by Democrats, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and others who are admittedly “movement liberals”. Yes?
    .
    Despite your aberration for third way Democrats like Nelson, Lieberman, and so forth, they did not write into this legislation the 1099 clause. Nancy did. Harry did.
    .
    But, what is also at stake here are the environmental freaks from your side of the aisle, the movement liberals like big fat Al Gore who are ginning up some type of controversy on climate change to start things like “Cap and Trade” to put legitimate businesses out of business, and then come and take the little people in this country to hell and back with taxes on utilities.
    .
    This drives businesses out of the US, people lose jobs, and those companies go to countries like China and India. Good companies who now say, “I just won’t fight City Hall in America any longer, it is just not worth it”.
    .
    Regulations always come down to hurt the little guy, the small business owners the most. As you go after those mega-companies to put them in check through regulations you ultimately go completely against what you say here and hurt the little guys. It is that simple.

  • stuartzechman

    Rustydog:
    .
    First, I guess I should just let that reply stand, since our disagreement is pretty well laid out for folks to read and make up their own minds on, so I think that a more detailed debate about who is ultimately right should be left for another thread, maybe.
    .
    Agreed?
    .
    Second, when you say:
    .
    Despite your aberration for third way Democrats like Nelson, Lieberman, and so forth, they did not write into this legislation the 1099 clause. Nancy did. Harry did.
    .
    , that’s pretty much a factual claim that has a yes or no answer, not an ideological or philosophical debate over regulation policy.
    .
    How do you know that this is the case?
    .
    If I can be proven to be mistaken, and the New Democrats actually opposed that provision, then I’ll stand corrected.
    .
    I understand full well that Nelson introduced an amendment to a bill today to repeal this draconian 1099 provision in the health care legislation (which failed, blocked by Senate Republicans, by the way), but I don’t see where he was on it during the actual health care debate –when it mattered.
    .
    All I heard from his crew was the constant non sequitur “it must be paid for” right after they voted down the Dorgan Amendment that would have allowed importing prescription drugs from Canada at half the price (as you, yourself, have accurately noted).
    .
    Do you know of any position New Democrats took at the time by which they opposed the insane 1099 provision, Rustydog? Can you find any examples?

  • newfreedomblog

    “The paper trail
    Why did these tax code revisions get included in a health-care reform bill? Welcome to Washington. The idea seems to be that using 1099 forms to capture unreported income will generate more government revenue and help offset the cost of the health bill.
    .
    A Democratic aide for the Senate Finance Committee, which authored the changes, defended the move.
    .
    “Information reporting improves tax compliance without raising taxes on small businesses,” the aide said. “Health care reform includes more than $35 billion in tax cuts for small businesses … indicating that during these tough economic times, Congress is delivering the tax breaks small businesses need to thrive.”

    .
    http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/
    .
    Who is the head of the Senate Finance Committee you ask?
    .
    None other than our dear friend Max Baucus. I do not think you can label him a “New Democrat”, but I am sure you will. He is a Democrat. He is a Liberal. He is the man responsible for this clause in the healthcare reform bill. Perhaps we can get word out to small business, and they can personally thank good ‘ol Max for his caring, and loving of the free market system in the United States of America. I’ll call all my Conservative small business friends. Will you be calling your “Movement Liberal” friends?

  • diecash1

    Our system is quite complex and people do make mistakes; they are not cheats. While we are not “a nation of tax cheats”, don’t kid yourself that there aren’t a significant number of tax cheats out there. David Cay Johnston has written extensively about our tax system and how it is designed to provide tremendous advantages to the wealthiest among us through methods that would be considered “cheating” by any reasonable standard. His book on the subject is an excellent read:
    ..
    http://www.amazon.com/Perfectly-Legal-Campaign-Rich—Everybody/dp/1591840694/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1284580782&sr=1-2

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    I think it’s more accurate to say “We have a broken tax system that people do the minimum necessary to comply with”
    .
    Ironically, while it’s the businesses who ISSUE the 1099′s who are supposedly squawking about the requirments, it’s the vendors who RECEIVE them who are actually dealt the additional tax liability.

  • http://forgottenlord.livejournal.com forgottenlord

    Woah, hold up. Did Rusty just compliment and opponent?

  • destor23

    @Paul Dirks: The vendors are taxed on their reported profits though, right? These 1099 would only add up to revenues. If a business is reporting theire revenues, costs and profits then these 1099s should make no difference and should be tax neutral. In which case, what’s the point of all the hassle? I guess the only point would be that the IRS thinks that small vendors are cheating. If that’s the case, I think the IRS is barking up the wrong tree. It’s the big companies that pay next to nothing.

  • ohiolibb

    Oh, I never claimed you made a racist comment in this particular rant. Just that your history of racism, ignorance, and hate completely disqualifies you from being a member of the reality-based community.

  • apr2563

    Newrusty: Baucus is a liberal? Don’t say that outloud. He would be horrified. Baucus has no political affiliation except to his corporate masters.

  • apr2563

    Thanks Stuart for pointing out that liberals will speak out against a legislative policy that is harmful regardless of the political source.

  • shepherdwong

    None other than our dear friend Max Baucus. I do not think you can label him a “New Democrat”, but I am sure you will. He is a Democrat. He is a Liberal.
    .
    And you’re a schnauzer. Go chase the car, Rustydog, chase the car! Good boy.

  • carpevis

    The story reports that it’s unknown exactly how many of the “under $10 million annual income small businesses” actually HAVE to file the 1099.

    Based on my experience with small businesses of that type (and I do this a lot), it’s in accordance with the actual percentages who file. Over 90% of my small business clients pay less than $600.00 for my time and services per year.

    Since expenses in hard goods are a separate issue, services are not as often provided (especially lately with the “slacksession” we’ve had for two years). Services just aren’t that necessary that often. At least in the IT field.

    My rates are lower than most vendors, granted, and I provide teaching and instruction for self sufficiency as well (it makes my business more appealing if I can save another business money). While it may seem self defeating, I get a lot of referral business, nearly all of which is under the $600.00 1099 limit.

    It may well be that my experience with this issue is unique, but I don’t see any issue with the percentages being quoted.

  • 3xfire3

    Ohiolibb,
    .
    “By all means, continue your racist, ignorant, hateful ramblings, rustyblog.”
    .
    How is calling a person out who cheats on their taxes Racist.
    .
    Do you see Racism whenever a person criticizes a black person? If you do then you are the true Racist.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “How is calling a person out who cheats on their taxes Racist.”:
    .
    Ohiolib is referring to other writings of Rusty including the “awakening of the great white gaint” against non-whites migrating to the United States.
    .
    Your comments are just ignorant.
    .
    That’s why I like to call you Mr. Magoo, not Hitler.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I would only support a national sales tax or a value added tax as long as, in order to make it progressive rather than regressive, that every April 15th those earning under $250,000 per year get sent checks by the government and every quarter the government refund and add to our paychecks for extra taxes paid.
    .
    Just imagine the income tax system going the other way – the government puts refunds into our paycheck every week.
    .
    That I would support even if everything I want to buy would cost, say, 60% more. If every paycheck refunds part of that unless I earn $250k a year or more, that’s fine with me.

  • ohiolibb

    Patrick is right. I was referring to rustyblog’s past comments, which completely disqualify him from the category of “decent human being”. He has absolutely no credibility on anything requiring a hint of judgement. If you really want me to, I can and will back up all of my arguments against rustyblog with his own words. I wasn’t calling this particular rant racist, but arguing that rustyblogs history of racism, hate, and ignorance make his opinions worthless.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I find it ridiculous and misleading when Republicans set the dialog and the media repeats it again and again “pro” and “anti” business legislation.
    .
    Rusty breaks off from Stuart on the environment since Stuart appreciates facts and Rusty does not.
    .
    So, ignoring the 800 pound gorilla (no, not Limbaugh, global warming) and looking into other environmental regulation, labeling it “anti-business” is pathetic.
    .
    MMS requiring an acoustic switch to shut down wells by remote control, for example.
    .
    Tell fishermen, seafood wholesalers, seafood restaurants, Gulf area resorts that adding to the risk of a massive spill is in their business’s best interest is absurd.
    .
    As a point of fact, nearly all environmental regulations are designed to protect businesses from one another.
    .
    You own a hotel a mile away and down wind from a coal burning power plant. I own the power plant. It would cost me a fortune for the scrubbers needed to turn that pollution into CO2 only.
    .
    So, it would be supporting your hotel’s ability to do business against my encroaching on your hotel’s property with polluted air.
    .
    No legislation is written with the intent of harming the economy, so, this “pro-business” and “anti-business” rhetoric must go.
    .
    If the 1099 rule applies to $600 in many separate purchases, I can see that it was poorly written and needs to be amended.
    .
    It was my understanding that it was if one single purchase was over $600 and, therefore, 25 separate business lunches did not require this, for example.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I second Apr’s thanks to you Stuart.

  • calkate

    Oh for pete’s sake. I have managed the finances for my own small businesses for over 20 years. It takes me about ONE HOUR to file 1099MISCs for about 100 vendors (yes, this is a small business, and I do it part time) at year end, using a $300 piece of software (Quickbooks for Mac). This is all such a sham, this drivel about it being too difficult for small businesses. People don’t want to do it because they don’t want it done to them – they don’t want a paper trail so that they can avoid reporting income. Plain and simple.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    I agree the tax system is a total mess. I have long been in favor of a flat tax, no deductions. The first, say $100,000 in earnings could be tax free, and everything over that taxed at a reasonable rate. This would protect the poor and much of the middle class, who already pay no income taxes, while making filing taxes easier. When the rules are simple, people tend to comply.

  • stuartzechman

    1) Imagine that you buy $12,000 of IT hardware and software a year in response to a constant stream of projects,
    .
    2) go to PriceGrabber.com and do a search like one of these:
    .
    http://computers.pricegrabber.com/hard-drives/Seagate-FREEAGENT-GOFLEX-USB-3TB/m794972079.html/search=hard+drives/st=product/sv=button
    .
    3) Choose the lowest priced vendor,
    .
    4) try to remember if you had a difficult experience obtaining that vendor’s EID in the past, so as to avoid potential filing problems,
    ,
    5) try to obtain that vendor’s EID, just in case you’ve bought from that vendor before/might buy from that vendor again up to the $600 filing threshold,
    .
    6) abandon the whole concept of lowest-price shopping for whichever vendor has surplus inventory of any given product at any time, one of the truly innovations brought to small businesses by small IT retailers on the internet,
    .
    7) settle on a minimum of vendors, choosing the most likely to remain in business (the largest), with the most resources to respond in a timely fashion to a constant stream of EID requests,
    .
    8) avoid e-Bay and Amazon, with their low-priced, second-hand marketplace, even if liquidity is constrained,
    .
    9) get used to keeping track not only of the purchases in terms of categories of expenses, but in terms of totals per vendor, and thresholds at which new 1099′s must be filed,
    .
    10) hate the political party that brought this lunacy to you in the name of health care tax credits for employees you don’t have, and look forward to voting them out of office at the first available opportunity.
    .
    Did you actually go look at the PriceGrabber link I posted here?
    .
    Do you now understand how crazy it is to keep tabs on those 16 different vendors who could be offering the lowest price on what you need at any given time?
    .
    Do you now understand the burden of tracking the necessity (or not) of filing 1099′s with each of them, once that $600 threshold is reached?
    .
    Do you now understand how, even if you may have filed the same 100 1099′s (more or less) for the same vendors year in and year out such that it’s a breeze for you, many of us don’t operate that way?
    .
    Do you now understand that we will probably be incentivized to purchase/work the way that you do, even if that makes little economic sense for our business situations, and even less for emerging marketplaces full of small vendors selling to us over the internet?
    .
    Finally, do you have any f*cking idea how insulting it is to sneer at people trying to do their best in a sh*t economy to keep their shops going, telling them that, if they don’t like it, they’re probably tax cheats, anyway?

  • liberalmeltdown

    I get my tax advice from Timothy Geithner. Just blame Turbo Tax. It works, apparently.

    So, when do all the illegal aliens have to report income? Pay sales taxes? Be audited for filing for EITC? Oh, wait we have legal American citizens to prosecute first. We wouldn’t want to go after someone here illegally, doing something illegal.

  • garyyager

    “Under the Bush Administration, a rule existed requiring businesses to file 1099s for cumulative annual purchases over $600, but the rule only applied to services – not goods – and excluded purchases from corporate entities”

    this rule also existed under the clinton, and bush sr. and reagan and carter and nixon and johnson and kennedy and eisenhower administrations… it’s almost as if you are purposely omitting facts to make some point.

    Also the rule never “excluded purchases from corporate entities”. the scope of the rule is and always been intended for services from people. PPACA changed the scope of the rules to apply to things it was never intended. Please get your facts straight.

    In addition the $600 limit has never been changed since the 1950s to adjust for inflation. Which it should. So the ideal solution would be to adjust it for inflation ~$3200 and keep the scope the same as originally intended.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “NASHVILLE — The tax system collects its due, even from a class of workers with little likelihood of claiming a refund and no hope of drawing a Social Security check.

    Illegal immigrants are paying taxes to Uncle Sam, experts agree. Just how much they pay is hard to determine because the federal government doesn’t fully tally it. But the latest figures available indicate it will amount to billions of dollars in federal income, Social Security and Medicare taxes this year. One rough estimate puts the amount of Social Security taxes alone at around $9 billion per year.

    Paycheck withholding collects much of the federal tax from illegal workers, just as it does for legal workers.”
    .
    http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2008-04-10-immigrantstaxes_N.htm
    .
    Like many conservatives, you are woefully misinformed on how undocumented workers start work in the US.
    .
    1) Enter the country. A vast majority do so by getting a tourist visa while visiting legal immigrants who are friends or relatives from their home country or do so using a student visa and, although living in the country legally, their working is not legal and a class C misdemeanor (the same as loitering). From there, they overstay their visa. A very small percent come here through illegal border crossing.
    .
    2) Obtain a fake Social Security Number for an I-9 form. If the person is hired, they will be paying social security and taxes into a bogus account, giving tax revenue to Federal and State government with no possibility of receiving Social Security, Social Security Disability, food stamps, unemployment benefits or any other type of federal or local government assistance.
    .
    How do they pay sales tax?
    .
    They pay sales tax exactly the same way you do: buy things and for every item any person buys, the tax is added on unless you are a nonprofit (such as a church) or government agency.
    .
    3) They pay local real estate taxes either by buying land themselves (which is rare since it is, basically impossible to do without a legal residency) or pay rent to a landlord who pays the real estate taxes.
    Americans, legal immigrants, naturalized American citizens and illegal immigrants all work under the table.
    .
    A large majority of these tax cheats are, also, in jobs which the cost of worker’s compensation is high, such as construction. This is why employers are so eager to hire people under the table since the cost os such insurance is often over $1 or even several dollars per hour.
    .
    So, for a majority of people who work under the table, although they do not pay taxes, they have no means of getting medical bills paid if they are injured.
    .
    Sorry meltdown, illegal immigrants contribute taxes and use $0 in government resources for their tax dollars.
    .
    In theory, if you want to close the deficit, bring in about a hundred million illegal immigrants who will pay into the government but not pay out.
    .
    You’re barking up the wrong tree on this one.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    Meltdown,
    .
    Before you make a predictable and inaccurate remark, I will counter that point.
    .
    No, I am not advocating illegal immigration.
    .
    It does present problems on many levels when laws are regularly broken even when those laws are misdemeanors.
    .
    If I told you that the late Joseph Stalin was not responsible for the 2010 deficit in the United States no sane person would say that I am supporting the atrocities of Stalin. So, even though I am telling you that illegal immigration is not the cause of our deficit, that does not man that I am supporting illegal immigration. I am just stating that the two issues have no relation to one another.

  • calkate

    No Stuart, I don’t understand how insulting it is. I think vendors will pretty quickly learn to supply their EINs as routinely as they supply their bills to accounts payable. If they won’t, it is a pretty straightforward indication that no, they don’t intend to report their income, and yes, they probably are those tax cheats I’m hating on. And I don’t care if I insult them – I hate tax cheats just as much as I hate deficits and wars paid for by borrowing from China and inadequate social safety nets and lousy schools.

    Sometimes, yeah, change is difficult, but sorry, you can’t let big chunks of our economy go untaxed. I collect EIN data on every vendor I use that could be subject to 1099MISC, and that data is entered in their QB account. I only need to get it once – their EIN is theirs forever. I don’t really need to do anything after that – QB is quite capable of determining who reaches the threshold. But it is not like it is illegal to send out a 1099 on someone who DOESN’T meet the threshold.

  • herby002

    I got it! We should OUTSOURCE the collection of money due us from tax cheats to private companies! That’ll work – we just pay them a set amount for their labor, and a % of what they bring in to the Treasury…

    Um, no. We tried that during the Bush II administration. Those expert companies charged us more for their “services” than they got back from the tax cheaters, so we lost more money by outsourcing than it would have cost us to hire in-house collectors – or done nothing.

    Gotta love it.

blog comments powered by Disqus