Discussion:IRS finally does something intelligent on misclassified workers...
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> IRS finally does something intelligent on misclassified workers...
| 20 December 2007 | |
| Why am I certain this idea came from practitioners?
| |
| 20 December 2007 | |
| Good information Steve. But by looking at the reason codes, this form is for employees who have been terminated or who want to be terminated. | |
| 20 December 2007 | |
| And so my question is: how much should we charge for filling out an SS-8? | |
| December 20, 2007 | |
| Wow! Well maybe businesses that think they can get away with treating employees as contractors will think twice once they hear about this. | |
| 20 December 2007 | |
| We've done this. Discussion:Misclassified Workers | |
| December 20, 2007 | |
| Thanks for pointing that out Dennis. I missed a lot of discussions earlier in the year. | |
| 20 December 2007 | |
| As Mike said the problem is the aftermath if you stay with the employer. I have always told employees in this situation that filing a 4137 (or the new form) will cause you to lose your job anyway so to be it is going to be happening after the fact. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 20 December 2007 |
| Thanks Dennis. My final post in that thread concerned a client. I explained the criteria for using the form. She would be petrified to file an SS-8; she has two co-workers who provide 24-7 assistance and they've never tried the 4137 route, yet I brought this issue to a well-known attorney who does a lot of work in the classication of medical workers field, on the side of the payers, and he agreed she is an employee. So what does she do now? She fears that if she files the SS-8 the insurance company will let her go.
She has been filing with the 4137 for 18 years now. She has no expenses and no reason to file Sch C except that she can't fight the insurance company, or her woman's estate that was created when the woman was injured. | |
| December 20, 2007 | |
| D&T what the insurance company is doing is clearly wrong. And most definitely these people get injured. They help people move around and hurt their backs or any number of other things. It seems like this would fall under a whistle blower statute somewhere but I imagine she feels she isn't even in a position to take that step.
| |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 20 December 2007 |
| No, she receives a 1099....we use a 4137 and cross out the word "Tips" and insert 'Wages" See last year's Quickfinder, page 13.
Don't get me wrong, they do pay her well, but should after 18 years, and the pay is hourly with reimbursement of expenses. BTW: I wonder if filing an erroneous 8919 is a MLTN issue! | |
| December 20, 2007 | |
| It sounds like she does not have TDI or W/C, so if she does get hurt or sick, she may be up the creek. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 20 December 2007 |
| Exactly! It is not the Social Security issue I worry so much about as the possibility of injury. The woman she takes care of is not physically disabled, but brain damaged from an auto accident. Left alone she would be a danger to herself.
The irony here is that two years ago my client's mother died and left her a considerable sum. Prior to this she had few savings though her mother would insist on funding an IRA every year. My client is now 55 and could actually benefit from a one person 401K or even a SEP, and have the money to fund it. | |
TheTinCook (talk|edits) said: | 20 December 2007 |
| D&T, if she files a FLSA claim with the USDOL for OT or minimum wage she's got protection against retaliation. She doesn't have that if she doesn't file. Other protection depend heavily on state laws or even Title VII if its an issue. A good lawyer might be able to squeeze it into the ERISA protections.
Re: 8919 and MLTN. Wouldn't filing the 8919 be a defacto disclosure of the position? | |
| 20 December 2007 | |
| We've used the 4137 method for 15 years and it always works and I'm very happy to hear it's finally going to be done right, but the fly in the ointment is obvious.
| |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 20 December 2007 |
| Well, TC, PPC reminds me this week that disclosure is only a defense if the position is reasonable! | |


