4 ms·

Wait, I don't get it. What is he proposing as an alternative? Would he be happier to pay Sally $74,000 so that she herself can do the whole process of paying $3

Wait, I don't get it. What is he proposing as an alternative? Would he be happier to pay Sally $74,000 so that she herself can do the whole process of paying $30,000 for taxes and health care and stuff like that? Or is he proposing to pay sally $44,000 and let Sally pay $30,000 out of that? Or is he just whining?

forinti 16y ago
Also, what kind of market does he expect to have after he takes away so much disposable income from workers?
noodle 16y ago
just whining. he could, instead, hire freelance or contract workers. he won't have to pay much to the government, he'll just have to pay the contractor double what he pays Sally.
- mattm 16y ago
  I don't know how it works in the US. In Canada, if a business hires someone on contract but they are not in an "arms-length" transaction (ie. the 'contractor' is working in their office, using their equipment for more than a 'temporary' period of time), then the Canadian Revenue Agency can force the business to re-classify them as an "employee" causing both the person and company to pay back-taxes and any penalties.
  - noodle 16y ago
    i honestly don't know the details of the current US laws, but i do know that i've worked in a team with reasonably permanent, in-house contractors before.
    - e40 16y ago
      And that company was likely breaking the law in the state in which they operated. If CA, MA, WA, or most others. CA and many other states are now going after companies that hire contractors to do the work that is usually done by employees (and they use their own definition of "employee", too). They will hit you with fines and back employment taxes should you be audited. How would you be audited? A contractor files for unemployment, to which they are not entitled (because unemployment taxes are not paid for them). It happens all the time.
  - jcl 16y ago
    It is the same in the US: http://www.google.com/search?q=irs+independent+contractor+test http://www.google.com/search?q=irs+independent+contractor+te...
cdavid 16y ago
Those articles are sad. They are the equivalent of the crackpot in sciences, in that they ignore the most basic rules of economics. Discussing about whether taxes are a burden for business or not without taking care of tax incidence is at best totally ignorant. Which part is paid by him and which part is paid by his employee administratively is meaningless - it all depends on the job market, and the elasticiy of demands and supply. Most likely, if he paid less in taxes, he would have to pay sally more.

forinti 16y ago

Also, what kind of market does he expect to have after he takes away so much disposable income from workers?

noodle 16y ago

just whining. he could, instead, hire freelance or contract workers. he won't have to pay much to the government, he'll just have to pay the contractor double what he pays Sally.

mattm 16y ago
I don't know how it works in the US. In Canada, if a business hires someone on contract but they are not in an "arms-length" transaction (ie. the 'contractor' is working in their office, using their equipment for more than a 'temporary' period of time), then the Canadian Revenue Agency can force the business to re-classify them as an "employee" causing both the person and company to pay back-taxes and any penalties.
- noodle 16y ago
  i honestly don't know the details of the current US laws, but i do know that i've worked in a team with reasonably permanent, in-house contractors before.
  - e40 16y ago
    And that company was likely breaking the law in the state in which they operated. If CA, MA, WA, or most others. CA and many other states are now going after companies that hire contractors to do the work that is usually done by employees (and they use their own definition of "employee", too). They will hit you with fines and back employment taxes should you be audited. How would you be audited? A contractor files for unemployment, to which they are not entitled (because unemployment taxes are not paid for them). It happens all the time.
- jcl 16y ago
  It is the same in the US: http://www.google.com/search?q=irs+independent+contractor+test http://www.google.com/search?q=irs+independent+contractor+te...

cdavid 16y ago

Those articles are sad. They are the equivalent of the crackpot in sciences, in that they ignore the most basic rules of economics. Discussing about whether taxes are a burden for business or not without taking care of tax incidence is at best totally ignorant. Which part is paid by him and which part is paid by his employee administratively is meaningless - it all depends on the job market, and the elasticiy of demands and supply. Most likely, if he paid less in taxes, he would have to pay sally more.