3 ms·

I didn't know about the no-more-than-a-year guideline -- that's fascinating. Is the purpose of the rule to protect the worker from being perpetually denied bene

by sowbug 17y ago

I didn't know about the no-more-than-a-year guideline -- that's fascinating. Is the purpose of the rule to protect the worker from being perpetually denied benefits that he'd otherwise get as an employee? If so, that's too bad, because in this case the worker wants to remain a contractor! And thanks for the advice on not being covered twice. I'll be careful about that if it comes up. If I were offered health coverage as part of my employee compensation, I hope I'd be able to negotiate it into extra cash instead.

pmikal 17y ago
Your new employer can be held liable for employment taxes, plus interest and penalties, if a worker, you, is incorrectly classified as an independent contractor and paid via your LLC. The penalties can be reasonably high. The IRS definition is here: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.h... There will also be a state definition to consider. The one year period isn't a rule but more of a generally accepted guideline. You can get around most of these in your contract with the hiring company and your LLC, but again will need their cooperation to properly structure the relationship to minimize their risk of losing an audit. It's really a bunch of hoops for them to jump through to get you on-board. If it were my company, it would be unlikely that I would go through the effort unless you were a key man.