Don't Try This At Home
Ariella posts an ad that appeared on a public forum which reads as follows:
"Perfect as part time or telecommute: We need you to search the internet and databases (will be provided) for potential customers. Will pay $12 an hour in cash weekly (this is the equivalent of $24 an hour on a 1099). Must have some experience in business, research, sales, insurance etc to be able to define a "Qualified Potential Customer" Please contact us____"
Whoever takes this cash job should be prepared to cough up 14.1% for employment taxes (92.35% * 15.3% * profit) plus their federal marginal rate + their state marginal rate.
Just because your employer doesn't intend to issue a 1099 to a (presumably legitimate) contractor, doesn't mean the IRS won't want their cut when they come a knocking. I know someone who took a cash job and was ultimately stuck with the bill + interest + penalties because he didn't want to be a 'moser' and defend himself against the employer who could not claim he was a contractor in the least.
Anyone who takes a $12 an hour contracting job and ends up getting audited is going to feel really stupid when the bill arrives. You certainly run the chance of stealing not only from the government, but from yourself!
And to the businessman: don't let the newest scandal get in the way of announcing your intentions to evade taxes on a public listserve. Have you no shame?
10 comments:
SL, you might want to clarify that Ariella did not put up this ad herself. It's not clear when you say "post".
Some day cash will be obsolete and all payments will be electronic and tax returns will have to match all deposits into a person's electronic account.
I saw this post on the Five Towns email list, as well as several others by the same poster. The emails offered various sales and marketing opportunities, and described a "breakthrough advertising technique" that "sells itself."
I did a little research on just who and what exactly this is - and here we are:
http://jetangel.com
http://jetangel.com/VOTE.html
http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/2008/08/take-cover-from.html
http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/pfizer-sues-over-viva-viagra-missiles/
I really like the Obama missle. I'm wondering if it's supposed to be ironic.
Thanks for your concern, Abbi. I didn't think anyone would take this as my own post, and SL's link clarifies that I was quoting it on my blog. It's certainly not the way I advertise for salespeople. I also have to admit that it bothers me that a moderated list that will often ignore a request for a posting just because it mentions the business name or is not titled correctly will put through a post like this one.
I appreciate the research put into finding what this is. My guess is that jet ads are too expensive for many businesses. So this is hardly an easy sell.
"Some day cash will be obsolete and all payments will be electronic and tax returns will have to match all deposits into a person's electronic account."
That would be rather silly, anonymous, seeing as gifts are tax free on the recipient no matter what and on the giver for most sane numbers (in 2009, the limit is $13,000 per person to person, or $52,000 from couple to couple). Not to mention refunds for products, rebates, etc, which also aren't subject to taxation.
SL, the answer is no, some of these people have no shame. I would think in the wake of the "great" publicity we have been giving ourselves lately people would be smarter than to advertise something like this, but it appears we lean nothing from seeing a few of our won being carted off in handcuffs because, hey, "it won't happen to me, I am more careful thank those guys"!
Given the trouble he has gotten into with Pfizer, it looks like Mr. Sachs doesn't really care much for following any kind of laws.
Two common sayings come to mind here. The first is "a fool and his money are soon parted." This ad is posted publicly and people believe that the government won't see it and come after what is theirs?! The second saying is "If it sounds too good to be true, it isn't," no explanation needed.
In addition to the moral and legal issued, do people understand that with all that paying under the table, they will have no taxable earnings record and therefore no social security? Do people have a clue that your social security benefits (and social security disability if needed) depend on how many quarters of taxable earnings are reported and how much? Do people also understand that if you pretend to be a contracter when you are an employee, you may not be eligible for unemployment compensation and worker's compensation if there is a work-related accident? Do the employers realize that in addition to tax fraud, they also face huge legal problems in the event of a workplace accident and the employee isn't on their worker's comp. coverage?
The root of many problems is the attitude "no one can tell me what to do". Another root is "I can't tell anyone what to do".
Post a Comment