Well, that's an arguable point

Post #63,612 by mhuber 11/18/02 1:22:38 PM Reply	Well, that's an arguable point It hasn't been transferred to the employee, but it was (unless the employee is an idiot) a factor in the negotiations. The employee was paid less in order to cover the cost - and both sides know it. In negotiations over w-2/10-99 status, it is a rather significant factor. How many people work over-the-table instead of under just to get that 7.5%? I considered not quiting a job in which I was losing money in order to get that (and other) tax paid. If I were in a better financial position, I'd keep driving courier (my costs per IRS milage allowances are higher than my pay) as a tax loss. This is sort of an FOB situation, rather like the question of who's money the bank robber stole if cash from/to your account was on the counter when he pulled the gun. ---- Whatever
Post #63,663 by a6l6e6x 11/18/02 5:07:54 PM 11/18/02 5:19:29 PM Reply	Right on! It's a "matching contribution" not unlike one for 401-K plan. Alex "Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these."\t-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18) Edited by a6l6e6x Nov. 18, 2002, 05:19:29 PM EST Expand All History
Post #63,823 by mmoffitt 11/19/02 2:10:07 PM Reply	Gullability Abounds. So, if the costs of production (and labor is a cost of production) drops, the savings are shared with non-shareholding employees? On what planet? Do you really think that if tomorrow the mandatory employer contribution to your FICA taxes was dropped, that you'd see any gain on your paycheck? You can't be that naive. Technology has boosted productivity in the past 20 years. How much of those savings have been passed on to employees? Are we earning more in real wages? Have we kept our pay the same and started working fewer hours/week? Have lay-offs ended? Of course not. That is NOT the way American capitalism works. Any savings of any business are passed on almost exclusively to the shareholders, almost never to the wage slaves of the shareholders. Geesh! And I thought you were playing along at home.
Post #63,869 by Ashton 11/19/02 5:54:36 PM Reply	Yes, as with 'Doze pure Crap.. we're inured to the scam now.
Post #64,048 by mhuber 11/20/02 11:18:18 AM Reply	In most cases I'd agree But when one of the options is 10-99 status and the negotiations are serious (as opposed to the usual situation where the employer ofers and the employee says "yes" more or less automaticaly) it can be a factor. I've had contracts where the client explicitly offered me a higher rate if I'd take 10-99 status. (And in case the IRS is reading this, it was legitimate - the other 10-99 qualifications applied, I set the hours and working conditions, used my own equipment, and in every way was operating as an independant contractor.) ---- Whatever

Welcome to IWETHEY!