Jump to content

American family plan: better read up


5GallonBucket

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Well one of the issues is the IRS will mandate banks to report any withdrawals or deposits on accounts with $600 or more

I work at a bank, I'm not sure how that would work.  Based on the Patriot act, we report transactions over 10K, but not directly to the IRS like some people think.....and transactions over 10K are VERY common....I've never understood why one person would be worried about the government picking on them with millions of transactions reported daily from every bank in the US. 

Now with a $600 trigger, that would be 95% or more of every transaction we do......I'm not sure what they would do with that information, but they don't have the staff to manage that....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Well one of the issues is the IRS will mandate banks to report any withdrawals or deposits on accounts with $600 or more

You have always been required to declare income in excess of $600 to the IRS. As a 20+ year sports official could not tell you how many officials keep tabs on how much they work in one school district so they would not hit that magic number.

President Biden announced the American Families Plan today, which is designed to “grow the middle class and expand benefits of economic growth to all Americans.

As always the devil is in the details and when you see either party state anything about the middle class you can bet grandmas pearls it is going to HURT the middle class.

The middle class, income between $40k and $120K, the average U.S. household income is $87,864, and the median is $61,937, which would make both the average and median income group "middle class".

As someone who has spent his entire adult working life at or above the median income, this is a total attack on the middle class. Those of us in the middle class usually have both heads of household working and sometimes one or both may have a second job, many times as an independent contractor.  In my first 10 years of officiating I could make from $5K to $20K depending on the number of sports and how much you wanted to work. Much of this money was in the form of cash or personal check from youth sports or a scheduler for that sport.

About 5 or 6 years ago the IRS started clamping down on these entities forcing them to file a 1099 on those who made under that $600 reportable income. Also those at the lower end of the MC, $40K are less likely to own a home or have enough deductions to long form to save taxes or use a short form with the standard deduction. It's not really the lost income tax that Uncle Sam hates with these 1099ers it is the SS income tax they are concerned with. Every one that makes extra money in this form puts 95 to 100% back into the economy, weather it is saving for a large purchase or expenditure or using it for everyday expenses.

So thanks for taking me down the rabbit hole, I gave up the officiating gig a couple of years ago and do not miss tax time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

I work at a bank, I'm not sure how that would work.  Based on the Patriot act, we report transactions over 10K, but not directly to the IRS like some people think.....and transactions over 10K are VERY common....I've never understood why one person would be worried about the government picking on them with millions of transactions reported daily from every bank in the US. 

Now with a $600 trigger, that would be 95% or more of every transaction we do......I'm not sure what they would do with that information, but they don't have the staff to manage that....

According IRS website in this American family plan it talks about the lack of staff….and so there for they brought up some program that would do all the analysis….I couldn’t read no more cause it’s so dang boring and was 24 pages.

Also spending 80 billion on irs 

 

always trying to take

i get taxed for a old rusty sheetmetal chicken house…..what the hell.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

According IRS website in this American family plan it talks about the lack of staff….and so there for they brought up some program that would do all the analysis….I couldn’t read no more cause it’s so dang boring and was 24 pages.

Also spending 80 billion on irs 

 

always trying to take

i get taxed for a old rusty sheetmetal chicken house…..what the hell.

 

I get ya...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5GallonBucket said:

According IRS website in this American family plan it talks about the lack of staff….and so there for they brought up some program that would do all the analysis….I couldn’t read no more cause it’s so dang boring and was 24 pages.

Also spending 80 billion on irs 

 

always trying to take

i get taxed for a old rusty sheetmetal chicken house…..what the hell.

 

You could actually make it a tax deduction if you made capital improvements to your free range, organic poultry "business". Heck just show a loss for a couple years and like magic your tax burden is reduced. You would be amazed how treating a hobby as a business and following a few minor tax codes can make you a hundredaire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Derf Nosneb said:

About 5 or 6 years ago the IRS started clamping down on these entities forcing them to file a 1099 on those who made under that $600 reportable income.

Was that directed at just sports officiating? The tax law only mandates reporting income of $600 or more. I wonder if these organizations just decided to send a 1099 to everyone to make it easier (see regs below). 


From the IRS website:

“If you pay independent contractors, you may have to file Form 1099-NEC, Nonemployee Compensation, to report payments for services performed for your trade or business. If the following four conditions are met, you must generally report a payment as nonemployee compensation.

  1. You made the payment to someone who is not your employee;
  2. You made the payment for services in the course of your trade or business (including government agencies and nonprofit organizations);
  3. You made the payment to an individual, partnership, estate, or in some cases, a corporation; and
  4. You made payments to the payee of at least $600 during the year.

Note: Beginning with Tax Year 2020, you must use Form 1099-NEC, Nonemployee Compensation, to report payments of nonemployee compensation (NEC) previously reported in box 7 on Form 1099-MISC. The separate instructions for filers/issuers for Form 1099-NEC are available in the 2020 Instructions for Forms 1099-MISC and 1099-NEC.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

Was that directed at just sports officiating? The tax law only mandates reporting income of $600 or more. I wonder if these organizations just decided to send a 1099 to everyone to make it easier (see regs below). 


From the IRS website:

“If you pay independent contractors, you may have to file Form 1099-NEC, Nonemployee Compensation, to report payments for services performed for your trade or business. If the following four conditions are met, you must generally report a payment as nonemployee compensation.

  1. You made the payment to someone who is not your employee;
  2. You made the payment for services in the course of your trade or business (including government agencies and nonprofit organizations);
  3. You made the payment to an individual, partnership, estate, or in some cases, a corporation; and
  4. You made payments to the payee of at least $600 during the year.

Note: Beginning with Tax Year 2020, you must use Form 1099-NEC, Nonemployee Compensation, to report payments of nonemployee compensation (NEC) previously reported in box 7 on Form 1099-MISC. The separate instructions for filers/issuers for Form 1099-NEC are available in the 2020 Instructions for Forms 1099-MISC and 1099-NEC.”

I am not really sure if it was directed just at officiating. I found from past experience not to mess with the IRS back in the 80's. 

The problem I saw with some of the officials was the lack of knowledge in deductions and how using those deductions would actually increase the profit made. It could also have been that the scheduler was doing some crazy under the table business as he was pulling a pension for MLB. It may have been his accountant that recommend he do that to cover his arse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Derf Nosneb said:

I am not really sure if it was directed just at officiating. I found from past experience not to mess with the IRS back in the 80's. 

The problem I saw with some of the officials was the lack of knowledge in deductions and how using those deductions would actually increase the profit made. It could also have been that the scheduler was doing some crazy under the table business as he was pulling a pension for MLB. It may have been his accountant that recommend he do that to cover his arse.

Who knows. Just an FYI, if it’s less than $600, you don’t have to include the 1099 with your tax return, nor will you be required to pay income tax on those earnings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

Who knows. Just an FYI, if it’s less than $600, you don’t have to include the 1099 with your tax return, nor will you be required to pay income tax on those earnings. 

Thanks yes I knew that, I would show all my income from High School sports and all my youths sports was nickel/dime work so would not claim any of it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/18/2021 at 9:07 AM, BS Wildcats said:

I’m sure members of Congress will be exempt from the meddling, just as they are from getting the vaccine.  Guess they don’t want to be able to track how they come in with nothing, and become multi-millionaires on roughly a salary of $200K. 

aoc can afford a $30,000 gala. She used to not have enough to afford an apartment in DC, or so she said. Poor little thang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...