Posted on 12/22/2007 2:49:32 PM PST by lowbridge
Bottom line. These delivery guys are not independent in any sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There are many thousands of independent truckers who haul for one company only, are they all to be reclassified? FedEx looks like just a starting point to me. What about sales reps who work for straight commission?
FedEx is non-union (UPS is a union shop), so I'm sure Hoffa and Co. delight in anything negative relating to FedEx.
I’m sure it has something to do with size and volume. We’re a small company (less than 10 employees) and don’t do as much shipping as the big boys do.
......Who are all those people they pick up packages from and deliver them to?......
They are delivery sites.
The solution is for the contractors to be corporations rather than individuals. Corporations can deal as they please with vendors.
Every Ground contractor actually buys and owns their routes.The guy who pressed for this lawsuit in the first place was an embittered ex-contractor who had already lost his contract. It takes a bit of doing before one loses a contract.
I think they will be required to transmit it electronically. If one’s taxes are over a certain amount, electronic transmission is required.
Will the IRS now refund money to all the independent contractors? Or will they collect from the FedEx AND keep the taxes they already collected?
I guess the bottom line is different strokes for different folks. I value the compartmentalization I get as an independent. I buy my own health insurance, or not. None of my customers is going to get a printout of what medications I buy or what I see the doctor for, etc., like an employer may. No information escapes the compartment except things that actually have to do with our relationship.
Of course, my situation is different from the one in dispute here. I work for many customers, at my location as well as theirs, and the work for which I contract includes more than just my man hours, so there is no question that I’m truly an independent.
—”There are many thousands of independent truckers who haul for one company........”—
Are these independent truckers required to wear the company uniform and have their trucks prominently display company advertising?
Fershur....our friends in Florida mailed us a Christmas package via USPS, and have been tracking it.
Today's Monday the 24th - tracking indicates it's been in our city's post office since last Wednesday the 19th.
—”RPS was purchased by FedEx, and as far as I know the employees went with the deal.”—
They did. And then new people and equipment were added.
Remember Flying Tigers? That was what is now FedEx.
When a PC manufacturer signs an exclusivity agreement with Microsoft, and solely supplies MS Windows, and labels and advertises Microsoft and MS products prominently all over its computers, popping up on the screen, on packaging or even on its commercials — then I suppose that by your line of reasoning the company is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft.
There is always two sides to a story. It sounds like the ex-contractor really screwed up if he lost his contract.
Just as it does now. When the DOD procures a system from a defense contractor, it pays for all labor, materials and profit the contractor is owed. And in labor, materials and profit are embedded payroll taxes, income tax and corporate tax. Those amounts are embedded in the price of the system procured.
So your argument at the outset fails. The government pays for federal taxes now in its purchases.
That is the same as a cow living on its own milk.
Not worthy of comment, irrelevant, not publishable.
The government has no money to pay taxes save what it collects in taxes.
The government borrows.
The missing revenues will be recovered through an even higher tax rate than has been claimed...or an expanded scope of things subject to the sales tax.
Complete and utter fabrication, no backup and not plausible.
The "pre-bate" is socialist redistribution. It will create yet another giant government bureaucracy.
Same comment as above. The Rebate effectively excludes federal taxes for ALL REGISTERED ELIGIBLE AMERICANS up to the level of poverty. There is no other way of excluding federal burden except by rebate. A system of deduction would require filing an income statement, the very system the FairTax abolishes. Therefore, a Rebate is the only system that is feasible and it can involve the usage of smartcards.
The Rebate is necessary because the abomination known as the Income tax was originally brought about by a flaw in the system of excise taxes. Excise taxes hit smaller farmers harder than larger farmers as a proportion of their income. This 'disproportionate' burden is completely erased with the Rebate which is available to every one from retirees living on Social Security to the wealthy. The Rebate does not play favorites. It was not possible to have a Rebate prior to 1913 because the federal government did not have the administrative technology and capability to manage a rebate.
Eliminate sales taxes on food and you eliminate the justification for this "pre-bate" and the associated bureaucracy.
Overly simplistic bordering on the absurd. There are other necessities besides food.
It creates double taxation by taxing purchases made with money already taxed by the current income tax.
Your argument here fails in the same way as at the beginning. All purchases made today are paying as part of the price the embedded federal taxes from labor, material and profits. The FairTax replaces these embedded taxes. It does not create a new tax on an existing tax, it creates a replacement tax that consolidates all other taxes together and replaces them at the end of the production chain and service outlet with the NRST.
Those who have substantial savings from their after tax earnings will get screwed big time.
Same as above and at the beginning.
Lastly, nowhere is the FairTax dishonest. The only thing dishonest is what you showed in your original post. On the other hand if you are plain ignorant, then this post should make you more aware.
For more information:
—”by your line of reasoning”—
Not my reasoning. It’s the Feds. I just understand why they come to the conclusion.
—”When a PC manufacturer signs an exclusivity agreement with Microsoft....”—
Does your exclusive Microsoft vendor report to Microsoft daily for work? Do they deliver the products in Microsoft vehicles, wearing Microsoft uniforms?
The government borrows.
That which is borrowed must be repaid...with interest...from TAXES.
No further comments are required.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.