Posted on 05/12/2013 8:45:00 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
Many part-timers are facing a double whammy from President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act.
The law requires large employers offering health insurance to include part-time employees working 30 hours a week or more. But rather than provide health care to more workers, a growing number of employers are cutting back employee hours instead.
The result: Not only will these workers earn less money, but they'll also miss out on health insurance at work.
Consider the city of Long Beach, Calif. It is limiting most of its 1,600 part-time employees to fewer than 27 hours a week, on average. City officials say that without cutting payroll hours, new health benefits would cost up to $2 million more next year, and that extra expense would trigger layoffs and cutbacks in city services.
Part-timer Tara Sievers, 43, understands why, but she still thinks it's wrong.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
Much like the claim that socialism is great, it's just never been implemented correctly, by the right people. Interestingly enough, the people saying this are always the ones wanting to give it another try with themselves at the helm.
Mark
Interesting, but not surprising . Do you have a link to this pending edict?
So Cali now has more “29ers” than 49ers.
Not sure if that would work either.
The IRS has very specific rules about who can be classified as a contractual worker with a 1099 vs an employee. In fact, and entire industry was formed to certify contractors.
Mark
The IRS is stopping businesses from making their employees part-time as well?
As I understand it, what they are doing is making it so that companies cannot spin off sub-companies that will be set up to have the number of employees be below the “magic” number of 50 employees. They are doing this by looking at the ownership of the companies and if there is a common ownership, then for the purpose of “fines/Taxes” associated with Obamacare all of those companies are considered to be one. Thus the fines are going be based on those figures.
This is very disturbing.
From what I remember of the original “ZeroCare” bill, they attempted to require any and all payments for services in excess of $600.00 per year, to be reported by both the provider and recipient.
That was removed from the bill.
That provision would have turned a deductible business expense into paperwork nightmare.
Now, it seems to turn it from a deductible expense into a liability ?
Please set me straight.
This is how Obama rewards his supporters.
Not yet, I'm sure it is coming.
The IRS though is requiring every person who files taxes in April 2014, to additionally supply what insurance that person has, when they purchased it, and what it covers, to ensure that the taxpayer is compliant with the mandatory coverage required under the law. If your plan is a group plan, and that plan does not have the required coverage, you then will be assessed a fine/tax because you the employee don't have the required coverage.
And if you bought your plan, let's say, December of 2013, to comply with having coverage, they will also assess the fine/tax, because the law requires that every person (individual mandate) must have insurance in the calendar year 2013.
My company is getting ready to renew our group insurance 7/1. I have two employees who cannot afford the coverage, we're a very small company, and the new law states that if you want any new insurance plan (instead of the grandfathered plan) you must have 75% participation of all eligible employees. So if you have allowable exceptions (employees under 26 on their parents plans / employees on their spouses' plans / VA, etc) everyone left must still meet the 75% compliance.
So, what this means to us, is that we have a grandfathered plan, it may be compliant with the required government coverage, I'm going to be checking with the insurance people on Monday, I want to be able to forewarn my employees before they get surprised by the fine/tax.
This is all a big freaking boondoggle.
Obamacare will stay regardless of how degraded, incompetent or expensive health care gets. The worse it gets, the bigger the lies will be about its success. It will cost us jobs, lives and more money than anyone could have imagined. Every attempt at reform will create new, unforeseen problems, and the solutions will be to enlarge the bureaucracy and pour more and more money into it. And more lies.
Maybe someone needs to set up a service that would match up random companies in a town with no connection with each other to provide part time workers for another company.
Isn’t that called Craigslist?
Not sure if that would work either.
This won't work either. The rules of the 1099/IC are such that they cannot be under your direct management. If a 1099 only works for you, under your direct control, and you require him/her to be where/when/how you like, they are an employee not an 1099.
A true 1099 works for himself at multiple vendors and is on his own time, and you do not give him a paycheck, he invoices you, and is payed out of A/P. Also, the 1099 is required to have Worker's Comp insurance and must provide a certificate of insurance to any vendor he has.
So love the "we have to pass it to know what's in it" bill. /raging sarcasm
Setting aside the workman’s comp issue and some retarded notion that they must provide their services to “multiple clients” (they 1099 entity is the vendor) BTW.
If I run an office cleaning service and I am the only “worker” and I only have 1 customer.
I enter into a contract/agreement to provide my services with certain expectations that include when (between 8 and 10pm), where (duh, the office), what and how (clean the office and they don’t care HOW).
We can extend this to virtually any position within a company that allows some flexibility on the HOW part.
I could have a boat load of 1099 salespersons that I control the where/when but not the how. The how starts to get really subjective.
In addition, one persons technique for cleaning or selling or driving or mowing or consulting or taking orders or flipping burgers or analyzing data or writing reports or greeting customers and on and on, seem to require certain standards of performance that have nothing to do with HOW.
The IRS nor the Federal Gov’t can make me have multiple contracts or agreements in order for me to be a 1099 independent contractor.
Tell me how they will differentiate between a cleaning service and someone that provides exclusive co-location cloud computing services ?
A failed ObamaCare is part of their strategy. They will blame it on competition and the markets. Their answer is a nationalized single payer system.
“This is a perfect example of what the low-information voters have wrought unto themselves.”
You shouldn’t have to be a political junkie to know what is going on in this country.
The constitutionally protected media has been entirely derelict in their duty to INFORM the public.
No, it’s going to collapse under its own weight and unworkability. It’s going to be ugly and awful, but it’s never going to last.
Silver lining? Both Barack Obama and John Roberts will go down as 2 of the most miserable failures in American history.
As did Barry Sotero, making this a Dingell-Barry collaboration.
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” - Plato
A valid point and excellent argument.
As I understand it, if a person is 100% a 1099 for whomever (sales, cleaning, etc), the pressure points comes down to:
1) do you supply the 1099 with any supplies? Be it office equipment, cleaning supplies, a branded shirt? and
2) do you require the person not to contract with any other entity other than yourself
3) do you require specific training, bonuses (other than listed in original agreement) and
4) do you require the "how", and I agree, it's subjective.
There is a complicated form that the IRS is now using to determine if the person hired is a 1099 or a W2. The training I received was that the 1099 had to pass the requirements of the SS8 from by the government (and the hiring company better be looking at it) or else the person hired was a W2 and all tax withholding, benefits, training, yada yada were in play.
If I, as the hiring authority, hire person X to supply services at client A, requiring set specific hours, and set specific training, and set specific behaviors, then I am the employer of record for person X, and am required to do all of those personnel paperwork issues that arise, not client A.
If I hire person Z as a 1099, and subcontract him to client B, and offer no specific training, no supplies, no support, basically I offer Z nothing other than the opening into client B, then Z is required to do his own taxes, WC, etc, and works on a "as needed" bases by client B (for whatever the project and/or contract stipulates) but could be handled somewhere between the hours of 8am to 10pm, but that is not my requirement, just that somewhere in that time frame, the work needs to be done. Person Z invoices me his time, I pay him out of A/P, and bill client B per contract.
It's a mess, I agree. I agree to your logic as well, but the government does not care for logic, they want to tax, and tax again, and unfortunately they've made it as difficult as possible for companies to chose the way they wish to conduct business.
From what I remember of the original “ZeroCare” bill, they attempted to require any and all payments for services in excess of $600.00 per year, to be reported by both the provider and recipient.
That was removed from the bill.
That provision would have turned a deductible business expense into paperwork nightmare.
Now, it seems to turn it from a deductible expense into a liability
Please set me straight.
I have no idea about this. What I was simply saying is that you can't just decide that you'll no longer be an employee whose taxes are collected by your employer, instead deciding to become a contractor and be issued a 1099.
The IRS has very strict rules and requirements to be a 1099 worker, and they will fine and penalize any employer and employee who doesn't conform to their requirements.
The IRS demands the employers become tax collectors simply because they want a constant stream of funds and do not want to deal with the tracking nightmare of well over 100 million 1099 employees.
Mark
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.