Author Topic: List of Stock Sites not subject to automatic IRS 30% withholding tax (Read 12858 times)

luceluceluce · « **on:** June 02, 2009, 01:40 »

Hello everybody, I am From the UK.

Although my country has an exisiting double tax relief treaty with the United States - unfortunately, I will have to provide evidence to the IRS to prove it.

Rightly or wrongly, I have moral and political objections to this. I also have practical objections to this (the cost and time).

This thread isnt to discuss the right or wrong, it's just to ask:

Does anyone know the agencies that do not automatically withhold tax for the IRS? And will not in the future either because they have overseas offices or because they absorb this cost themselves.

Hope so!

Lucy x

friese · « **Reply #1 on:** June 02, 2009, 06:17 »

hey lucie, its STEVE the bichon!
sorry i couldnt read your PMs over in tax land...
maybe you can send me an email with your message !

anyway.. i'm sure all sites will do the stock thing pretty soon....

StockManiac · « **Reply #2 on:** June 02, 2009, 06:29 »

In other words, you would like to know which sites will allow you to evade paying your taxes!

Dreamframer · « **Reply #3 on:** June 02, 2009, 06:43 »

Quote from: StockManiac on June 02, 2009, 06:29

In other words, you would like to know which sites will allow you to evade paying your taxes!

She talks about double taxes, not just paying taxes. We all pay our taxes, just some of us are doing it once, and some other have to do it twice...which is pretty unfair. Only USA has this kind of tax. What would Americans say if they would have to pay 30% additional tax for every bottle of CocaCola sold in other countries around the world?

StockManiac · « **Reply #4 on:** June 02, 2009, 06:51 »

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 06:43

She talks about double taxes, not just paying taxes.

Then why isn't she complaining about the VAT tax. The VAT tax is not only paid twice on a product, but multiple times.

Why not just consider this another VAT tax and be done with it?

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 06:43

We all pay our taxes...

I highly doubt that. It's easy to say that on a forum, but in reality most people probably don't pay anything on the profits that they make from microstock. I have found that if people can get away with paying their taxes, then they will.

RT · « **Reply #5 on:** June 02, 2009, 07:01 »

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 06:43

What would Americans say if they would have to pay 30% additional tax for every bottle of CocaCola sold in other countries around the world?

They'd probably say "Oh we don't want to do that lets fill out this simple form so that we don't have to" then again some might say "But I don't want to fill out the form and give our details to another country because I'm paranoid" this is despite the fact that if that country really wanted your personal details they could get it quite easily from any number of sources. And then of course some of them might just go on and on and on crying on public forums about something they don't think is fair because it means they have to declare some of the earnings they're making on the side, of course the same people will still moan about the state of their country and why things don't improve.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #6 on:** June 02, 2009, 07:12 »

If iStock suddenly started withdrawing 30% to give to the Canadian government on my work with no way for me to adjust for that here, you can bet I'd be upset and looking too. I wouldn't understand why the place that I live couldn't benefit from the income I'm making.

hqimages · « **Reply #7 on:** June 02, 2009, 07:51 »

Quote from: StockManiac on June 02, 2009, 06:51

Then why isn't she complaining about the VAT tax. The VAT tax is not only paid twice on a product, but multiple times.

Why not just consider this another VAT tax and be done with it?

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 06:43
We all pay our taxes...

Because we claim 100% of vat back from the country we live in.. I have no problem paying vat to istock for example, because I recoup it every two months from revenue IN MY OWN COUNTRY.. this tax is income/royalty tax, you're comparing bread with cheese, totally different.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #8 on:** June 02, 2009, 08:09 »

Quote from: RT on June 02, 2009, 07:01

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 06:43
What would Americans say if they would have to pay 30% additional tax for every bottle of CocaCola sold in other countries around the world?

They'd probably say "Oh we don't want to do that lets fill out this simple form so that we don't have to" then again some might say "But I don't want to fill out the form and give our details to another country because I'm paranoid" this is despite the fact that if that country really wanted your personal details they could get it quite easily from any number of sources. And then of course some of them might just go on and on and on crying on public forums about something they don't think is fair because it means they have to declare some of the earnings they're making on the side, of course the same people will still moan about the state of their country and why things don't improve.

RT,
I see you are not informed well, of you forget some big facts about this.
1. First, that simple form costs "only" $600 in some countries to fill, including all taxes and fees needed for all papers. Not to mention that some people have to travel hundreds of miles to get all papers. If you still think it's just about filling some simple form I have second big reason
2. Many countries have no tax treaty with USA, so, there is no form that will make this tax less painful. For example, I HAVE to pay those additional 30%, because USA doesn't have this kind of contract with my country, and when I get my money from selling photos, I have to pay tax to my country as well.

alias · « **Reply #9 on:** June 02, 2009, 08:57 »

Quote from: RT on June 02, 2009, 07:01

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 06:43
What would Americans say if they would have to pay 30% additional tax for every bottle of CocaCola sold in other countries around the world?

They'd probably say "Oh we don't want to do that lets fill out this simple form so that we don't have to" then again some might say ..

No they would do what Coca Cola actually do

and form local companies and strategic alliances in the countries all around the world where they manufacture and sell the product. Local branches.

luceluceluce · « **Reply #10 on:** June 02, 2009, 09:22 »

Quote from: StockManiac on June 02, 2009, 06:51

Then why isn't she complaining about the VAT tax. The VAT tax is not only paid twice on a product, but multiple times.

I didnt complain about that because I didn't know about it. Please see my new thread complaining about multiple VAT tax.

: D : D

To be honest, I've done my best to support the UKs Inland Revenue by consistently paying too much tax. Which they always return to me, at an unspecified date - minus the potential interest that could have accrued if i hadnt used the taxman as my number one banking choice. I just don't really care enough. Because of my attitude - the Inland Revenue have just given me nearly £500 which I didn't know I had - which is going to go towards half of a 70mm-200mm f4.5 L IS lens.

: D : D : D : D

My tax department have been the only people to have supported my microstock career in any financial way. (i love you guys so much - but i have to say i do hear bad things about customs and excise!) I open my bank accounts and my heart to them - and they are careful not to take too much or break anything.... so i trust them.

I support taxation wholeheartedly. I admire the scandinavians for taxing hard but looking after their citizens.

x

straw man alert * straw man alert * straw man alert
(sorry, that last part's automated. I have no control over it)

RT · « **Reply #11 on:** June 02, 2009, 09:28 »

Quote from: Whitechild on June 02, 2009, 08:09

RT,
I see you are not informed well, of you forget some big facts about this.
1. First, that simple form costs "only" $600 in some countries to fill, including all taxes and fees needed for all papers. Not to mention that some people have to travel hundreds of miles to get all papers. If you still think it's just about filling some simple form I have second big reason
2. Many countries have no tax treaty with USA, so, there is no form that will make this tax less painful. For example, I HAVE to pay those additional 30%, because USA doesn't have this kind of contract with my country, and when I get my money from selling photos, I have to pay tax to my country as well.

I sympathise with you I really do, however rather than complain and blame people why don't you sort it out. The US government and Shutterstock do not owe you or anybody else a living, they do not control where you or anybody else choose to live and/or do business from. Nobody is saying it's fair or even right but life isn't fair either sometimes.
Only you can decide to what level you deal with this, but there are and will be ways no matter where you live, look on the bright side as least they haven't said they're going to back tax you for past earnings on SS.

luceluceluce · « **Reply #12 on:** June 02, 2009, 09:47 »

A lot of the talk seems to be about establishing if there is a problem or not.

Some people seem to think there is, and others seem to think there isn't. There's been a lot of debate, and a lot of evidence presented - and I'm afraid i remain convinced there is a problem.

Whether smn agrees with my values or not is not relevent. All i can say is that my values are strong and they guide my behaviour. They are not pure economic values. I also suspect others share some of these values, otherwise there wouldn't have been so much protest.

This same business context is nested inside and created by human nature - and in human nature we react like people with feelings and desires and fears. Branding experts know that. They give companies personalities - because they know that people don't relate to 'companies', they relate to people.

It is not right to say that any value that is not a cold hard 'business' value is illegitimate because we operate in a business context. And it's not right to try to discredit a voice by calling it dishonest.

So, even if some people think that it 'shouldn't' be a problem, clearly for many people it 'is'.

and it is reaaaaaaaaaaaaally distracting for my small little nut of a brain to have to continue to debate the actual existence of the thing we are debating. And I am a total lover of epistemology, so you'd think id be in my element... : (

So the list i guess, looking at the big 6:
no problem with istock for foreign suppliers
dreamstime?
fotolia?
stockxpert is istock too is it?
123royaltyfree?

x

RT · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2009, 10:02 »

Quote from: luceluceluce on June 02, 2009, 09:47

So, even if some people think that it 'shouldn't' be a problem, clearly for many people it 'is'.

Actually I think everyone has identified it as a problem, however some people like to deal with the problem whereas others like to go on and on about the problem in the hope that it'll disappear.

Sometimes problems can't be solved, in this case you can either accept it or find a way to work round it.

A bit off topic but as you're a fan of human nature ask any expert what makes some people who have lost their legs to sit in a wheelchair for the rest of their lives and others to overcome it and climb mountains.

luceluceluce · « **Reply #14 on:** June 02, 2009, 10:07 »

Quote from: friese on June 02, 2009, 06:17

hey lucie, its STEVE the bichon!
sorry i couldnt read your PMs over in tax land...
maybe you can send me an email with your message !

anyway.. i'm sure all sites will do the stock thing pretty soon....

Everyone got new names and I'm really bummed out i didn't think of a new one.

Sorry to have PMd you - you were in my pm inbox and i was just checking to see if i was really in a vacuum in a jamjar with the lid turned tight. But no, people could hear a squeak! : D

It was so James Bond, but without the level of suaveness that would have ensured we didnt cause a scene at some of the most exclusive casinos of the world.

It's so difficult to spot who the ss folk are, what with the new names. There's one poster called eva_ers and it's really stumping me who that could be.

Why wont istock accept me? Why? Why? you're canadian.... you tell me...

Goddam they will accept me... even if i have to save up enough money for a takeover of getty to do it.

: (

Im waiting with bated breath for the 'sales are down' threads to start here..... Im missing them. i remember them with fondness. and sometimes i smile. and sometimes a tear comes to my eye.

for seeing you here (no witholding of 30% smileys cos our countries have a treaty)

Lucy x

luceluceluce · « **Reply #15 on:** June 02, 2009, 10:15 »

Quote from: RT on June 02, 2009, 10:02

Quote from: luceluceluce on June 02, 2009, 09:47
So, even if some people think that it 'shouldn't' be a problem, clearly for many people it 'is'.

Actually I think everyone has identified it as a problem, however some people like to deal with the problem whereas others like to go on and on about the problem in the hope that it'll disappear.

Sometimes problems can't be solved, in this case you can either accept it or find a way to work round it.

A bit off topic but as you're a fan of human nature ask any expert what makes some people who have lost their legs to sit in a wheelchair for the rest of their lives and others to overcome it and climb mountains.

i think i very much agree with your attitude : ). I reckon it can still be solved though. We can either work with shutterstock and find ways to solve it together, or we can solve it by avoiding the problem altogether.

There are bridges to many kingdoms - but if there's a big troll with a club standing on one - then I'm taking another bridge... So this topic was about which bridges it were safe to take, and not meet a paperwork-and-money-eating troll.

Efficient systems expend less energy. I want to find the easiest bridges to my goals : )

x

friese · « **Reply #16 on:** June 02, 2009, 11:15 »

Quote from: luceluceluce on June 02, 2009, 10:07

Why wont istock accept me? Why? Why? you're canadian.... you tell me...

Goddam they will accept me... even if i have to save up enough money for a takeover of getty to do it.

: (

Im waiting with bated breath for the 'sales are down' threads to start here..... Im missing them. i remember them with fondness. and sometimes i smile. and sometimes a tear comes to my eye.

for seeing you here (no witholding of 30% smileys cos our countries have a treaty)

Lucy x

i'm really pi$$ed at Istock. They FINALLY accepted 3 images after sending them DOZENS over many months... so 3 of my best sellers across all sites end up in the final 3..
so i get accepted..
and send the 3 in again, to start my porfolio.
So the REJECT 2 of them !!!!! ..
after having reviewed them..and their being up to the standards to join their team, they reject the images.
that kind of drek, i don't need. Canadian or not... I

luceluceluce · « **Reply #17 on:** June 02, 2009, 11:29 »

im on a 3 month wait with them. Now i feel like im just badgering them unnecessarily when i apply : )

I might check with this forum before i apply again... and I'm really gonna have to stop making white paper images just because they sell well....

But my motivation levels for trying hard with istock went up a lot recently : )

x

ShadySue · « **Reply #18 on:** June 02, 2009, 11:47 »

Quote from: friese on June 02, 2009, 11:15

i'm really pi$$ed at Istock. They FINALLY accepted 3 images after sending them DOZENS over many months... so 3 of my best sellers across all sites end up in the final 3..
so i get accepted..
and send the 3 in again, to start my porfolio.
So the REJECT 2 of them !!!!! ..
after having reviewed them..and their being up to the standards to join their team, they reject the images.
that kind of drek, i don't need. Canadian or not... I

That's really common: I had one of my initial images rejected for the site. Basically, with the entry sample, they're trying to see if you can hold a camera the right way up etc and if you have potential. The standards are less stringent (though getting stricter) for entry than for the site.

luceluceluce · « **Reply #19 on:** June 02, 2009, 13:46 »

So, congratulations i think!

I've just completed my few days of cold turkey; and now I am not addicted to checking my stats anymore : )

It was hard, but im glad i made it through.

x

studio10 · « **Reply #20 on:** June 02, 2009, 14:24 »

I for one, will NOT send the IRS any of my personal information. If that means I don't submit to SS anymore then so be it. I have enough of a problem with my own government knowing too much about me. I'll be damned if I allow the IRS to breath down my neck as well. Who knows, once you sign up with them, maybe you get a statement in the mail for back taxes for that eBay transaction two years ago, or the camera lens you bought and had shipped. I am Canadian, and have nothing against the US (love it there, love the people) and I also am a tax payer. I pay honestly and declare my earnings. But for me this is unacceptable, whether it is the law or not. Not to mention that SS already pays too little for images in the first place.

Adeptris · « **Reply #21 on:** June 03, 2009, 03:42 »

You might be able to offset any witholding tax, check with your local tax office, if you contribute to many stocksites or generate revenue with other photographic activities, then just look on it as a part payment on your overall tax liability, and do not fill out the US paperwork.

I work as a freelance IT contractor in the UK, the days of getting paid and sorting out taxes later are gone, and I like everyone else has to pay income tax at source, this is the same with most contractors now including construction industry, they take the tax and we have to claim against it.

Look at it from the perspective of the IRS, stocksites have multi-million dollar turnover and pay out millions, and many part-time Photographers feel the income is tax free and would not dream of declaring it as it is just pocket money, this is what happened with construction contracting and the country lost a lot of tax revenue, so the only choice was to tax at source.

Someone mentioned Ebay as tax free trading, but many Ebayers are running a proper business and paying taxes, others that are full time Ebayers and think they are getting away with it, will likely get a knock on the door one day as every transaction is recorded, they would not come after genuine people that make one or two transactions a year, but many make a lot of transactions a week.

This is a business with transactions that create revenue that is liable to be taken into account for tax in the country of the transactions origin, I am sure that other countries will catch up soon, and we will see posts from US contributors complaining about Alamy witholding taxes in the UK.

There is nothing stopping any countries tax offices from asking stocksites for details of all payments made to contributors from thier country.

At the moment Alamy is UK based but the CEO is moving to the US, so things could change.

David

Xalanx · « **Reply #22 on:** June 03, 2009, 04:15 »

Quote from: friese on June 02, 2009, 11:15

i'm really pi$$ed at Istock. They FINALLY accepted 3 images after sending them DOZENS over many months... so 3 of my best sellers across all sites end up in the final 3..
so i get accepted..
and send the 3 in again, to start my porfolio.
So the REJECT 2 of them !!!!! ..
after having reviewed them..and their being up to the standards to join their team, they reject the images.
that kind of drek, i don't need. Canadian or not... I

Congrats for being accepted at istock, Steve. It's kinda different from the other stock sites, the bar is surely higher. SS accepts almost anything and this can be said about every other site, except FT which randomly rejects photos.
But it pays off if you have the patience. My only rejections from IS in some weeks now (since I started to pay attention to them) are because of keywords. I only send them the best stuff, no duplicates. And its quite funny for a day like yesterday let's say when I got 4 dls from IS where I have 90 photos, compared to 3 dls from 123RF where I have over 2800 photos.

I left istock for a very long time, not uploading anything to them, because of the rather unproductive submission system. Then I found DeepMeta some weeks ago and started uploading. Immediately the results were showing.

So they also have few millions of photos, how . do they manage to sell from my 90-photos portfolio, it's a mistery. These guys are really good.

alias · « **Reply #23 on:** June 03, 2009, 04:23 »

Quote from: Adeptris on June 03, 2009, 03:42

This is a business with transactions that create revenue that is liable to be taken into account for tax in the country of the transactions origin

The transactions are already taxed. The resident companies are taxed on their profits. In many US states sales taxes will also apply on the transaction. It is not as if the business being done is not already taxed.

Taxing the royalties is about taking yet another cut - taxing the money as it becomes income. Income tax, including royalties, are typically taxed where a person actually lives. So if you live in the UK and have an untaxed bank account somewhere offshore, then the UK will expect you to pay UK taxes if you repatriate any income from away.

Double taxation agreements with respect to income taxes recognize that fact. Given that recognition, the question which arises is why should that recognition be necessary. It should surely be assumed. Since it is not for one country to decide how the income of a person in another country should be taxed.

This is not something new. It is not a sudden change of policy in light of changes caused by the internet. The US has for a long time imposed different regulation than most with respect specifically to passive royalties earned by non resident 'aliens'. Whilst other countries are allowed (under the tax treaties) to impose such taxes, most do not.

gostwyck · « **Reply #24 on:** June 03, 2009, 05:01 »

Quote from: luceluceluce on June 02, 2009, 01:40

Hello everybody, I am From the UK.

Although my country has an exisiting double tax relief treaty with the United States - unfortunately, I will have to provide evidence to the IRS to prove it.

Rightly or wrongly, I have moral and political objections to this. I also have practical objections to this (the cost and time).

This thread isnt to discuss the right or wrong, it's just to ask:

Does anyone know the agencies that do not automatically withhold tax for the IRS? And will not in the future either because they have overseas offices or because they absorb this cost themselves.

This is getting ridiculous. This is the 3rd thread you have started on this subject despite the fact that there were already 3 others.

Because you are from the UK it is much easier and cheaper for you to comply with the law than most others affected __ at least the forms are in your native language and you live in a Treaty country.

You say you object to the use of your time but you must already have spent 10x more time in not complying and complaining about it everywhere you can. You've more than made your feelings clear. I think you should now just grow up and either decide to comply or not __ your money, your choice.

I really hope that these forums do not get populated by the rejected whiners from the SS forum and denigrate us down to the level of 'discussion' seen over there.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: List of Stock Sites not subject to automatic IRS 30% withholding tax (Read 12858 times)

luceluceluce

friese

StockManiac

Dreamframer

StockManiac

RT

Sean Locke Photography

hqimages

Dreamframer

alias

luceluceluce

RT

luceluceluce

RT

luceluceluce

luceluceluce

friese

luceluceluce

ShadySue

luceluceluce

studio10

Adeptris

Xalanx

alias

gostwyck

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors