Author Topic: PayPal sending 1099 forms for US users in 2012 (Read 38555 times)

helix7 · « **on:** November 17, 2010, 16:57 »

Just saw this article on PayPal about the new IRS 6050W law requiring PayPal and other payment providers to report detailed transaction data to the IRS for any US PayPal user who receives at least $20,000 in a single year. This isn't anything new or unexpected in itself, it's been discussed for probably a couple of years now as far as I remember.

What's odd to me is that PayPal will be issuing 1099 forms. Maybe this make sense somehow, but I don't see it. It looks to me like PayPal is going to send me a 1099 form for earnings I received through microstock from some companies (like SS and BigStock) that also issue 1099 forms. Am I wrong here, or does this sound like we'll be getting 2 1099 forms for some of the same exact money?

donding · « **Reply #1 on:** November 17, 2010, 17:01 »

Now that will be a nightmare since just about everyone gets paid through paypal from the stock agencies and I doubt the IRS will listen and with the track record these microstocks have for dealing with 1099's, I doubt they will listen either!!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #2 on:** November 17, 2010, 17:24 »

I don't think I'll be required to deal with this because I don't think I will get more than 200 separate PayPal payments a year (52 from iStock and the odd few from relatives in the UK for kids birthday presents). It's $20K and 200 payments.

The form will be new - a 1099-K, so I assume it'll be used to reconcile amounts on other types of 1099s and catch those that aren't on any 1099.

helix7 · « **Reply #3 on:** November 17, 2010, 17:35 »

I'm also looking at this from a freelance graphic designer standpoint. If I've got a client who pays me for a project, I'm reporting that I earned $X from that client, not from PayPal. But then PayPal is going to issue a 1099 for that exact same money.

I'm hoping there is a logical explanation for all of this and an easy way of dealing with it. But right now, I feel like I'm going to need help from my accountant to figure out this new 1099 that will include the bulk of my freelance and stock income that comes through PayPal, and somehow avoid double-reporting the same earnings.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #4 on:** November 17, 2010, 18:19 »

Something else to get your senator to revoke.

lisafx · « **Reply #5 on:** November 17, 2010, 18:22 »

This is absolutely bizarre. I had expected paypal to report earnings to the IRS, because as you said, Mike, it has been discussed for a couple of years.

But I don't see how they could possibly 1099 us for the same money we are already getting 1099'd on from the agencies.

Does anyone know if this applies to Moneybookers too? Oh, I see it applies to all payment services.

Some thoughts on avoiding this:

1. Request no more than one payment a month from each agency you do business with.

2. Switch to check payments from agencies you get frequent payouts from.

3. Have a spouse or other relative open a paypal account and switch half your agencies to that account.

4. Assign half your agencies to pay via Moneybookers and half via Paypal so that neither one reaches the 200 payment threshold.

Disclaimer - I am not suggesting to avoid paying your taxes. Most of us already pay taxes on our micro earnings, and are 1099'd by the agencies we do business with. I am only suggesting ways to avoid any confusion caused by the extra paperwork involved in this mess.

No matter how you slice it this is going to be a big additional PITA.

lisafx · « **Reply #6 on:** November 18, 2010, 18:58 »

I have been looking all over the Moneybookers site and I don't see anything about this new US law. Are they not subject to it because they are headquartered outside the US?

Whiz · « **Reply #7 on:** November 19, 2010, 00:16 »

Quote from: jsnover on November 17, 2010, 17:24

The form will be new - a 1099-K, so I assume it'll be used to reconcile amounts on other types of 1099s and catch those that aren't on any 1099.

This is probably what it amounts to.

dnavarrojr · « **Reply #8 on:** November 19, 2010, 09:29 »

So, this will be in 2012 regarding payments made in 2011, correct?

And is it based on the number of transactions or a dollar amount? I've seen reports of one or the other.

lisafx · « **Reply #9 on:** November 19, 2010, 10:30 »

Quote from: dnavarrojr on November 19, 2010, 09:29

So, this will be in 2012 regarding payments made in 2011, correct?

And is it based on the number of transactions or a dollar amount? I've seen reports of one or the other.

According to the notice on the paypal site, it's 20k AND 200+ payments.

cthoman · « **Reply #10 on:** November 19, 2010, 10:57 »

So do these solutions actually solve anything or does it just make it harder for people that actually do pay their taxes.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #11 on:** November 19, 2010, 10:59 »

Exactly.

lisafx · « **Reply #12 on:** November 19, 2010, 14:12 »

Quote from: cthoman on November 19, 2010, 10:57

So do these solutions actually solve anything or does it just make it harder for people that actually do pay their taxes.

What solutions do you mean? Paypal sending 1099s? If that's what you mean, I don't see how that benefits anyone. I talked to my accountant and she said it's going to be a real PITA to sort out the money on the paypal 1099 along with the SAME money on 1099s from DT, FT, BigStock, SS, etc.

This is one area where the Istock exclusive folks have it a lot easier, I think.

cathyslife · « **Reply #13 on:** November 19, 2010, 17:01 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 19, 2010, 10:30

Quote from: dnavarrojr on November 19, 2010, 09:29
So, this will be in 2012 regarding payments made in 2011, correct?

And is it based on the number of transactions or a dollar amount? I've seen reports of one or the other.

According to the notice on the paypal site, it's 20k AND 200+ payments.

I'm thinking I don't have anything to worry about then.

GL Reviewer · « **Reply #14 on:** November 19, 2010, 17:13 »

There was a thing going around on the web a few years ago with the IRS trying to go after those "pro" Ebay sellers but it never materialized to my knowledge. Perhaps this is the new way the IRS will approach.

cthoman · « **Reply #15 on:** November 19, 2010, 18:01 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 19, 2010, 14:12

Quote from: cthoman on November 19, 2010, 10:57
So do these solutions actually solve anything or does it just make it harder for people that actually do pay their taxes.

What solutions do you mean? Paypal sending 1099s? If that's what you mean, I don't see how that benefits anyone. I talked to my accountant and she said it's going to be a real PITA to sort out the money on the paypal 1099 along with the SAME money on 1099s from DT, FT, BigStock, SS, etc.

This is one area where the Istock exclusive folks have it a lot easier, I think.

I meant IRS solutions to try to find tax dodgers. I assume the cheaters will still cheat and the only people dealing with the new forms will be the rest of us.

pet_chia · « **Reply #16 on:** November 19, 2010, 18:22 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 19, 2010, 14:12

Quote from: cthoman on November 19, 2010, 10:57
So do these solutions actually solve anything or does it just make it harder for people that actually do pay their taxes.

What solutions do you mean? Paypal sending 1099s? If that's what you mean, I don't see how that benefits anyone. I talked to my accountant and she said it's going to be a real PITA to sort out the money on the paypal 1099 along with the SAME money on 1099s from DT, FT, BigStock, SS, etc.

This is one area where the Istock exclusive folks have it a lot easier, I think.

Most forms of regulation are created so that big companies can shut down smaller competitors. A big company already has a big bureaucracy on the payroll and a lot of automated systems. Therefore cost to a large company of complying with new, enhanced regulations is much less, as a percentage of their revenues, than the cost to a small company. That is why whenever some new, onerous and small-business-killing government regulation comes down the pipe you will find that it was preceded by an army of corporate lobbyists greasing palms in the legislature and a battalion of shills in the media claiming that the public will be better served. The government is always happy to go along with the push for more regulation because it means more power for them and more patronage jobs and porkbarrel contracts to distribute to their political supporters.

In this case if I understand it correctly, the 1099 was slipped into the Obamacare bill, which was basically a kind of early Christmas present for large health insurance companies, big pharmaceutical companies, etc. who want the entire country to be forced to buy their services at price levels set by the government so that their profits are guaranteed. Especially the young and healthy people who now work independently or for small companies, who do not currently have health insurance, drug plans, etc. and who don't want it. The 1099 forms, besides being an administrative burden that hurts small companies disproportionately, are also a way of trying to flush out these people wherever they are working, and force them to "get with the plan", i.e. fork over the dough, and when their dough runs out, go work as a drone at some huge company (become exclusive in other words) or get government welfare.

Just saying!

cthoman · « **Reply #17 on:** November 19, 2010, 18:41 »

Quote from: pet_chia on November 19, 2010, 18:22

The 1099 forms, besides being an administrative burden that hurts small companies disproportionately, are also a way of trying to flush out these people wherever they are working, and force them to "get with the plan", i.e. fork over the dough, and when their dough runs out, go work as a drone at some huge company (become exclusive in other words) or get government welfare.

Just saying!

Well, I don't know about business killing. I'd just rather not spend another hour or two dealing with unnecessary forms for taxes that I was going to pay anyway. But, your way is fun too... DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #18 on:** November 19, 2010, 21:39 »

Quote from: cthoman on November 19, 2010, 18:41

Quote from: pet_chia on November 19, 2010, 18:22
The 1099 forms, besides being an administrative burden that hurts small companies disproportionately, are also a way of trying to flush out these people wherever they are working, and force them to "get with the plan", i.e. fork over the dough, and when their dough runs out, go work as a drone at some huge company (become exclusive in other words) or get government welfare.

Just saying!

Well, I don't know about business killing. I'd just rather not spend another hour or two dealing with unnecessary forms for taxes that I was going to pay anyway. But, your way is fun too... DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't forget, the PITA 1099, is the one you will have to send to any company you spend more than $600 with. And you have to get their EIN or other data to do the form. I've already contacted my legislators, and they are working against this ridiculous paperwork burden that will accomplish nothing in the end.

lisafx · « **Reply #19 on:** November 20, 2010, 13:54 »

Quote from: cthoman on November 19, 2010, 18:01

I meant IRS solutions to try to find tax dodgers. I assume the cheaters will still cheat and the only people dealing with the new forms will be the rest of us.

Amen to that! ^^

Quote from: sjlocke on November 19, 2010, 21:39

Don't forget, the PITA 1099, is the one you will have to send to any company you spend more than $600 with. And you have to get their EIN or other data to do the form. I've already contacted my legislators, and they are working against this ridiculous paperwork burden that will accomplish nothing in the end.

WTH??!! We have to SEND 1099s to companies we do business with? What kinds of companies are those -vendors we buy equipment from? Or do you mean models? ~~Could you go into more details, Sean? I haven't heard anything about this...~~

Okay, just found this article explaining it all: http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/

Can't believe this was passed in May and this is the first I am hearing of it. I watch the news every day and this little nugget was conveniently not mentioned. What a massive cluster%#@k!!!

cthoman · « **Reply #20 on:** November 20, 2010, 15:07 »

That's a pretty amusing article. So is a law that they can't possibly enforce really a law? I can't imagine that they can possibly get all these people and small businesses to file 1099 for every moderate sized purchase. I rarely get all the 1099s I'm supposed to get, so I can't really see more being filled out. If anything, I think this will just cause businesses to give up and send less.

Also, am I supposed to send Paypal a 1099 also for all the fees that they take off. This thing doesn't seem to make any sense and I don't see much coming of it.

lisafx · « **Reply #21 on:** November 20, 2010, 16:12 »

Quote from: cthoman on November 20, 2010, 15:07

That's a pretty amusing article. So is a law that they can't possibly enforce really a law? I can't imagine that they can possibly get all these people and small businesses to file 1099 for every moderate sized purchase. I rarely get all the 1099s I'm supposed to get, so I can't really see more being filled out. If anything, I think this will just cause businesses to give up and send less.

I imagine the way they will enforce this is if you deduct those purchases on your tax return. If you don't take the deduction, then you will probably not have to bother filling out the 1099. But most of us probably deduct our business expenses. I know I do.

What a lot of extra work to keep track of all this, not to mention getting the EIN's of everyone I do business with.

Just followed Sean's lead and contacted all my congress people and those from states where my parents live too. I wonder what the odds are the new congress will roll back this BS?

pet_chia · « **Reply #22 on:** November 20, 2010, 16:32 »

Quote from: cthoman on November 20, 2010, 15:07

That's a pretty amusing article. So is a law that they can't possibly enforce really a law? ...

It's a law, in the sense that while it may not collect any significant revenue, it will mean that whenever someone angers them, for example by being an outspoken critic of the government (or for any other reason), they can audit them and screw them over with fines and imprisonment.

When you have a legal and tax code consisting of several tens of thousands of pages, to which legislators add thousands more pages every year, then the effect is that EVERYONE is technically a criminal and tax evader, and ANYONE can be prosecuted on a whim. Plus there are governmental organizations which work outside of any legal framework, who can fine and imprison practically anyone they want, at their own discretion. The FTC is such an organization. If they suspect that people have been illegally "conspiring to form a cartel" (for example by discussing selling and pricing strategies on a forum such as this) they can swing into action and even if they don't win their case, they can easily bankrupt any individual or small to medium sized company they want to with legal bills. Sic semper tyrannis (thus always with tyrants).

cthoman · « **Reply #23 on:** November 20, 2010, 17:19 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 20, 2010, 16:12

I imagine the way they will enforce this is if you deduct those purchases on your tax return. If you don't take the deduction, then you will probably not have to bother filling out the 1099. But most of us probably deduct our business expenses. I know I do.

I meant enforcement from more of a manpower aspect. You have to assume that the majority of small businesses have some sort of expense deduction over $600 per year. Are all of those going to be reported? Are they going to chase after everyone who doesn't fill out the form, but keeps the receipts? Legal fees and time expenditures are a two way street. There doesn't seem a lot of logic in going after grandma's yarn expenses for her small crafting business. Unless the IRS has hired a significant amount of staff, I don't see why they would pursue these small cases. If I was to guess, I'd say they'd use all of this as another tool to raise red flags about suspicious behavior and not to chase down normal business expenses.

lisafx · « **Reply #24 on:** November 20, 2010, 18:16 »

Probably both of you (Cthoman and Pet Chia) are right that this will be too difficult to police. More likely, as you say, they will just use this as an additional charge against businesses they are auditing for other reasons.

Still, I would feel compelled to comply. It might be easy for the IRS to red flag anyone with over X amount of deductions to see if they have filed those 1099s.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #25 on:** November 20, 2010, 18:39 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 20, 2010, 13:54

WTH??!! We have to SEND 1099s to companies we do business with? What kinds of companies are those -vendors we buy equipment from? Or do you mean models? ~~Could you go into more details, Sean? I haven't heard anything about this...~~

Okay, just found this article explaining it all: http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/

Can't believe this was passed in May and this is the first I am hearing of it. I watch the news every day and this little nugget was conveniently not mentioned. What a massive cluster%#@k!!!

It really is an unbelievable burden. Like we have time to track down an EIN from B&H or whatever. And the IRS is so incompetent, it's not like they'd be able to do anything with these billions of forms.

cardmaverick · « **Reply #26 on:** November 20, 2010, 22:23 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 20, 2010, 18:39

Quote from: lisafx on November 20, 2010, 13:54
WTH??!! We have to SEND 1099s to companies we do business with? What kinds of companies are those -vendors we buy equipment from? Or do you mean models? ~~Could you go into more details, Sean? I haven't heard anything about this...~~

Okay, just found this article explaining it all: http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/

Can't believe this was passed in May and this is the first I am hearing of it. I watch the news every day and this little nugget was conveniently not mentioned. What a massive cluster%#@k!!!

It really is an unbelievable burden. Like we have time to track down an EIN from B&H or whatever. And the IRS is so incompetent, it's not like they'd be able to do anything with these billions of forms.

Just ignore it. It's as ridiculous as use tax enforcement. The more we just ignore our government, the better off society will be in my opinion.

lisafx · « **Reply #27 on:** November 21, 2010, 15:52 »

While I agree about the idiocy of this law and the difficulty IRS will have enforcing it, I don't plan to ignore it. Having already been audited for Use Tax, and having to pay over 2k in back taxes, I don't want problems with the IRS too.

We may want to ignore our government, but they don't want to ignore us

cardmaverick · « **Reply #28 on:** November 21, 2010, 16:02 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 21, 2010, 15:52

While I agree about the idiocy of this law and the difficulty IRS will have enforcing it, I don't plan to ignore it. Having already been audited for Use Tax, and having to pay over 2k in back taxes, I don't want problems with the IRS too.

We may want to ignore our government, but they don't want to ignore us

True, its not without its risks, but I believe the US is finally hitting the boiling point all forms of government eventually reach when the people they govern simply disband that government by any means necessary. The other option... they just leave, while they still can. I've researched expatriation and citizenship renouncing for my own future safety, only to discover I'm basically locked into being a tax paying US citizen for at least 6 years, with another 10 years back tax liability after renouncing citizenship!!!! One of the essential characteristics of a free country is the right to leave at will, expediently if desired. That right no longer exists, especially if your wealthy...

klsbear · « **Reply #29 on:** November 21, 2010, 20:30 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 20, 2010, 18:39

It really is an unbelievable burden. Like we have time to track down an EIN from B&H or whatever. And the IRS is so incompetent, it's not like they'd be able to do anything with these billions of forms.

They will, however, be able to hire thousands of government employees to shuffle those form around around making it look like something is actually being done, therefore creating massive tax increases as we have to pay the salaries and pensions of these new employees, then they will claim that unemployment has dropped radically because they have created lots of new jobs!

Fred · « **Reply #30 on:** November 22, 2010, 07:20 »

Well the Bush administration's mismanagement of the budget and the economy put us in a big hole:

Just trying to dig out of it.

fred

lisafx · « **Reply #31 on:** November 22, 2010, 10:21 »

I can sympathize about having to dig out of the hole. I really can. And I understand my obligation to pay my fair share of taxes.

What is upsetting about this new regulation is that it doesn't really stand to raise new tax revenue, but simply adds absurd layers of paperwork that is placing a crushing burden on every small business owner and independent contractor. In addition to the already-mentioned scores of new IRS employees just to handle the flood of 1099s.

To be honest, I would prefer they just raise my taxes a couple % if they need money, instead of making me jump through all these hoops

lagereek · « **Reply #32 on:** November 22, 2010, 10:40 »

same rubbish here in sweden, they make it harder and harder to pay taxes, in the hope of youll make a misstake, especially as a freelancer, then they can assess you for the highest possible earning and tax you on that.

Im thinking seriously of emigrating to the Caymans, Jersey or Guernsey. Seriously!

Karimala · « **Reply #33 on:** November 22, 2010, 12:11 »

Nice to see my normally useless congressman Dan Lungren actually sponsored a repeal of the bill...and he has support from the White House as of November 4.

Press Release

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #34 on:** November 22, 2010, 13:09 »

Yeah, I tried to contact him a few months back for advice on how to combat this, and I got a lovely form email that they can't talk to me because I'm not in his district.

johngriffin · « **Reply #35 on:** November 22, 2010, 13:28 »

This is a really weird situation and even makes me as a site owner scratch my head. There is going to be a lot of overlap here.

Beach Bum · « **Reply #36 on:** November 22, 2010, 14:04 »

Absolutely ridiculous! Just another reason why Congress needs to pass this: www.fairtax.org

lisafx · « **Reply #37 on:** November 22, 2010, 16:20 »

Thanks Karimala. Very useful article. Glad folks across the political spectrum see what a dumb idea this was.

Fred · « **Reply #38 on:** November 22, 2010, 16:55 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 22, 2010, 16:20

Thanks Karimala. Very useful article. Glad folks across the political spectrum see what a dumb idea this was.

Yeah, I think they got a little carried away trying to find the missing $300 Billion. Actually, IRS is pretty efficient overall. Costs them $0.42 to collect $100, and they collect $245 for every dollar of their total budget.

c h e e r s
fred

michaeldb · « **Reply #39 on:** November 22, 2010, 18:33 »

So I see by the article that the 1099 tax law is a part of Obamacare? I did not know that. Health care reform that makes me sick.

Quote from: Karimala on November 22, 2010, 12:11

Nice to see my normally useless congressman Dan Lungren actually sponsored a repeal of the bill...and he has support from the White House as of November 4.
Press Release

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #40 on:** November 22, 2010, 20:18 »

Just saw this:
http://cnnmoney.mobi/primary/_JqlcIN-iSsBrlcHG

michaeldb · « **Reply #41 on:** November 22, 2010, 20:33 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 22, 2010, 20:18

Just saw this:
http://cnnmoney.mobi/primary/_JqlcIN-iSsBrlcHG

"Senate Finance Committee head Max Baucus says he will introduce legislation to repeal the unpopular tax form expansion."
Hey that's my Senator! And what a lame jackass he is. Up for re-election in 2012, I think. I guess he has decided to finally do something non-destructive, after all these years in office.

lisafx · « **Reply #42 on:** November 22, 2010, 21:12 »

If he's your senator, write him and tell him to repeal it!

Randy McKown · « **Reply #43 on:** November 22, 2010, 22:46 »

pretty stupid .. why should they make a form for paypal .. will my bank be sending me a 1099-K .. highly doubt it. But oh well .. until they invent a form that reads your mind and logs all the cash transactions I could care less.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #44 on:** November 22, 2010, 22:57 »

I've written (via their web sites) to my senators - Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell - urging them to repeal this.

I made the argument that in addition to the paperwork burden, it was highly unlikely to raise the $17 billion they planned/hoped it would as those who currently ducked payment would probably continue. It was just folks like me who pay anyway who'd be stuck with a bunch of useless extra paperwork.

Whiz · « **Reply #45 on:** November 23, 2010, 01:15 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 20, 2010, 18:16

Probably both of you (Cthoman and Pet Chia) are right that this will be too difficult to police. More likely, as you say, they will just use this as an additional charge against businesses they are auditing for other reasons.

Still, I would feel compelled to comply. It might be easy for the IRS to red flag anyone with over X amount of deductions to see if they have filed those 1099s.

This portion of the health care bill will either be repealed or watered down. The president is for repeal of it as well. I just want to add that I was confused briefly because I thought I was going to have to send W9 forms to the grocery store for my food (among other things). Then I realized this is for business related items. Also, it does not take place until 2012.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #46 on:** November 23, 2010, 02:07 »

Quote from: Whiz on November 23, 2010, 01:15

This portion of the health care bill will either be repealed or watered down. The president is for repeal of it as well. I just want to add that I was confused briefly because I thought I was going to have to send W9 forms to the grocery store for my food (among other things). Then I realized this is for business related items. Also, it does not take place until 2012.

Well, you would if you spent more than $600 in food for your business, as I'm sure I have done this year.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #47 on:** November 23, 2010, 06:28 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 22, 2010, 20:18

Just saw this:
http://cnnmoney.mobi/primary/_JqlcIN-iSsBrlcHG

From what I've been reading a full repeal is unlikely.

Big healthcare corporations are already pushing hard to keep the bill but remove all of the pieces that they don't want. Like all of the parts that protect us such as them not being able to deny people with preexisting conditions and on and on.

So the nightmare scenario is that this bill does get partially repealled with only the greed left in place.

Whiz · « **Reply #48 on:** November 23, 2010, 14:58 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 23, 2010, 02:07

Quote from: Whiz on November 23, 2010, 01:15
This portion of the health care bill will either be repealed or watered down. The president is for repeal of it as well. I just want to add that I was confused briefly because I thought I was going to have to send W9 forms to the grocery store for my food (among other things). Then I realized this is for business related items. Also, it does not take place until 2012.

Well, you would if you spent more than $600 in food for your business, as I'm sure I have done this year.

If you pay for the food with a credit card, then you do not have to worry about it. Not sure about a debit card. It's probably the same as the credit card, though.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #49 on:** November 23, 2010, 15:34 »

Uh, sure you would. If you want to write it off that is (or even if you don't, I guess). Doesn't matter how you pay for it.

Whiz · « **Reply #50 on:** November 23, 2010, 15:46 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 23, 2010, 15:34

Uh, sure you would. If you want to write it off that is (or even if you don't, I guess). Doesn't matter how you pay for it.

In a speech in May to payroll industry trade groups, Shulman explained that any transactions paid for with debit or credit cards will be exempt from the reporting requirements because a separate requirement on credit card companies for reporting credit card transactions will give the IRS the information it seeks. "Whenever a business uses a credit or debit card, there will be no new burden under the new law."

http://tinyurl.com/2dhuceb
This is where I'm getting the payment information from. Maybe I'm missing something. I don't know.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #51 on:** November 23, 2010, 15:54 »

"The payments that are included under this are not only those made directly by check but also those made by other means such as credit cards, for example. Think about the airlines, hotels, rental cars, and restaurants that appear on your credit card bill. You might not think of them as vendors of goods and services, but that is what they are. Also, if you are in the business of selling or distributing goods, all of your suppliers of products are also vendors under the new law. (Under existing law there are regulations that provide narrow exceptions for some types of vendors (telegrams, telephone, freight, storage) and some individual vendors that accept payment from you by credit card and meet qualifications set forth by the IRS. Even if some regulatory exceptions are carried over under the new law, you will still be the one responsible and liable for issuing the information report and it will not be easy.)"

http://www.stopform1099.org/

So, perhaps, in some cases.

lisafx · « **Reply #52 on:** November 23, 2010, 16:01 »

Hopefully it will be a moot issue, when this silliness is revoked.

Roadrunner · « **Reply #53 on:** November 23, 2010, 16:49 »

Consider who is in charge - Gathers and Rangle, two frauds!

To cover your buts, printout the monthly Transactions for funds receivedd from Pay Pal showing the sites making the deposit into your account. This is what you should report for income tax purposes. Considering you are on a cash basis rather than accrual basis.

If you are audited, you can show that there was a duplicate filing of a 1099 (Pay Pal as well as each site.). No agent can refute that. If he/she tries; just appeal the decision to the Appelatte Division. the Appeals officer will see things clearly. If the Revenue Agent ever drags his heels after you supply information, call the IRS and ask to speak to the Problem Resolution Officer (PRO) in your Area. The Pro will move things more quickly to resolve an issue; especially if you have tried to get something accomplished with a couple of call to the Examination Division. Just don't panic or loose your temper.

Seems to me that this is going to work something like a Currency Transaction Report. IRS will probably use it in their Special Enforcement Group to compare Reported Income to what shows up in a Transaction Report of some sort. I wouldn't loose any sleep over it.

Sleep tight!
Roadrunner

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #54 on:** November 29, 2010, 17:07 »

Today's news:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/29/smallbusiness/1099_repeal/index.htm

cathyslife · « **Reply #55 on:** November 29, 2010, 18:22 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 29, 2010, 17:07

Today's news:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/29/smallbusiness/1099_repeal/index.htm

Good that there's a chance it will be repealed, but the odds don't look too good that it is actually going to happen.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #56 on:** November 29, 2010, 21:22 »

I'll try and keep track of who voted how, and if the repeal doesn't happen, I'll write to my two senators again and tell them how unhappy I am about that (even more so if they voted against repeal).

I don't think they'll actually collect the tax they expect to, but if there's enough "you're against small businesses" fussing, I expect eventually the votes will be found for repeal. Small businesses are the good guys in the political stories

lisafx · « **Reply #57 on:** December 14, 2010, 11:36 »

Just received a response from one of my senators today. Apparently the repeal of the 1099s for vendors failed to get enough votes. Anyone who cares about this might want to consider sending another round of letters to your elected representatives.

Thank you for contacting me regarding reporting requirements for business transactions. Businesses are facing enough problems in this economy without having to deal with more government red tape.

That’s why I voted for an amendment introduced by Senator Johanns to the Food Safety bill (S.510) that would have fully repealed any new information reporting requirements. Unfortunately, the measure failed to receive enough votes to overcome a procedural motion. However, I am still committed to finding real solutions to the challenges faced by the business community, and I will press my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support a full repeal of these onerous requirements.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #58 on:** December 14, 2010, 11:43 »

I got a very similar response from one of mine on Friday - Sen. Murray also voted for the Baucus amendment, but that needed 67 to pass and it fell short. She says she'll keep working on it. Haven't yet heard from Sen. Cantwell...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #59 on:** December 17, 2010, 10:25 »

Mailed my congressional peeps this morning.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/12172010/businew185530_32543.php

lisafx · « **Reply #60 on:** December 17, 2010, 16:44 »

Thanks for the update Sean. What a bunch of idiots that they can't even manage to repeal something NOBODY supports?!!

I'll fire off another letter and hope it does some good....

Karimala · « **Reply #61 on:** December 17, 2010, 16:56 »

I wrote to mine the other day. I'm especially hoping Rep. Lungren responds and tells me where he's at with the bill he wrote and sponsored in the House (and then later couldn't vote for

).

Karimala · « **Reply #62 on:** January 27, 2011, 00:27 »

Never did hear from Lungren (told y'all he was useless...LOL). But last night it was encouraging to see the entire Congress stand up during the State of the Union address and applaud the President's call to get rid of this stupid law.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #63 on:** January 27, 2011, 02:54 »

Yeah, it was good to see that this is apparently something they can all agree on, although I don't know why it failed before.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/21/smallbusiness/1099_repeal_effort/index.htm

Karimala · « **Reply #64 on:** January 27, 2011, 13:24 »

The problem this last time was the 1099 repeal was inserted into a version of the House's Bush tax cuts bill (before the Obama compromise) no one could agree on. When the compromise was drafted, for whatever reason it was removed from the final version. Hopefully my congressman reintroduces his bill as a stand-alone bill, so we can just get this over with.

lisafx · « **Reply #65 on:** January 27, 2011, 14:28 »

Yeah, it would be great to see this finally put to rest. The amount of paperwork you have to do as a small business is already onerous enough.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: PayPal sending 1099 forms for US users in 2012 (Read 38555 times)

helix7

helix7

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lagereek

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors