Exploiting Workers by Misclassifying Them as Independent Contractors: Hearing Before the Employment and Housing Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, First Session, April 23, 1991, Volume 4U.S. Government Printing Office, 1991 - 210 pages |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
Airtech April 23 audit benefits BSCAI California Carpentry Industry Partnership CBSE Chairman cheating CHRISTOPHER SHAYS classified clients Cockshaw common law compliance Congress Congressman Shays Connecticut construction industry contract costs DELAURO Department of Labor determine employee misclassification employees as independent Employment and Housing EMPLOYMENT TAX enforcement Federal filed franchise Government Operations hearing HEDDEN hired Hobbs income tax independent contractors individual Internal Revenue Service issue janitor Kim Taylor KROCHMALNY LANTOS legislation MARTINEZ McGOVERN Michigan million misclassification of employees misclassifying employees misclassifying workers MUNOZ paid paralegals payments payroll percent prepared statement problem protection question ROS-LEHTINEN ROTONDI safe harbor section 530 Sheet Metal Workers Social Security Sports Illustrated staff status Subcommittee on Employment subcontractors taxable wages TAXPAYER testimony Thank Tom Lantos Tompkins Trammell Crow Treasury unemployment insurance union Vaughn wages WASHBURN workers as employees workers as independent WYRSCH
Popular passages
Page 101 - In general, if an individual is subject to the control or direction of another merely as to the result to be accomplished by the work and not as to the means and methods for accomplishing the result, he is an independent contractor. An individual performing services as an independent contractor is not as to such services an employee under the usual common law rules.
Page 102 - ... common-law facts and circumstances test that seeks to determine whether the service provider is subject to the control of the service recipient, not only as to the nature of the work performed, but the circumstances under which it is performed. Under a special safe...
Page 57 - So it is said that an independent contractor is one who, exercising an independent employment, contracts to do a piece of work according to his own methods, and without being subject to the control of his employer, except as to the result of the work.
Page 117 - Do their work on the employer's premises. 10. Must do their work in a sequence set by the employer. 11. Must submit regular reports to the employer. 12. Receive payments of regular amounts at set intervals. 13. Receive payments for business and/or travelling expenses. 14. Rely on the employer to furnish tools and materials. 15. Lack a major investment in facilities used to perform the service. 16. Cannot make a profit or suffer a loss from their services. 17. Work for one employer at a time. 18....
Page 105 - ... circumstances under which it is performed. Under a special safe harbor rule (sec. 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978), a service recipient may treat a worker as an independent contractor for employment tax purposes even though the worker is an employee under the common-law test if the service recipient has a reasonable basis for treating the worker as an independent contractor and certain other requirements are met.
Page 72 - Security, federal and state unemployment insurance and workers' compensation coverage . Thus, the economic incentive for a contractor to cheat is far greater than in other industries because workers' compensation rates are significantly higher in construction. In Connecticut, for example, a contractor's average workers' compensation cost is $23.82 for every $100 of payroll.
Page 15 - Your prepared statement will be entered in the record in its entirety. You may proceed anyway you choose.
Page 5 - When employees are improperly classified it hurts the worker, who does not receive the benefits to which he or she is entitled; it hurts the honest employer, who loses bids to competitors who are able to illegally cut their labor costs; and finally, it hurts the government, which loses billions of dollars in tax revenues.
Page 54 - BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MARCH 20, 1991 Mr.