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 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 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 154 - ... inquiry concerning the classification of that company's workers. We understand this is true even if the audit was for something such as income taxes and not specifically directed to employment taxes. We believe this provision "rewards" a company misclassifying workers.
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 117 - Must follow set hours of work. 8. Work full-time for an employer. 9. 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...
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 15 - Your prepared statement will be entered in the record in its entirety. You may proceed anyway you choose.
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 74 - It is also difficult for the IRS to track down contractors and employees that deal strictly in cash. According to one IRS source, ' "we're overburdened with many, many other types of tax dodging. Manpower is stretched so thin it's very difficult to make much of an impact on an industry as vast as construction.
Page 155 - He do our workers no favor if we rob them, through misclassif ication as independent contractors, of the various protections such as worker's compensation and unemployment insurance which have been erected by the federal and state government over the past half century. To Summarize the Problem in Our Industry. Workers in our industry traditionally under applicable common law are "employees.