Want this question answered?
The threshold for receiving a 1099 from an employer is $600. However, you are still responsible for reporting the income to the IRS even if you do not receive a 1099.
Any income that you make as a contract employee should be recorded on a 1099. Even if you only worked one day, if you were paid for that work the employer must provide you with a form 1099. If you have not received this form by January 31, contact the firm and/or the IRS to obtain it. Alternately, if you still have all the pay stubs for this employment, you can figure out how much was received and use it on your taxes, while including a form 4852 stating the 1099 or W2 wasn't received. Of course, if you are an employee - your earnings AND withholdings will be reflected on a W-2, not a 1099.
75k if they are a contract driver.
The State is irrelevant. These are Federal Laws as the 1099 is a Federal form. Generally, $600 is the threshold that requires a 1099 to be filed. However, if your an employee or there is withholding, etc., any amount is enough.
false
Yes, unless the employee has a signed contract.
A myogenic heart is a heart that can naturally contract and relax and doesn't need to receive impulses from a nerve to make it contract. your heart is a Myogenic heart
There are a large number of forms in the 1099 series. While each hs a specific purpose, they are all similar in what they do. They are used by a reporter, who is generally obligated to report some item...interest paid for example (a 1099-INT), or debt that has been cancelled (a 1099-C), or activity in a brokerage account (a 1099-B), etc. Generally what they are reporting, BOTH to you and the IRS (who gets a copy of the form you receive), is something you must report on your return...and if you don't, consider that the computer matching programs to check on something like this are fairly effective.
There are multiple bases of power and the employment relationship embodies what is known as legitimate power.Employment is a contract between the employer and the employee where the employee agrees to perform a specified work and the employer agrees to compensate the employee (i.e. money, stock options, and benefits).In an ideal world the employee would live up to his responsibility to provide the service that he was contracted to provide. We do not live in an ideal world so the following happen:The employment contract is vague therefore the employee does not know what they are supposed to provideThe employment contract is well defined but the employee does not understand what they are supposed to doThe employee for whatever reason provides less than the minimum service required by the contractWhen an employment contract is poorly specified or when an employee takes actions that exceed a well specified contract then the employer needs to invoke power to regulate this. When the contract is poorly specified they have the obligation to provide clarity on the contract and work with the employee to define all vague areas and make sure that both parties are still in agreement with the contract. When employees exceed well specified contracts then the employer needs to reign them in and establish why there is a misunderstanding of the contract.A well defined employment contract will specify concreteand measurable targets that the employee must provide; an example is a union contract where productivity is very explicit.When the employee fails to provide the required performance then the employee has breached their contract and the employer can seek remedy. This is where the employer has the right to regulate an employee but only where it concerns the employer.For example, you may have an employee that is chronically showing up late on Monday morning because they party late on Sunday night. The employer can talk about being on time but the employer can't comment about how the employee spends their Sunday night.Even though an employer clearly needs to be able to regulate their employees the real problem is that as humans we have biases and poor interaction skills. This makes it difficult for people to execute employer/employee relationships properly.To make matters worse, no two people (ok, maybe identical twins :-) see the world the exact same way. So unless an employment contract is as explicit and measurable as a union contract (e.g. employee will work 40 hours a week and produce at least 100 widgets) then it is a guarantee that both the employer and the employee interpret the employment contract differently.So in summary, employers have the right to use power regulate an employee only as far as it concerns the employment contract and does not break any laws at any point in the process.
Well YOU never fill out a 1099, your receive them..and generally they report income yu need to include. And to cut to the chase....if the IRS says you don't HAVE TO file (but can) who do yo think that would benefit, you or them?
Unless there is a contract, such as a Union contract, or possibly an employee handbook which might be construed as a contract, or an individual contract between the employee in question and the employer, and this contract specifies when drug tests may be administered, then the employer may demand drug tests whenever it desires. In other words if there's a contract which says when the employee may be drug tested, then the contract should control; if there is no such contract then the employee can be tested anytime. Its enough to make you wish George Washington was alive and some pencil-neck was waving a vial at him. We'd have our muskets loaded and be on our way! For verily, we are living in the time foretold: "By their pee shall ye judge them; by thy pee shall ye be judged". Amen.
Courts don't make the decision, law does. There are federal DLSE/Dept of Labor Standards and Enforcement, IRS rules, and state mandates providing the definition of independent contractor vs employee. Generally, if you are an employee, you would see tax deductions on your check stubs, and a W-2 at the end of the year.l If you are a valid/legal independent contractor, you would receive a 1099. There are very specific rules for both. The answer above is wrong in every way. Courts often need to rule on whether worker X was an employee or not. How the employer pays you is irrelevant to decisions about whether a worker is an employee. IRS and USDOL rules are the factors that courts follow.