Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Attempt to repeal 1099 requirement fails
www.accountingweb.com ^ | 08-02-2010 | Staff

Posted on 08/02/2010 7:49:01 AM PDT by Red Badger

Efforts by House Democrats on Friday to repeal an Internal Revenue Service filing requirement contained in the new health care legislation failed when the measure fell short of the two-thirds majority vote needed to pass. The measure, proposed by House Ways and Means Chairman Sandy Levin (D-MI), sought to repeal a requirement of businesses to report to the IRS any purchase from a vendor of goods or services worth $600 or more during the calendar year.

The measure failed 241 to 154 in a vote that followed party lines almost entirely.

The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) last month told members of Congress they should repeal the reporting requirement, which takes effect next year, because it will be burdensome and costly for small businesses to compile the data and prepare the Form 1099-MISC information return.

Furthermore, the AICPA said the information collected on the 1099 forms will not be helpful to the IRS in collecting any unpaid taxes that should have been paid by the vendor because it will be difficult to reconcile payments reported on the forms and income reported by the vendor.

Rep. Levin on Friday said the reporting requirement is "a potentially onerous burden for small businesses." However, the extra reporting, according to The Wall Street Journal, is projected to raise $17 billion in government revenues for the IRS over the next decade because it will give the IRS ability to seek out income currently not reported by vendors.

To replace that revenue, Democrats proposed curbing foreign tax credits that multinational firms use to lower their U.S. tax burden. This revenue-raising proposal, however, presumably was the death knell for a measure supported by Democrats and Republicans, alike.

Sen. Mike Johanns (D-NE), among other senators, is looking to add a provision repealing the IRS reporting requirement to a small-business tax package pending in the Senate, according to The Wall Street Journal. Several Senate Democrats last month raised concerns with the IRS regarding the reporting mandate.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: 1099; tax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
To: PSYCHO-FREEP
They will be so overwhelmed that they either hire several hundred thousand more workers, train them and audit every American, or just ignore it themselves.

They have that covered too. In 2012 all tax preparers will be registered with IRS. There is a big difference between being certified by your professional association and registered by IRS. In essence this makes the tax preparer an employee of IRS only you pay the wages...................
41 posted on 08/02/2010 9:05:50 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple ( Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Yep, this will be a huge burden to small businesses. And the IRS says that these 1099s will not really help them in auditing and verifying that income and taxes were paid correctly? Then what’s the point?

control, I suspect. they want to see how every single person in the country acquires every single penny that they make. even if it won't help collect taxes, it will probably come in handy one day.

42 posted on 08/02/2010 9:06:56 AM PDT by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Your reading is correct. We operate a mid-sized business, 140 employees, and are spending tens of thousands of dollars to buy compliance software in anticipation of this asinine requirement.

Our accounting department has told us that their contacts in the IRS are not happy about the requirement either as it is going to generate a lot of information overload which will actually hinder their efforts to collect from tax cheats by focusing them instead on minor discrepancies which will inevitably result from this whole additional new data set.

43 posted on 08/02/2010 9:09:54 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
the extra reporting, according to The Wall Street Journal, is projected to raise $17 billion in government revenues for the IRS

The dems can't repeal it because then they would have to unspend the money. The health care bill was passed based on this revenue which they are not going to get anyway.

Short term solution is a cash based business servicing individuals who don't have to report the 1099’s. But eventually they will find you guilty of something and haul you off to the gulag as an example to others..........

44 posted on 08/02/2010 9:10:58 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple ( Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

Nobody will comply because they can’t comply.


45 posted on 08/02/2010 9:16:33 AM PDT by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: beethovenfan

Penalty for not filing:

$50 per information return if you file after August 1 or you do not file required information returns; maximum penalty $250,000 per year ($100,000 for small businesses).


Might be cheaper to send the money.................


46 posted on 08/02/2010 9:17:45 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple ( Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Senator Johans is a Republican, not a democrat. Nice try, Media!


47 posted on 08/02/2010 9:28:29 AM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fresh Wind
No, the Republicans voted against repeal.

Okay, I see that in THIS article, which offers a bit more detail. The "party line" comment in the article above was just a shot at Republicans for being united against the repeal.

Regardless of what those "other purposes" might be, this issue should not be detached from ObamaCare and neatly swept under the rug.

48 posted on 08/02/2010 9:39:36 AM PDT by Charles Martel ("Endeavor to persevere...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: cableguymn

I’d look into this immediately with an accountant, were I you. Because, the way I understand it, if you don’t have a tax id number, or are unable to get one from your vendor, you must withold income tax at a rate of 28%. I think this is one of the reasons the IRS hopes to raise the 19 billion it thinks it will get from this provision. It’s a 19 billion slush fund, that overseas entities will have to pay, then apply to get back. But I am not an accountant, so I’d check.


49 posted on 08/02/2010 9:41:16 AM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

JUST THINK OF A HOUSE PAINTER.

He has to buy paint, specified by the homeowner, that could easily be more than $600 including supplies. If each homeowner specifies a different brand of paint, he might have to go to a dozen or more different vendors to by that brand of paint. His CODB will go through the roof...................


50 posted on 08/02/2010 10:07:16 AM PDT by Red Badger (No, Obama's not the Antichrist. But he does have him in his MY FAVES.............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
His CODB will go through the roof...

I think that's the idea: to drive the small independents out of business so there are more jobs for those glorious unionized painters.

Of course, some will barter or sell their services for cash to beat the system. This is exactly why you find black markets, tax avoidance and tax evasion schemes more prevalent in higher tax, more socialized countries.

51 posted on 08/02/2010 11:10:43 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

If you have been to the IRS web site... you now have to purchase special 1099 forms (you can’t download them from the site as in the past). These forms are $75 for 100 forms (or something like that). Don’t worry...this is not considered a tax...


52 posted on 08/02/2010 11:26:55 AM PDT by willyd (Tree planting is a zero sum game unless you find the seed on the sidewalk ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

They ought to just call it the “Tax Accountant Full Employment Act.”


53 posted on 08/02/2010 11:28:33 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: willyd

scratch that...they don’t charge for the forms...you just have to order them via mail now and can’t download them.


54 posted on 08/02/2010 11:31:35 AM PDT by willyd (Tree planting is a zero sum game unless you find the seed on the sidewalk ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: willyd

Why do they co$t me if I’ve already paid for them with my taxes?.............


55 posted on 08/02/2010 11:31:55 AM PDT by Red Badger (No, Obama's not the Antichrist. But he does have him in his MY FAVES.............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Ping to post #52..............


56 posted on 08/02/2010 11:32:41 AM PDT by Red Badger (No, Obama's not the Antichrist. But he does have him in his MY FAVES.............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

Nightmare not just on the issuer’s side, but on the vendor’s side too. Imagine being the phone company and receiving millions of 1099’s from businesses. This is just a disaster all the way around.


57 posted on 08/02/2010 11:32:50 AM PDT by keepitreal ( Don't tread on me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

So why is it that the Democrats are trying to repeal the provision and the Republicans are opposing that repeal?
The Republicans are probably looking that the $17 billion windfall that they estimate will result. Talk about missing the forest for the trees!


58 posted on 08/02/2010 11:33:02 AM PDT by TIElniff (Autonomy is the guise of every graceless heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
it will be difficult to reconcile payments reported on the forms and income reported by the vendor.

My prediction is that the feds, in their infinite wisdom, will start requiring that income reported on a 1099 will have to be reported as a separate line item (pages and pages of itemization) by the recipient.

Ridiculous and crushingly burdensome?

Yes, that's why they'll do it.

59 posted on 08/02/2010 11:43:29 AM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TIElniff
To replace that revenue, Democrats proposed curbing foreign tax credits that multinational firms use to lower their U.S. tax burden. This revenue-raising proposal, however, presumably was the death knell for a measure supported by Democrats and Republicans, alike.

The Dems hitched the legislation to this horse hockey legislation...............The Republicans had to vote against it.............

60 posted on 08/02/2010 11:54:12 AM PDT by Red Badger (No, Obama's not the Antichrist. But he does have him in his MY FAVES.............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson