Sec. 1706 of the Tax Code

[Keith Smith]

It was me.  My current accountant says a one person LLC doing business 
with a one company is a legit business.



On 2016-12-08 16:48, Vara La Fey wrote:
> I was clarifying generalized things for the poster who mentioned LLC
> as a suggestion from his accountant.
> 
> Was that poster you?? Then you're welcome. Was it someone else?? Then
> correct my errors or kindly stick to your original grievance.
> 
>  - Vara
> - www.facebook.com/vara.lafey [3]
> On Dec 8, 2016 4:39 PM, "David Schwartz" <newsletters at thetoolwiz.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I’m not sure what the point of these “Rah Rah for LLC!” posts
>> is all about. Nobody has said anything to the contrary.
>> 
>> This list is primarily for people who work in the "high tech" (i.e.,
>> computing) industry, which is SPECIFICALLY what Sec. 1706 of the Tax
>> Code deals with.
>> 
>> If you’re in Real Estate, Accounting, Architecture, or whatever,
>> 1706 does not apply to you. It’s very, VERY NARROW in its
>> applicability — BY DESIGN.
>> 
>> Sec. 1706 eliminates the “safe harbor” provisions for people who
>> work as contractors, eliminating any “benefit of the doubt” that
>> is historically given in most other professions, and instead
>> subjects workers and the companies that employ them to a vague
>> 22-point (IIRC) series of questions that an IRS Auditor can use to
>> establish whether someone should be (or should have been) regarded
>> as a “contractor” or “employee” for tax purposes.
>> 
>> The problem is, this is not something that is adjudicated when you
>> hire on, and it does not matter how many reams of paperwork you sign
>> that says it’s one thing or the other.
>> 
>> It’s a ticking time-bomb that applies in the vast majority of
>> cases 3-5 years AFTER THE FACT when the person — usually hired as
>> a contract worker at the time — is audited by the IRS for whatever
>> reason, and the auditor reviews one of his employment situations and
>> subjects it to the 22-point “test”. If he rules the person was
>> acting as a “contractor”, all is fine.
>> 
>> But if he rules the person should have been treated as an
>> “employee”, both the person and the erstwhile “employer”
>> just got nuked.
>> 
>> The back-due taxes assessed to the “employer", plus accrued
>> penalties and interest, typically amount to far more than whatever
>> the person was paid. The company has no knowledge anything went awry
>> until they suddenly get a bill from the IRS.
>> 
>> Meanwhile, the person in question now has to “unwind” any
>> business expenses and deductions, as well as anything that depended
>> on them such as retirement contributions, FICA/FUTA/UI set-asides,
>> etc. Everything is up-ended and needs to be re-filed.
>> 
>> And to add insult to injury, the same auditor is likely to flag
>> previous and subsequent years for auditing as well, and what do you
>> think he’s going to rule on other contract gigs that were
>> fundamentally the same situations as the first one he nuked?
>> 
>> Again, if you’re not in the high-tech industry, this does not
>> apply to you.
>> 
>> Having a single-member LLC stand-in to protect you against such
>> situations can be helpful, IF the company you want to work with is
>> willing to hire you. Many are not because of problems discussed in
>> other threads.
>> 
>> -David "The Tool Wiz" Schwartz
>> 
>>> On Dec 8, 2016, at 4:53 PM, Vara La Fey <varalafey at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Yes, you can be the only user ("Manager" and "Member") of an LLC.
>>> I did it for years in real estate, and still have my LLC.
>>> 
>>> IIRC the form takes more like 5 min. You publish your intended LLC
>>> in the Record Reporter for 6 weeks. I forget the cost, but it's
>>> fairly cheap and easy. And IIRC, the Sec of State office (or
>>> wherever I went) has a form for that too.
>>> 
>>> LLCs are almost zero maintenance and are not sublect to hostile
>>> takeover. And so easy that some real estate investors create one
>>> for each property, just to keep properties legally isolated from
>>> each other for basic liability reasons. An LLC name like "<street
>>> address>, LLC" is one of those. (So named cause the investor
>>> realized that pretty names would be silly and confusing.)
>>> 
>>> Good luck!!  :-)
>>> 
>>> - Vara
>>> - www.facebook.com/vara.lafey [1]
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss [2]
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://u2206659.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/click?upn=tzJbcg2o-2FNh3kfIF32sRUUEfAUrPlRdODloCrKUTDLEe1Xr5sB7TGzxKSs-2BD8fg9_6lpMB7VLnN-2Fj9-2FEErg8-2F-2BMBpb5QxlByTgv2M3fbWD9ebvC-2BWrN3h7jImK8EVWYBeAxMmDgWQUd2i68p21gEHYLmzzu8vgCbnR7qSefIuucNhxoTyXijd7R8Jowtg-2FV5Dkz-2BgzFV6-2B2OrsHp91e84j9nNhrCwnc65Eb-2FhBwOPyjAQDAaWiVOu3q4ib0iC0nv-2Ftk2QxRqZ-2FXdFTr-2Buj-2FxL3kNL3-2Fm51aLLtj7-2BtYtEWOY-3D
> [2] http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> [3] http://www.facebook.com/vara.lafey
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

-- 
Keith Smith