Working for recruiter on W-2 vs. working for client on 1099?
I don't think anyone can give you a definitive answer without knowing all about your situation, but some things to consider: If you are on a 1099, you have to pay self-employment tax, while on a W-2 you do not. That is, social security tax is 12.4% of your income. If you're a 1099, you pay the full 12.4%. If you're W-2, you pay 6.2% and the employer pays 6.2%. So if they offer you the same nominal rate of pay, you're 6.2% better off with the W-2. What sort of insurance could you get privately and what would it cost you? I have no idea what the going rates for insurance are in California. If you're all in generally good health, you might want to consider a high-deductible policy. Then if no one gets seriously sick you've saved a bunch of money on premiums. If someone does get sick you might still pay less paying the deductible than you would have paid on higher premiums. I won't go into further details as that's getting off into another question. Even if the benefits are poor, if there are any benefits at all it can be better than nothing. The only advantage I see to going with a 1099 is that if you are legally an independent contractor, then all your business expenses are deductible, while if you are an employee, there are sharp limits on deducting employee business expenses. Maybe others can think of other advantages. If there is some reason to go the 1099 route, I understand that setting up an LLC is not that hard. I've never done it, but I briefly looked into it once and it appeared to basically be a matter of filling out a form and paying a modest fee. The tax savings of being 1099 can be significant.  It depends on your salary, and what you can deduct.  You may want to consult with an accountant.   The social security tax, for the self employed, is 12.4% of profit not on revenue.  If you can write off more than half of the income as expenses then you could be paying less than a w-2 employee. Also you might make a higher salary as a 1099, it is rare the offer the same compensation for a W-2 as a 1099 as the former has higher expenses for the employer. It is hard to know without actual numbers, actual expected expense deductions and so forth.  Which is why I would suggest consulting with an accountant.  You may want to talk to one in the state where he will be working rather than where you live now.
Yes, but make sure you issue a 1099 to these freelancers by 1/31/2016 or you may forfeit your ability to claim the expenses. You will probably need to collect a W-9 from each freelancer but also check with oDesk as they may have the necessary paperwork already in place for this exact reason.  Most importantly, consult with a trusted CPA to ensure you are completing all necessary forms correctly and following current IRS rules and regulations.  PS - I do this myself for my own business and it's quite simple and straight forward. The committee folks told us Did they also give you advice on your medication? Maybe if they told you to take this medicine or that you'd do that? What is it with people taking tax advice from random people? The committee told you that one person should take income belonging to others because they don't know how to explain to you which form to fill. Essentially, they told you to commit a fraud because forms are hard. I now think about the tax implications, that makes me pretty nervous. Rightly so. Am I going to have to pay tax on $3000 of income, even though my actual winning is only $1000? From the IRS standpoint - yes. Can I take in the $3000 as income with $2000 out as expenses to independent contractors somehow? That's the only solution. You'll have to get their W8's, and issue 1099 to each of them for the amounts you're going to pay them. Essentially you volunteered to do what the award committee was supposed to be doing, on your own dime. Note that if you already got the $3K but haven't paid them yet - you'll pay taxes on $3K for the year 2015, but the expense will be for the year 2016. Except guess what: it may land your international students friends in trouble. They're allowed to win prizes. But they're not allowed to work. Being independent contractor is considered work. While I'm sure if USCIS comes knocking, you'll be kind enough to testify on their behalf, the problem might be that the USCIS won't come knocking. They'll just look at their tax returns and deny their visas/extensions. Bottom line, next time ask a professional (EA/CPA licensed in your State) before taking advice from random people who just want the headache of figuring out new forms to go away. I am currently dealing with the same issue of having a 1099 reported to the wrong person.  I applied for the square account for my son's business but used my information, which I realized now was a BIG mistake.  I did contact Square by email yesterday, which was Saturday, not expecting to hear from them until Monday, or possibly not at all (wasn't hearing a lot of good things about Square's customer service).  She was most helpful and while the issue isn't completely taken care of, I do feel better about it.  She just had me update the taxpayer information number which then updated the 1099 form. "Your employment status is not 100% clear from the question.  Normally, consultants are sole-proprietors or LLC's and are paid with 1099's.  They take care of their own taxes, often with schedule C, and they sometimes can but generally do not use ""employer"" company 401(k).  If this is your situation, you can contact any provider you want and set up your own solo 401(k), which will have great investment options and no fees.  I do this, through Fidelity. If you are paid with a W2, you are not a consultant.  You are an employee and must use your employer's 401(k). Figure out what you are. If you are a consultant, open a solo 401(k) at the provider of your choice.  Make sure beforehand that they allow incoming rollovers.  Roll all of your previous 401(k)s and IRA's into it. When you have moved your 401(k) to a better provider, you won't be paying any extra fees, but you will not recoup any fees your original provider charged. I'm not sure why you mention a Roth IRA.  If you try to roll your 401(k) into a Roth instead of a traditional IRA or 401(k), be aware that you will be taxed on everything you roll. ---- Edit: a little info about IRA's in response to your comment ---- Tax advantaged retirement accounts come in two flavors: one is managed by your company and the money is taken out of your paycheck.  This is usually a 401(k) or 403(b).  You can contribute up to $18K per year and your company can also contribute to it.  The other flavor is an IRA.  You can contribute $5,500 per year to this for you and $5,500 for your spouse.  These are outside of your company and you make the deposits yourself.  You choose your own provider, so competition has driven prices way down.  You can have both a 401(k) and an IRA and contribute the max to both (though at high incomes you lose the ability to deduct IRA contributions). These accounts are tax advantaged because you only pay taxes once.  With a regular brokerage account, you pay income tax in the year in which you earn money, then you pay tax every year on dividends and any capital gains that have been realized by selling.  There are two types of tax-advantaged accounts: Traditional IRA or Traditional 401(k).  You do not pay income tax on this money in the year you earn it, nor do you pay capital gains tax.  Instead you pay tax only in the year in which you take the money out (in retirement). Roth IRA or Roth 401(k).  You do pay income tax on money on this money in the year in which you earn it.  But then you don't pay tax on any gains or withdrawals ever again. When you leave your job (and sometimes at other times) you can move your money out of a 401(k) into your IRA, where you can do a better job managing it.  You can also move money from your IRA into a 401(k) if your 401(k) provider will allow you to. Whether traditional or Roth is better depends on your tax rate now and your tax rate at retirement.  However, if you choose to move money from a traditional account into a Roth account, you must pay tax on it in that year as if it was income because traditional and Roth accounts are taxed at different times.  For that reason, if you are just trying to move money out of your 401(k) to save on fees, the logical place to put it is in a traditional IRA. Moving money from a traditional to a Roth may make sense, for example, if your tax rate is temporarily low this year, but that would be a separate decision from the one you are looking at. You can always roll your traditional IRA into a Roth later if that does become the case.  Otherwise, there's no reason to think your traditional 401(k) should be rolled into a Roth IRA according to what you have described." "We will bill our clients periodically and will get paid monthly. Who are ""we""? If you're not employed - you're not the one doing the work or billing the client. Would IRS care about this or this should be something written in the   policy of our company. For example: ""Every two months profits get   divided 50/50"" They won't. S-Corp is a pass-through entity. We plan to use Schedule K when filing taxes for 2015. I've never filled a schedule K before, will the profit distributions be reflected on this form? Yes, that is what it is for. We might need extra help in 2015, so we plan to hire an additional   employee (who will not be a shareholder). Will our tax liability go   down by doing this? Down in what sense? Payroll is deductible, if that's what you mean.  Are there certain other things that should be kept in mind to reduce the tax liability? Yes. Getting a proper tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) to explain to you what S-Corp is, how it works, how payroll works, how owner-shareholder is taxed etc etc." It makes no difference for tax purposes. If you are 1099, you will pay the same amount of taxes as if you formed a corporation and then paid yourself (essentially you are doing this as a 1099 contractor, just not formally). Legally, I don't know the answer.  I would assume you have some legal protections by forming an LLC but practically I think this won't make any difference if you get sued. I'm not sure why you're confusing the two unrelated things. 1040ES is your estimated tax payments. 941 is your corporation's payroll tax report. They have nothing to do with each other. You being the corporation's employee is accidental, and can only help you to avoid 1040ES and use the W2 withholding instead - like any other employee. From the IRS standpoint you're not running a LLC - you're running a corporation, and you're that corporation's employee. While technically you're self-employed, from tax perspective - you're not (to the extent of your corporate salary, at least). "The ""independent contractor"" vs. ""employee"" distinction is a red herring to this discussion and not at all important just because someone suggested you use your LLC to do the job. Corp-2-Corp is a very common way to do contracting and having an LLC with business bank accounts provides you with more tax deductions (such as deducting interest on credit lines). Some accounting practices prefer to pay entities by their Tax ID numbers, instead of an individual's social security number. The actual reasoning behind this would be dubious, but the LLC only benefits you and gives you more advantages by having one than not. For example, it is easier for you to hire subcontractors through your LLC to assist with your job, due to the opaqueness of the private entity. Similarly, your LLC can sign Non Disclosure and Intellectual Property agreements, automatically extending the trade secrets to all of its members, as opposed to just you as an individual. By signing whatever agreement with the company that is paying you through your LLC, your LLC will be privy to all of this. Next, assuming you did have subcontractors or other liability inducing assets, the LLC limits the liability you personally have to deal with in a court system, to an extent. But even if you didn't, the facelessness of an LLC can deter potential creditors, for example, your client may just assume you are a cog in a wheel - a random employee of the LLC - as opposed to the sole owner. Having a business account for the LLC keeps all of your expenses in one account statement, making your tax deductions easier. If you had a business credit line, the interest is tax deductible (compared to just having a personal credit card for business purposes). Regarding the time/costs of setting up and managing an LLC, this does vary by jurisdiction. It can negligible, or it can be complex. You also only have to do it once. Hire an attorney to give you a head start on that, if you feel that is necessary. Now back to the ""independent contractor"" vs. ""employee"" distinction: It is true that the client will not be paying your social security, but they expect you to charge more hourly than an equivalent actual employee would, solely because you don't get health insurance from them or paid leave or retirement plans or any other perk, and you will receive the entire paycheck without any withheld by the employer. You also get more tax deductions to utilize, although you will now have self employment tax (assuming you are a US citizen), this becomes less and less important the higher over $105,000 you make, as it stops being counted (slightly more complicated than that, but self employment tax is it's own discussion)." "Your comment to James is telling and can help us lead you in the right direction: My work and lifestyle will be the same either way, as I said.   This is all about how it goes ""on the books.""    [emphasis mine] As an independent consultant myself, when I hear something like ""the work will be the same either way"", I think: ""Here thar be dragons!"".  Let me explain: If you go the independent contractor route, then you better act like one.  The IRS (and the CRA, for Canadians) doesn't take lightly to people claiming to be independent contractors when they operate in fact like employees. Since you're not going to be behaving any different whether you are an employee or a contractor, (and assuming you'll be acting more like an employee, i.e. exclusive, etc.), then the IRS may later make a determination that you are in fact an employee, even if you choose to go ""on the books"" as an independent contractor. If that happens, then you may find yourself retroactively denied many tax benefits you'd have claimed; and owe penalties and interest too.  Furthermore, your employer may be liable for additional withholding taxes, benefits, etc. after such a finding. So for those reasons, you should consider being an employee.  You will avoid the potential headache I outlined above, as well as the additional paperwork etc. of being a contractor. If on the other hand you had said you wanted to maintain some flexibility to moonlight with other clients, build your own product on the side, choose what projects you work on (or don't), maybe hire subcontractors, etc. then I'd have supported the independent contractor idea.  But, just on the basis of the tax characteristics only I'd say forget about it. On the financial side, I can tell you that I wouldn't have become a consultant if not for the ability to make more money in gross terms (i.e. before tax and expenses.)  That is: your top line revenues ought to be higher in order to be able to offset many of the additional expenses you'd incur as an independent.  IMHO, the tax benefits alone  wouldn't make up for the difference. One final thing to look at is Form SS-8 mentioned at the IRS link below.  If you're not sure what status to choose, the IRS can actually help you.  But be prepared to wait... and wait...  :-/ Additional Resources:" "You can do either a 1099 or a W-2.  There is no limitations to the number of W-2s one can have in reporting taxes.  Problems occur, with the IRS, when one ""forgets"" to report income.  Even if one holds only one job at a time, people typically have more than one W-2 if they change jobs within the year. The W-2 is the simplest way to go and you may want to consider doing this if you do not intend to work this side business into significant income.   However, a 1099 gig is preferred by many in some situations.  For things like travel expenses, you will probably receive the income from these on a 1099, but you can deduct them from your income using a Schedule C.  Along these lines you may be able to deduct a wide variety of other things like travel to and from the client's location, equipment such as computers and office supplies, and maybe a portion of your home internet bill.  Also this opens up different retirement contributions schemes such as a simplified employee pension.   This does come with some drawbacks, however.  First your life is more complicated as things need to be documented to become actual business expenses.  You are much more likely to be audited by the IRS.  Your taxes become more complicated and it is probably necessary to employee a CPA to do them.  If you do this for primary full time work you will have to buy your own benefits.  Most telling you will have to pay both sides of social security taxes on most profits.  (Keep in mind that a good account can help you transfer profits to dividends which will allow you to be taxed at 15% and avoid social security taxes.) So it really comes down to what you see this side gig expanding into and your goals.  If you want to make this a real business, then go 1099, if you are just doing this for a fes months and a few thousand dollars, go W-2." "The contract he wants me to sign states I'll receive my monthly   stipend (if that is the right word) as a 1099 contractor. The right word is guaranteed payment, which is what ""salary"" is called when a partner is working for a partnership she's a partner in. Which is exactly the case in your situation. 1099 is not the right form to report this, the partnership (LLC in your case) should be using the Schedule K-1 for that. I suggest you talk to a lawyer and a tax adviser (EA/CPA) who are licensed in your State, before you sign anything." "Yes, you can deduct up to your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) or your contribution limit, whichever is lower. Note that this reduces your taxable income, not your taxes.  This is self-employment income, which is included as compensation for IRA purposes.   You still have to pay self-employment taxes (Social Security and Medicare) though.  You pay those before calculating AGI.  So this won't entirely shield your 1099 income from taxes, just from income taxes.   Note that if you have both W-2 and 1099-MISC income, you don't get to pick which gets ""shielded"" from taxes.  It all gets mixed together in the same bucket.  There may be additional limitations if you are covered by a retirement plan at work." It sounds like they want to enter you into a contract in which they are allowed to charge a flat fee for filing contingent on money saving results from a tax review service, paid in full. Like those who answered before I have no legal experience.  IRS Circular 230 defines the ethics for tax practitioners and the definition of a tax practitioner is broad enough (effective Aug 2011) to include those who are not EAs, CTRPs, CPAs as long as the person is compensated to prepare or assist in a substantial part of the preparation of a document pertaining to a taxpayer's liability for submission to the IRS. Section 10.27 Fees: (b)(2)A practitioner may charge a contingent  fee for services rendered in connection with the  Service’s examination of, or challenge to — (i) An original tax return Paragraph c defines what a contingent fee is basically a fee that depends on the specific result attained, in this case saving you money. In the section above  'Service's examination'  is an audit in plain speak.  If your 2013 return has not been submitted and you have not received a written notice for examination, H&R block can not charge a contingent fee, period. Furthermore, H&R Block cannot hold your tax documents, upon your request, they must return all original tax documents like W2s and 1099s ( they don't have to return the tax forms an employee prepared). Like I said above, I'm not a lawyer, unless I missed a key detail, I don't believe they were permitted to charge you a filing fee contingent on saving you money. I am surprised no one has mentioned the two biggest things (in my opinion).  Or I should say, the two biggest things to me.  First, 1099 have to file quarterly self employment taxes.  I do not know for certain but I have heard that often times you will end up paying more this way then even a W-2 employees.  Second, an LLC allows you to deduct business expenses off the top prior to determining what you pay in taxes as pass-through income.  With 1099 you pay the same taxes regardless of your business expenses unless they are specifically allowed as a 1099 contractor (which most are not I believe).  So what you should really do is figure out the expense you incur as a result of doing your business and check with an accountant to see if those expenses would be deductible in an LLC and if it offsets a decent amount of your income to see if it would be worth it.  But I have read a lot of books and listened to a lot of interviews about wealthy people and most deal in companies not contracts.  Most would open a new business and add clients rather than dealing in 1099 contracts.  Just my two cents... Good luck and much prosperity. "Linkedlinked, You might want to seriously take another look at the links that Chris provided you.  Specifically the ones on the IRS website: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html From the IRS website: Businesses must weigh all these   factors when determining whether a   worker is an employee or independent   contractor. Some factors may indicate   that the worker is an employee, while   other factors indicate that the worker   is an independent contractor. There is   no “magic” or set number of factors   that “makes” the worker an employee or   an independent contractor, and no one   factor stands alone in making this   determination. Also, factors which are   relevant in one situation may not be   relevant in another. The keys are to look at the entire   relationship, consider the degree or   extent of the right to direct and   control, and finally, to document each   of the factors used in coming up with   the determination. Perhaps more importantly... pay attention to what happens if you're WRONG: Consequences of Treating an Employee as an Independent Contractor If   you classify an employee as an   independent contractor and you have no   reasonable basis for doing so, you may   be held liable for employment taxes   for that worker (the relief   provisions, discussed below, will not   apply). See Internal Revenue Code   section 3509 for more information. I would STRONGLY recommend that you and your partners give your accountant a call and discuss the matter.  They will be able to help you make the right decision. One of biggest mistakes businesses make in this are is to classify their employees as independent contractors.  The IRS (who happens to be hungry for money right now) comes in and says, ""Nooooooooo... those are employees."" ...and the COMPANY gets to pay the employment taxes.  I actually have person experience with this as I worked for a company this happened to.  Every contractor was re-classified as an employee except for two (myself and one other).  The key reason in that case was that none of the other contractors had any other clients. While I understand that you have other clients, I would still recommend talking to your accountant for an hour or so... just to be 100% sure. Sincerely, Andrew Smith TaxQueries.com"