IRS Looks Closely at Independent Contractors

The IRS is using various tools to attack the status of various so-called 'outside consultants" being used by hospitality firms. This article will provide some planning tips so that the hospitality firm can minimize its chances of having workers reclassified as employees.

The IRS Collection Division: Contacts and Settlements

In his study -The IRS Collection Division: Contacts and Settlements - by John M. Tarras, Assistant Professor School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management, Michigan State University, Tarras initially states: “The collection division of the internal revenue service is often the point of contact for many hospitality businesses. The author describes how the division operates, what the hospitality firm can expect when contacted by it, and what types of strategies firms might find helpful when negotiating a settlement with the IRS.” The author will have you know that even though most chance meetings with the IRS Collection Division are due to unfortunate tax payment circumstances, there are actually more benign reasons for close encounters of the IRS kind. This does not mean, however, that brushes with the IRS Collection Division will end on an ever friendlier note. “…the Tax Reform Act of 1986 with its added complexity will cause some hospitality firms to inadvertently fail to make proper payments on a timely basis,” Tarras affords in illustrating a perhaps less pugnacious side of IRS relations. Should a hospitality business owner represent himself/herself before the IRS? Never, says Tarras. “Too many taxpayers ruin their chances of a fair settlement by making what to them seem innocent remarks, but ones that turn out to be far different,” warns Professor Tarras. Tarras makes the distinction between IRS the Collection Division, and IRS the Audit Division. “While the Audit Division is interested in how the tax liability arose, the Collection Division is generally only interested in collecting the liability,” he informs you. Either sounds firmly in hostile territory. They don’t bluff. Tarras does want you to know that when the IRS threatens to levy on the assets of a hospitality business, they will do so. Those assets may extend to personal and real property as well, he says. The levy action is generally the final resort in an IRS collection effort. Professor Tarras explains the lien process and the due process attached to that IRS collection tactic. “The IRS can also levy a hospitality firm owner's wages. In this case, it is important to realize that you are allowed to exempt from levy $75 per week, along with $25 per week for each of your dependents (unless your spouse works),” Professor Tarras says with the appropriate citation. What are the options available to the hospitality business owner who finds himself on the wrong side of the IRS Collection Division? Negotiate in good faith says Professor Tarras. “In many cases, a visit to the IRS office will greatly reduce the chances that a simple problem will turn into a major one,” Tarras advises. He dedicates the last pages of the discussion to negotiation strategies.

Essays on international lending and increasing returns to scale

Standard economic theory suggests that capital should flow from rich countries to poor countries. However, capital has predominantly flowed to rich countries. The three essays in this dissertation attempt to explain this phenomenon. The first two essays suggest theoretical explanations for why capital has not flowed to the poor countries. The third essay empirically tests the theoretical explanations.^ The first essay examines the effects of increasing returns to scale on international lending and borrowing with moral hazard. Introducing increasing returns in a two-country general equilibrium model yields possible multiple equilibria and helps explain the possibility of capital flows from a poor to a rich country. I find that a borrowing country may need to borrow sufficient amounts internationally to reach a minimum investment threshold in order to invest domestically.^ The second essay examines how a poor country may invest in sectors with low productivity because of sovereign risk, and how collateral differences across sectors may exacerbate the problem. I model sovereign borrowing with a two-sector economy: one sector with increasing returns to scale (IRS) and one sector with diminishing returns to scale (DRS). Countries with incomes below a threshold will only invest in the DRS sector, and countries with incomes above a threshold will invest mostly in the IRS sector. The results help explain the existence of a bimodal world income distribution.^ The third essay empirically tests the explanations for why capital has not flowed from the rich to the poor countries, with a focus on institutions and initial capital. I find that institutional variables are a very important factor, but in contrast to other studies, I show that institutions do not account for the Lucas Paradox. Evidence of increasing returns still exists, even when controlling for institutions and other variables. In addition, I find that the determinants of capital flows may depend on whether a country is rich or poor.^

Analysis of Housing Partnerships using the Balanced Scorecard framework

Housing Partnerships (HPs) are collaborative arrangements that assist communities in the delivery of affordable housing by combining the strengths of the public and private sectors. They emerged in several states, counties, and cities in the eighties as innovative solutions to the challenges in affordable housing resulting from changing dynamics of delivery and production. ^ My study examines HPs with particular emphasis upon the identification of those factors associated with the successful performance of their mission of affordable housing. I will use the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) framework in this study. The identification of performance factors facilitates a better understanding of how HPs can be successful in achieving their mission. The identification of performance factors is significant in the context of the current economic environment because HPs can be viewed as innovative institutional mechanisms in the provision of affordable housing. ^ The present study uses a mixed methods research approach, drawing on data from the IRS Form 990 tax returns, a survey of the chief executives of HPs, and other secondary sources. The data analysis is framed according to the four perspectives of BSC: the financial, customer, internal business, and learning and growth. Financially, revenue diversification affects the financial health of HPs and overall performance. Although HPs depend on private and government funding, they also depend on service fees to carry out their mission. From a customer perspective, the HPs mainly serve low and moderate income households, although some serve specific groups such as seniors, homeless, veterans, and victims of domestic violence. From an internal business perspective, HPs’ programs are oriented toward affordable housing needs, undertaking not only traditional activities such as construction, loan provision, etc., but also advocacy and educational programs. From an employee and learning growth perspective, the HPs are small in staff size, but undertake a range of activities with the help of volunteers. Every part of the HP is developed to maximize resources, knowledge, and skills in order to assist communities in the delivery of affordable housing and related needs. Overall, housing partnerships have played a key role in affordable housing despite the housing market downturn since 2006. Their expenses on affordable housing activities increased despite the decrease in their revenues.^

Payroll Taxes and Personal Liability

Many corporate officers and responsible employees may be exposing their personal assets to liability for unpaid corporate payroll taxes. The authors discuss where liability may arise and identify strategies to avoid personal liability.

Tip Allocation: A Compliance Study tor Restaurants

Survey research of the commercial food service industry with regard to tips and tip allocation revealed that 50 percent of restaurateurs require that employees report a minimum amount or percentage of sales and over 50 percent which allocate tips report them as employee income. The authors discuss these results and point out other problems.