Seaside Nannies Web Blog

A Blog for Nannies, Parents and Children in San Diego, California

The Legal Review by Breedlove and Associates January 30, 2009

The Legal Review Bringing the Law to Life for the Household Employment Industry ___________________________________________________________________________________ A Complimentary Resource from © 2009 Breedlove & Associates, LLC. Breedlove & Associates

In an effort to help you strengthen your business practices and steer clear of legal trouble, The Legal Review will share findings from relevant legal cases. We’ve found that the easiest way to gain a practical understanding of complex tax and labor law is by reviewing real-life situations. These stories will illuminate potential legal landmines for your agency and/or your clients, and more importantly, show you how to avoid them.

Reporting Partial Wages: State of California & IRS vs. Family and Nanny

A fairly common myth exists in the household employment industry: it is acceptable to report some of an employee’s wages “on the books” and some “off the books.” The rationalization is that both family and employee save some tax dollars and the nanny receives some of her benefits. Additionally, because both parties file tax returns and appear to be compliant, they convince themselves they’ll fly under the audit radar.

While it’s true that your clients and candidates are better off reporting partial wages versus none at all, both parties need to know there is still financial and legal risk. To the state and federal tax authorities, this practice represents a textbook case of conspiring to commit felony tax fraud and tax evasion. Therefore, for your agency’s protection, make sure you and your counselors avoid any communication – explicit or implicit – that might be construed as condoning or supporting the practice of reporting partial wages. This case illustrates the risk for clients, candidates and agencies.

The Mistake

When making an offer to a candidate, a family offered to report only half the wages in order to meet a desired “take-home pay.” The employment agreement was finalized (and placement fees were calculated) based on a $30,000 annual salary, but the family and nanny agreed to set up payroll to reflect a salary of $15,000. The agency counselor, knowing the deal was improper but understandably eager to make the placement work, silently oversaw the negotiations. By failing to raise a red flag, the agency provided implicit approval of the arrangement.

The Law

Employers are required by law to report all compensation paid to an employee. This includes regular wages as well as all cash allowances, overtime pay, bonuses, commissions, gratuities, etc. (The only non-taxable forms of compensation are employer-paid health insurance premiums and employer-paid tuition for an accredited college or university). Verbal or written agreements to compensate an employee completely or partially “off the books” is considered felony tax evasion, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and fines up to $250,000.

The Mess

After a couple of years on the job, the nanny became pregnant. For health reasons, she was put on bed rest a month prior to her due date. Following the birth, she planned on a two-month maternity leave. Knowing she would need financial help in order to pay her bills during this 3-month period without employment, the nanny called the state’s disability benefits office to consult with a case worker about the application process, the amount she could expect, how long before she got a check, etc.

After talking to the case worker, the nanny was upset about what she considered to be an inadequate amount of financial assistance. (All government benefits – including disability, unemployment, retirement, medicare, etc. – are tied directly to reported compensation. Since she had reported only half of her wages, she was due to receive only half of her benefits).

Frightened that she would be unable to make ends meet during such a critical time in her life, the nanny desperately pleaded with the family to pay for the other half of her disability benefits. The family told her they would not be able to help her, claiming they would need all their money to pay for a replacement nanny during her time off. Stressed, tired and emotional – and out of options for supplemental income – the nanny decided to apply for her disability benefits with a stated income of $30,000. This triggered the following series of events:

The case worker at the state reviewed all the tax records and noticed a discrepancy between the stated and reported wages. The case worker then sent a notice to the employer to verify actual wages. The family was now trapped in a no-win situation. If they chose to lie and maintain that the wages were $15,000, the state would likely audit the nanny and the family, ultimately discovering the conspiracy to evade taxes. If they decided to honestly admit under-reporting of wages, they would be subject to expensive back taxes, penalties and interest. Upon learning the consequences of felony tax evasion charges, the family opted to come clean.

The Outcome

The family was forced to go back to the beginning of the relationship and amend every quarterly state tax return using the corrected gross income of $30,000. In addition to paying taxes on the unreported wages, the family was also required to pay penalties and interest. The family also had to amend two years of personal income tax returns and pay all the social security, medicare and federal unemployment taxes. Because they did not withhold the employee’s portion of the social security and medicare taxes on the unreported wages, the family was forced to pay both the employer and employee portions of these taxes. They were also subject to underpayment penalties on these federal taxes, which added two years of interest charges onto the bill. The employee was forced to amend her personal income tax returns to correctly report the total compensation. This resulted in additional income taxes and interest on the unreported income. She ultimately got the disability benefits she needed, but she had to set up a payment plan with the tax agencies to cover her increased income tax liability. The family contacted the agency repeatedly through this process, threatening to sue for a refund of fees and half the damages. Although they knew in their heart that the partial reporting deal they struck was improper, they claimed that the agency gave them a false sense of security. In their mind, the agency was complicit because they knowingly brokered an illegal placement. The agency ultimately acquiesced to the family’s demand in order to avoid the cost and risk of a lawsuit.

How the Whole Thing Could Have Been Avoided

This situation might have been avoided if the agency had 1) explicitly warned the family of their obligations to report all wages, and 2) clearly explained to the candidate the benefits available to those who are paid legally and the risk involved in failing to report income.

A thorough understanding by both parties of the taxes, the benefits and the risks would have helped them make an informed decision. Of course, the family and nanny might have decided to continue down the illegal path anyway, but at least they would have done so knowingly – thereby absolving the agency of all risk. For more information about household employment tax and labor law, please visit us at www.breedlove-online.com or call us at 888-BREEDLOVE (273-3356). We’re here to help our agency partners provide their candidates and clients with information, tools and resources that improve the employment relationship, eliminate legal risks for all parties, and generally increase the professionalism of the industry.

 

COUNSELOR’S CORNER by Breedlove January 28, 2009

 
Counselor’s  Corner

January 2008  

 
Breedlove Logo“You guys are exactly what I was looking for!  I’m so glad my counselor told me about you.  You’re just easier to work with than every other payroll company I’ve talked to.”

 

– Michelle in Minnesota–

Tab Tax & Labor LawTab Payroll CalculatorTab Services & Fees

With the first month of the new year almost behid us, it’s time to look ahead to 2009 and what will hopefully be the beginning of renewed optimism and growth.

From a tax perspective, there are only three changes that your families and candidates need to be aware of:

  • Mileage Reimbursement Rate

Effective January 1, 2009, employers should reimburse employees at a rate of 55¢ per mile.  The mileage reimbursement rate is established by the IRS in an effort to cover the total cost of gasoline and automobile maintenance when an employee is required to use his/her own automobile while performing duties of the job (commuting to and from work does not count).  In July 2008, there was a mid-year adjustment from 52.5¢ per mile to 58.5¢ per mile in response to exorbitant gas prices.  Now that gas prices have returned to more normal levels, the ‘09 mileage reimbursement rate will adjust accordingly.

  • Social Security & Medicare Threshold

Effective in 2009, the threshold will increase from $1,600 to $1,700.  Employers who pay an individual less than $1,700 during the 2009 calendar year, will fall under the “Casual Babysitting Exemption” and, therefore, will not be subject to FICA taxes.

  • Minimum Wage

Effective July 24, 2009, the federal minimum wage will increase to $7.25 per hour.  Some states have higher minimum wages standards.  Families in those states must adhere to the higher standard.  For minimum wage standards in your state, check your state’s website or visit http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm.

Here’s to a happy, healthy and risk-free ‘09.  Cheers!

__________________________________
 

Seaside Nannies are AWESOME. January 27, 2009

Seaside Nannies is very involved in the community and we are thrilled to share our families and our nannies perspectives and opinions through posting their public testimonials online and on our blogs.  

Here are some more testimonials from some very happy Nannies that have found comfort in finding the perfect fit!  Even in this horrible economy, which is effecting everyone, have faith, things will eventually turn out!

__________________________________________

I have been out of a job for about 3 months now. Before I met Dara I was going through 3 other different agencies. When I would go out and interview with other families I was lost.I didn’t know what to expect and I felt so unprepared. Families didn’t have enough information about me and they were left clueless.  Then if I didnt get the first job agencies stopped calling and it was becoming so frustrating. I found the light and met Dara. Meeting Dara for the first time was such a relief. Dara encourages her nannies to prepare a nanny portfolio which contains there bio, highlights, resume, grades, pictures, cpr/first aid, trustline, and other important information that a family looks for. Dara gave me my first assignment, and I felt at ease with my portfolio, which was given to the family to keep. It made the interview process so easy and left us both satisfied. I was able to leave the family knowing all about me, and even felt a perfect connection between us. A week later they decided to choose me to be their nanny. It was a perfect match and I thank Dara for preparing me. Thanks Dara you are awesome!!!!!!!

-Jennifer Lucia

 

San Diego’s BEST Nanny Agencies January 26, 2009

Seaside Nannies wants to thank all of our clients and nannies for making 2009 successful!  We continually receive testimonials such as the ones below that confirm what we are doing is awesome for our community.  

If you are interested in finding a nanny through our service, please mention that you saw our blog on Word press to receive a  10% “economic crisis” discount between Now and the end of February 2009.

 
To all parents looking for a nanny~
My husband and I attend lawschool at USD and are also involved in various extra-curricular activities. Our daughter was born in between semesters, and we have had an increasingly difficult time being able to juggle school and the baby. This is especially so during times of increased effort such as finals or when large assignments are due.
 
Seaside nannies is the best thing to happen to two law student parents.
 
With little time and even less trust due to reading cases about what could happen, it was important to us that we worked with someone who had passed a rigorous background check. However, as stated before, with little time it was essentially impossible for us to do any of the leg work to check out candidates. Thus, SN was like a godsend. Dara already has done criminal background checks, reference checks, and she uses the same fingerprinting service as the California Bar Association. Additionally, the candidates she finds are high quality. In fact, we actually had a difficult time deciding who to hire. (Un)fortunately, one of the candidates ended up not being able to work for us for logistical reasons, so luckily the choice was made for us. Words can’t describe the amount of stress and frustration that this service saves you. I literally have no idea how we would have survived without Dara. And did I mention how awesome she personally is? She is an absolute joy to work with, and if we could afford it and she was willing, I think we would have convinced her to work for us because we like her so much. Overall I would highly recommend using Seaside Nannies and especially working with Dara. The whole experience has been positive so far, AND we have been able to maintain all of our activities, the same grade range, and the time we spend with our daughter is all about here. There is no need to worry about whether or not we will be able to be prepared for class or our exams, etc. Our stress level is now only as high as it has to be.
Caitlyn O. Clairemont 

 

 

 

 

 

More on Nanny Taxes… January 25, 2009

Made famous during the days of President Clinton, both Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood helped to make Nanny Tax a well-known phrase. When you have a “household employee” earning more than $1,400 per year, knowing whether you are required to pay tax on this person is, according to the law, your obligation.

 

When Caroline Kennedy abruptly ended her Senate bid, her spokesman, Stefan Freidman, indicated that her reasons were unspecified. Yet, according to the New York Times, a source claimed that the decision was made when “problems involving taxes and a household employee surfaced.”

As pointed out in recently-overheard business advice given to a newly-minted female attorney, the last generation of women in law showed that gender-wise “the sky is the limit” but don’t forget to pay tax on your babysitter!

by Pat Sigmon, NY Business Examiner

Pat Sigmon is the founder and president of a computer consulting firm, as well as an advisor for other small business owners. Pat covers day-to-day news and issues concerning New York businesses. Contact her atpsigmon@lpsconsulting.com.