Medlin Software, Dennis

If intent is not the issue, and that may be true, will the employer pay if disabled, unemployed, killed? Is the employee going to earn enough to buy their own coverage? The OP implies the person is on the clock for 3 hours on the road, picking up others. Is the employee being paid for this time? Covered by insurance for this time? What if there is an accident and one of the passengers or another party is hurt? Who pays? It may all sound and be good until something goes awry. That is why I put it on the employee to make the decision. Maybe they need the income. If so, they really must consider the costs of taking the work, the costs their employer is not going to cover under the veil of IC. Employee should get a business license, EIN, insurance, etc., and really act like they are in business if they choose to accept the offer as presented. This is coming from experience nearly 40 years ago, taking a "job" as an "IC", Rented vehicles, transported my "coworkers", operated dangerous machinery at third party locations, and was somehow lucky enough to figure out it was a mistake before something went awry. Cash seemed good, but so much went out before I could eat, I was not only at risk, I was woefully underpaid when counting what I could really spend.

Employee in law and fact. The problem is the employee wants the job/money, so they will likely go along. WC is probably the biggest cost savings for a construction employer gaming the system. Employee loses out if they get hurt on the job. Even if they later prove they are an employee, it takes time. Allows employer to undercut not only expense, but pricing. What the employee may not want to ponder is if their employer is comfortable breaking the law in payment, what other areas are going to be shoddy? (I was on the "employee" side in my young naive days, in a dangerous job.)

Just thinking out loud... Having one password to access all other passwords makes the others moot. Might as well just use the same one over and over, since all it takes is for the one to get compromised to gain access to all others. Probably why two factor auth is preferred as a "real" security step. Would I be comfortable with a list of passwords in a spreadsheet? No, not unless in some sort of trusted online storage, accessible only with two factor auth.

It is the IRS's sandbox... so legislative or procedural, the software vendors have to do what the IRS says. The IRS is probably more concerned with having proper returns, and proper refunds, more than security. Security may help in that endeavor, as will having W-2 forms in hand before the returns are processed. Passwords are a silly "solution" since they are easily broken, if access to the data is gained.

I have not seen such a requirement, but that does not mean one exists (on paper or defacto). Every taxing agency can impose their will on their subjects. One tax agency can absolutely wag the tail of all others, since software is usually not written for one tax agency. There certainly may be a locality which essentially requires a password, forcing a software vendor to do so for all, or create a special version.

I root for the team that is much harder to get to than the ball clubs... I was glad to see the last batter swing it. My last TV gig, the cleanup batter took three strikes with the bases loaded, and wanted to argue with me. "They give you a bat for a reason" was what I was thinking. Not that I am perfect by far...

BB, I almost dropped my snack when I got to the bottom of your message! Thanks Not my place to say yes or no. I am but another minion who has to follow the rules set forth by others, to the best of my ability at each moment. I had not seen any confirmation of truncation being allowed on a W2, so I went looking. Still have not found confirmation, but that if it does come to be, it will likely be optional. That made me think what my preference would be, which is not to truncate for the reasons already covered. I also found the (to me) disturbing incorrect information being touted by those claiming to know. The pondering on this issue is probably wasted time in this group, as most here are probably efiling, so the "W2" information from one of your clients could be carved on a coconut, and you could possibly be somewhat comfortable preparing the return. I was just talking to someone who asked why we do not print, in black and white, a 1099 misc. The reason is the IRS has no specs for doing so, since they clearly state their copy must be on a red drop out ink form. Does that mean they will reject a black and white form? Hardly. As long as it scans, no human will ever give it thought. But, I am not comfortable preparing one in black in white, no matter what "other programs" do. P.S. This is a publicly viewable and searchable forum... Some members are also my customer, and customers of all members have the ability to search and find our posts using any search engine.

Wasn't the idea for this at least in part a reaction to the increasing number of fraudulent returns being filed? There were several states who started moving up deadlines, now the IRS/SSA has joined in.. Change is never easy, but this is probably a good for all concerned. Might reduce the number of rejected efile's, as well as cut down some fraud. Maybe states will not have to turn off/delay tax processing this year because of high fraud concerns. To me, this is a reasonable change, as it just makes sense the employer report, submitted under penalty of perjury, should be in hand before the return (and possible refund) is processed. Yep, I have sent at least two reminders to our customers, and will probably send a couple more before Jan 31 - change is never easy. Penalty? The penalties were increased (according to the W2 instructions). Failure to file correct information returns by the due date. If you fail to file a correct Form W-2 by the due date and cannot show reasonable cause, you may be subject to a penalty as provided under section 6721. The penalty applies if you: Fail to file timely, Fail to include all information required to be shown on Form W-2, Include incorrect information on Form W-2, File on paper forms when you are required to e-file, Report an incorrect TIN, Fail to report a TIN, or Fail to file paper Forms W-2 that are machine readable. The amount of the penalty is based on when you file the correct Form W-2. Penalties are indexed for inflation. The penalty amounts shown below apply for tax years beginning in 2016. The penalty is: $50 per Form W-2 if you correctly file within 30 days of the due date (for example, by February 28 if the due date is January 31); the maximum penalty is $532,000 per year ($186,000 for small businesses, defined in Small businesses). $100 per Form W-2 if you correctly file more than 30 days after the due date but by August 1; the maximum penalty is $1,596,500 per year ($532,000 for small businesses). $260 per Form W-2 if you file after August 1, do not file corrections, or do not file required Forms W-2; the maximum penalty is $3,193,000 per year ($1,064,000 for small businesses). If you do not file corrections and you do not meet any of the exceptions to the penalty, the penalty is $260 per information return. The maximum penalty is $3,193,000 per year ($1,064,000 for small businesses). Exceptions to the penalty. The following are exceptions to the failure to file correct information returns penalty. CAUTION ! CAUTION ! 1. The penalty will not apply to any failure that you can show was due to reasonable cause and not to willful neglect. In general, you must be able to show that your failure was due to an event beyond your control or due to significant mitigating factors. You also must be able to show that you acted in a responsible manner and took steps to avoid the failure. 2. An inconsequential error or omission is not considered a failure to include correct information. An inconsequential error or omission does not prevent or hinder the SSA/IRS from processing the Form W-2, from correlating the information required to be shown on the form with the information shown on the payee's tax return, or from otherwise putting the form to its intended use. Errors and omissions that are never inconsequential are those relating to: A TIN, A payee's surname, and Any money amounts. 3. De minimis rule for corrections. Even though you cannot show reasonable cause, the penalty for failure to file correct Forms W-2 will not apply to a certain number of returns if you: Filed those Forms W-2 on or before the required filing date, Either failed to include all of the information required on the form or included incorrect information, and Filed corrections of these forms by August 1. If you meet all of the de minimis rule conditions, the penalty for filing incorrect information returns (including Form W-2) will not apply to the greater of 10 information returns (including Form W-2) or one-half of 1% of the total number of information returns (including Form W-2) that you are required to file for the calendar year. 4. Forms W-2 with incorrect dollar amounts may fall under a safe harbor for certain de minimis errors. The safe harbor applies if no single amount in error differs from the correct amount by more than $100 and no single amount reported for tax withheld differs from the correct amount by more than $25. If the safe harbor applies, you will not have to correct the Form W-2 and it will be treated as having been filed with all of the correct required information. However, the safe harbor does not apply if the payee elects to have you issue a corrected return. Small businesses. For purposes of the lower maximum penalties shown in Failure to file correct information returns by the due date, you are a small business if your average annual gross receipts for the 3 most recent tax years (or for the period that you were in existence, if shorter) ending before the calendar year in which the Forms W-2 were due are $5 million or less. Intentional disregard of filing requirements. If any failure to timely file a correct Form W-2 is due to intentional disregard of the filing or correct information requirements, the penalty is at least $530 per Form W-2 with no maximum penal

Note: I am extra sensitive to bad information. I hear from employers and others who believe what they have heard, and complain our software does not comply. I then have to be the nit picker who points out the actual rules, which often gets a reply of "so what, X says"... An example is a state where a tax agency has made a request for certain information on a W-2 in box 20, using the word "please", not "required". First problem is the item is not required to be in any particular box, the actual law is the item can appear in "any available" box (yes, that's right, could be in box 1 and still comply). I consider some will believe it is required, and sometimes go along (assuming it is not prohibited) to prevent me from being having to educate all who question the issue. In this case, that is not even an option because what they would "please" like in box 20 will not fit, unless in a 2 or 4 point font, making the request pointless (to make it easier for the employee and preparer to not miss something).

Your link also does not say it will apply to W-2 forms. It says "most likely", and is then badly worded to say "effective". This is exactly how myths get perpetuated, by taking things out of context. A quick search finds many who opine it is already allowed, which is factually incorrect. I doubt a W-2 is the way many SSN's are compromised. The onus is still on the employee to handle "their business", such as not losing their W-2 or SS card, and reviewing their SS and credit report on a regular basis. Even if the SSA/IRS decide to change the W-2 requirements, truncation will not be required, and comes with pitfalls for the employer (and preparer), possibly expensive pitfalls.

Pondering the issue personally, meaning what would I do if there was an option to truncate? I would not. Why? It is likely the one and only time each year the employee gets the opportunity to make sure the employer has the proper SSN. Not all employers give the employee a chance to verify the SSN in their payroll system before Copy A is submitted.

https://www.irs.gov/government-entities/federal-state-local-governments/truncated-taxpayer-identification-numbers You may not truncate on any forms filed with the IRS (Copy A) or with state or local governments. You cannot truncate your own identification number. These rules do not apply to Form W-2. emphasis added

Your link article was dated in January 2016, and says the rules "may" be updated, not that they have or will be updated. I am going with the current W-2 instructions since they are very clear, and since the truncate regulations defer to the specific rules for the specific document.. Emphasis added: "The regulations (TD 9675) that allow truncated taxpayer identification numbers to be used on Forms 1099-MISC may be updated to include authorization for truncated identification numbers on Forms W-2, said Nancy Rose, senior counsel in the IRS's Office of Chief Counsel. "

Just one person's thoughts... If you have an application which is important to you, will it run on an Apple product? If not, and you choose an emulator to try to get it to work, you are using the emulator to pretend you are using a Windows box, negating any perceived or real advantage to using Apple, as well as adding an extra complication and failure point. I do not create software for Apple because so few use them. Probably the same for nefarious programmers as well. But, there are those that do... so the virus argument is invalid. For me, it is never about the OS, the OS is simply a means to get to the application I need or want to use.

From the IRS W-2 instructions: Social security numbers. Do not truncate social security numbers shown on Forms W-2, W-2AS, W-2GU, and W-2VI. Social security numbers are required on Forms W-2. See Taxpayer identification numbers, later. See also Regulations section 301.6109-(4)(b)(2). Filers of other forms, such as certain Forms 1099/1098, may truncate the social security number (XXX-XX-4567) to combat identity theft.

Jack, That assumes AL actually tests the software (I doubt it) rather than the results. The IRS does not test software, just the results, and the IRS is very clear that their test data does not cover all scenarios. https://revenue.alabama.gov/incometax/software_vendors.cfm You made me look... AL first requires the software to have been IRS approved. We know now the IRS approval is not reliable. Since AL talks about their schemas, I suspect their testing is similar to the IRS. The vendor submits the RESULTS of what their software creates, and AL washes it through some sort of verification. Whether or not the vendor tests all possible scenarios, or whether or not AL requires certain scenarios to be tested is not clear from their main vendor page. Even it the IRS or a state had built some sort of test data for all possible scenarios (unlikely), how would the IRS or state actually know the data was not manually created? Don;'t for a minute think the vendor has to send their software to a tax agency and the tax agency has someone who can operate the software for testing purposes. The onus is always on the software vendor, and those using the software. In other words, your only guarantee is your own review and maybe what the software vendor provides. There is absolutely no guarantee from the taxing agency that the software they show as approved will be accurate, or was even used to make the test data which garnered the approval. Remember, the taxing agency is going to do at little as possible in their testing, as they are only looking to make their job easier (not have to manually process data).

The last paragraph tells all... The IRS is not testing the software. They test some results, based on test data they provide, and clearly state the test data does not cover all poasibilities. Not all forms or scenarios are tested, and the vendor does not have to support all forms.

https://www.irs.gov/tax-professionals/e-file-providers-partners/how-tax-preparation-software-is-approved-for-electronic-filing

SaraEA, I cannot speak for anything other than what we do. In our case, such as W-2 and W-3, the SSA approves us annually for printing the form in black and white format. They do not check for data accuracy. What they do check is a blank form being scan-able, and a form with dummy data is scan-able. For testing, they prefer all fields be filled in, and filled in to the max length we will use. So our test forms contain 99999999.99 for all figures, 20 to 30 "W" for text fields, and with ALL check boxes checked. Clearly, they have no care as to the accuracy of actual figures and text. Same for the state forms we directly print. Same for any e-data we prepare. Most tax agencies do not have an "approval" process. A few have an over the top process. Those with an approval process have one reason in mind, and it is not accuracy. It is to stay within their budget, by reducing the number of forms requiring manual handling. (There may be one or two who have approval processes to ensure they have a budget/paycheck, but that is pure speculation .) Thankfully, expertise is still needed, or we would all be looking for work. The OP is a great reminder that we have to exercise our expertise.

Maybe the issuer has nothing showing the direct payment (assuming that is what the amount was for) is ACA compliant.

Kodak (name licensed to JK Imaging) SP360. I mount it to windshield using their suction cup mount. Records to SD in 10 min (IIRC) loops. Has a setting to power on and off with the vehicle. Fun little gadget to use for many things. Stuck it on a letter when our daughter was marching in her HS band for a night parade. They twirl the letters... Underwater case is fun to use. Mount it on one of our dogs - to their harness - when we walk, for fun at first, but now for security. Plenty of loose dogs around, and we do have to pepper spray the loose ones from time to time. There are many cameras now marketed for driving. I have seen them at Costco. I like the 360cam since it shows more, including me. On the other hand, not showing me might be better if I mess up, but that is not my concern. If I mess up, I can accept that. I just want to be sure the truth comes out. Same with the cams around the house. I am really not the worrying type, but it is so easy to record things, and is a nice peace of mind.

99! The truth is, at least for me, the reverse. I use a 360deg camera when driving. I have cameras outside my house (good cameras make good neighbors, not fences). I have the ability to record my umpire gigs - yes umpires have been and do get sued, and worse yet, get assaulted. No matter the scenario, when it is clear there is a camera recording, it helps certain types behave better. Also have two cameras inside my house - but those are to check on the dogs when away .

Many phone calls are carried over the internet. VOIP, Skype, Ooma, MagicJack, etc., so one has to assume every call is over VOIP since you never know what the other party is using, and you may not even know how your own provider connects. So no, I do not worry about someone looking for a few voice mail transcriptions out of the many, nor somehow monitoring the conversation - not any more than any phone call at all. I simply assume they are not private. Something I started doing with the first phones without cords, since those were easy to monitor, accidentally or on purpose.

And I thought I really was winning a free cruise each evening :). Joking aside, several years ago I setup several google voice numbers so I can limit my cell number to family and friends. Also works great for working from out of the office. The other benefit is gv filters calls, and can route known spam numbers to a spam folder. Can also receive texts as emails, and the missed or ignored call transcription is good enough to get by (comcast is a little better at transcribing). Still get random direct to cell spam calls, but unless from family or friends, or is a forward from a GV number within the time frame I setup in GV (business days and hours), they go to voicemail without ringing. Also use one gv number strictly to give out as a business text message number. I get the message via email, and reply via email as well. Easily limits the hours I get "beeped".

Jack - Nope, problem not prevented. You still have to practice safe hex. Received a new computer (late '80's) where the hard drive already had something nefarious on it. It was the person/store who put together the computer who caused the problem. Could get something internally, via using some sort of media for backup (assuming you are backing up). Safe hex is the only prevention. No software or hardware action can protect you.