Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Virtual Office Workers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    Virtual Office Workers

    Can anyone steer me to good reference material on 'virtual employees'.

    I have a small ($~100K Revenues) but complex client who has office workers in both Florida and now New York City. The corporation (now S) was formed in Washington State.

    For the Florida employee (also an officer/shareholder) who handles the administrative end, I have recommended obtaining an authority to operate in order to set up the UE tax account.

    For the NYC employee, administrative assistant, I'm inclined to recommend the same.

    Both locations are where their particular 'work' is conducted so I believe I'm right that each is a valid 'work location'.

    However, I can see this whole thing getting out of whack as they expand their horizons. I can't escape the feeling that I'm missing something. (ie, Do they need Workers' Comp policies in all the States in which they operate? Are these really 'employees'? - Sounds to me like they are but I wonder if a case could be made for them being independents...and it goes on)

    I would feel much better if there were somewhere I could research this. I have thus far been unsuccessful in finding any good material on this.

    Anecdotal information or anyone's thoughts on the matter is equally welcome.

    Thanks in advance!
    Tags: None
    #2
    S Corp. stockholder/Employee

    in Florida is an employee. This is a shareholder/owner and must take a salary.

    Comment

      #3
      It ..........

      .......... may be posible to look at this worker as "outsourced" and she gets a 1099. She should have no benefits, no client contact, etc.
      Last edited by BOB W; 01-14-2007, 04:48 PM.
      This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

      Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

      Comment

        #4
        Originally posted by BOB W View Post
        .......... may be posible to look at this of worker as "outsourced" and she gets a 1099. She should have no benefits, no client contact, etc.
        Thank you Bob, I'll check into that.

        Comment

          #5
          Originally posted by Bird Legs View Post
          in Florida is an employee. This is a shareholder/owner and must take a salary.
          No doubt. My issue is 'virtual employees' over all.

          My objective is to try and find ways (if possible) to minimize the complexity of this. So far, I can't get past the 'work location'...where they work is a work location so that would mean an authority to operate, registration etc. I would like to find a simpler way to do this. However, I'm beginning to think there may not be one.

          Thank you for your response, nonetheless.

          Comment

            #6
            Don't forget.....

            .... that FL is an office of the WA Corporation. That means that the Corporation needs to be registered as a foreign corp in FL, if I understand your situation correctly.

            NY has taken a posistion in a 2006 ruling, that virtual workers outside NY should be considered as working in NY, regardless of the state of residence. This is not within your situation but it is a direction of how other states may be heading.????
            This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

            Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

            Comment

              #7
              Originally posted by BOB W View Post
              .... that FL is an office of the WA Corporation. That means that the Corporation needs to be registered as a foreign corp in FL, if I understand your situation correctly.

              NY has taken a posistion in a 2006 ruling, that virtual workers outside NY should be considered as working in NY, regardless of the state of residence. This is not within your situation but it is a direction of how other states may be heading.????
              Yes, you have understood correctly. An application for authority has been submitted for FL. Thankfully, they will only be on the hook for UE. For the other WA-based officer/shareholder, WA allows officers to exempt out of UE.

              This and your point on NY is an example of why I want to proceed with caution. Each State/some States always treats these situations differently. AND each new State they 'operate' in requires a bunch of research.

              If I can streamline this, I can make this engagement profitable. As it currently stands, not so much.

              On the bright side, if I *do* have to straighten this up and streamline it from scratch, I could write a book and do seminars. In any case, I need to figure out how I parlay all this *work* into an excellent business model that generates profitable revenue streams.

              Comment

                #8
                Now.....

                ... the fun part comes. In each state they are operating in you will need to allocate it's share of income and expenses on each state's corporate tax return.
                This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

                Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

                Comment

                  #9
                  Exactly!

                  Originally posted by BOB W View Post
                  ... the fun part comes. In each state they are operating in you will need to allocate it's share of income and expenses on each state's corporate tax return.
                  FUN Part deux! In this case, they get subscriptions from all around the world...let's see how I manage THAT one. *sigh*

                  I'll keep you updated if you're interested.

                  O the fun times are a comin'!

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Yes

                    I would be interested as to the progression.

                    LT

                    Originally posted by TaxBird View Post
                    FUN Part deux! In this case, they get subscriptions from all around the world...let's see how I manage THAT one. *sigh*

                    I'll keep you updated if you're interested.

                    O the fun times are a comin'!
                    Only in government or politics is a "cut in spending" really an increase. It's just not as much of an increase as they wanted it to be, therefore a "cut".

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Originally posted by thomtax View Post
                      I would be interested as to the progression.

                      LT
                      Sure. Once I hash it out (or more likely in the course of) I'll post a separate thread.

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next

                      Disclaimer

                      Collapse

                      This message board allows participants to freely exchange ideas and opinions on areas concerning taxes. The comments posted are the opinions of participants and not that of Tax Materials, Inc. We make no claim as to the accuracy of the information and will not be held liable for any damages caused by using such information. Tax Materials, Inc. reserves the right to delete or modify inappropriate postings.

                      Working...
                      X