What are your guys opinions on jobs that pay cash and is not reported to the IRS? Let's say you picked up a part-time job, aside from your on main job, paying $15 dollars an hour for 4 days/15hours a week. Would it be moral because you would be paying taxes from your first job? From looking at debate sites, it seems the opinion if it's immoral is split in the middle. What are your guy's opinion on this matter? Have you been paid for work and not reported to the IRS?

@DavePi wrote:

What are your guys opinions on jobs that pay cash and is not reported to the IRS?

I would consider deliberately doing something illegal to be immoral, and tax evasion is very much illegal.

@DavePi wrote:

Let's say you picked up a part-time job, aside from your on main job, paying $15 dollars an hour for 4 days/15hours a week. Would it be moral because you would be paying taxes from your first job?

Have you been paid for work and not reported to the IRS?

No, in my opinion, it would not be moral to get paid under the table and not pay taxes on a second job, figuring you pay taxes on your first job. And, no, I report all income to the IRS.

I know a lot of baby sitters get paid under the table. Should that income be reported?

@roflwofl wrote:

And, no, I report all income to the IRS.

Let's say, hypothetically, I sold 10 pills of Oxycontin on the blackmarket for $600. How would we report that transaction to the IRS without revealing too much information about the selling of prescription drugs? hypothetically......



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2017 05:28PM by DavePi.

Gambling winnings, after all you are taking a gamble.

@DavePi wrote:

I know a lot of baby sitters get paid under the table. Should that income be reported?

Define "a lot of babysitters." Are we talking about a 12-year old who babysits twice a month for for her mom 3 hours each at $5 an hour and has no other income? Or are we talking about a babysitter who babysits non-family members 10-40 hours a week for $15 an hour, in excess of the minimum wage and does it on a regular basis as a job? I wouldn't condemn the 12 year old infrequent worker who is helping out her own mom and who may not know better. But anybody working a regular gig certainly should understand that the law requires that taxes be paid on all income

We could get deep into tax law, discussing whether a babysitter is an employee or self employed, which would determine the employer's reporting requirements, but, regardless, US law requires that individuals pay taxes on all income, so yes, babysitters should be paying taxes. The babysitter can enter babysitting earnings on Schedule C and can deduct expenses incurred babysitting.

What you are really asking is: Is it immoral to deliberately break the law? I think it is.

@RobG wrote:

Gambling winnings, after all you are taking a gamble.

After some research, it would appear that the W-2G is the form needed for gambling winnings



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2017 05:35PM by DavePi.

1. Baby-sitting: If you earn under a certain amount of income in a year, you are not required to file a return at all. Most teenage baby-sitters will fall into this category. A "professional" baby-sitter would have to obey local rules on having a business license for self-employment and file a tax return as a sole-proprietor, much like what most of us do.

2. Regular work paid at $15/hr... This will often come from a small business who should be reporting you as an employee so that they can deduct your wages. If they are reporting you as such, then you had better report the income as the IRS will likely catch the non-report. If they are not reporting you, they are in danger of getting into trouble should their finances ever by audited. If the entity is not registered as a small business, they likely should be.

So... Legally, yes, your income should be reported. However, I don't equate "legal" with "moral." So, is it immoral to not report the income? I know that I get frustrated when extremely wealthy folks find all sorts of "loopholes" so that they avoid paying taxes. I strongly believe that, as they are benefiting from our society, they should be paying taxes on their income so as to help support the system that enriches them. By extension, I believe that we are all morally obligated to pay our legal share of taxes. Do I agree with all aspects of the tax code? No. However, we live in a democratic society and we have to live by the decisions made with our democratic processes. If I could refuse to pay taxes because I disagree with the tax code, how would I argue that somebody else should pay? What right would I have to demand that others pay taxes if I were to create what I view as the "perfect" system of tax laws, should they disagree?

Report your income within the parameters of the law.

@roflwofl wrote:

What you are really asking is: Is it immoral to deliberately break the law? I think it is.

Our laws do reflect what we believe is to be moral. But sometimes laws can be created by corporations to further their profits. Or there can be unjust laws, like slavery/segregation, that people "deliberately" broke in the middle of the 20th century. Eventually the law changed to conform to the new moral standing of the country.

I think taxes are heading to the same direction. Sure, there are arguments that taxes are needed to create public institutions that are needed for a healthy society. But taxes can also be argued as theft, because people that don't give consent, still have to pay taxes. Evidence shows that physical currency is increasing in the economy, a sign that Americans are having enough with paying taxes and moving towards jobs that pay under the table. Why pay into social security when it will not exist when they retire? Breaking an unjust law = moral.

I know people who work teaching English to Chinese children. They work for Chinese companies. There is no reporting of their income by this company to the IRS or really any tracking of the payments. Is it immoral to not report this income to the IRS? Yes, it is. Would I feel guilty about it? No. I'm not sure why I'm okay with that because I'm usually a stickler on right and wrong. :shrug:
That wasn't helpful, I know!

well put!

Not talking about myself, but my neighbor works and hires a senior man in our development to walk and feed her two dogs daily. She pays him well, he is retired and I'm sure he doesn't report it, many are in this position, I'm really o.k. with this, he's on a fixed income and just trying to earn a few more bucks and doesn't make enough to file taxes. I also know a 3rd grade teacher who tutors in the summer, same story. I think there are occassions when it's acceptable and occassions where it's not, as in selling drugs.
Dave1...what are you up too, i probably wouldn't agree.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2017 08:06PM by Irene_L.A..

I don't know about that. As far as I know, there are situations where money that is "paid under the table" is just money that cannot be taxed once, twice, or more often. Is the money a gift? Is it a loan that has an indefinite payback period? In other situations, it may be an attempt to avoid reporting or paying taxes. How many of us know so much that we could pronounce someone else's money situation as moral or otherwise?! We do not know this about most people. Someone would have to determine what the money actually means before assigning a morality judgement to any person, money, or situation. Even then, it might be dicey to pronounce a personal judgement regarding someone, their money, or their situation. It is not our business. That is between them and... their consciousness, the IRS, or their own moral compass.

Just a discussion, we're not judging, at least I'm not...the IRS will catch up and don't forget about Karma, it gets everyone in the long run. People do what they have to do at the time,....

Many restaurants employ immigrants and pay them under the table. Will these immigrant employees face any bad karma down the road?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2017 08:24PM by DavePi.

Many builder/developers use immigrants for digging ditches, at least in the 80's, i remember it well.
They stand outside the painting stores waiting for work....don't know about today, but know about the past, everyone was doing it.....no one wanted these "jobs". ..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/2017 09:20PM by Irene_L.A..

I know someone who cleans houses for a living. She gets paid under the table so she doesn't have to pay taxes. One day she was in a car accident. Nothing serious but a few bruised ribs - enough so that she couldn't work for a few weeks. Couldn't claim disability or anything because it would have been found out she doesn't claim her income.

Laws are based on moral codes. Unlike law, morality is not so black and white. Jean Valjean broke the law by stealing bread to feed starving children. Was it an immoral act? Martin Shkreli raised the price of a medication to treat a rare disease from $1.50 to $30 per pill. While that may not have been illegal, it was certainly immoral.

@LisaSTL wrote:

Laws are based on moral codes. Unlike law, morality is not so black and white. Jean Valjean broke the law by stealing bread to feed starving children. Was it an immoral act? Martin Shkreli raised the price of a medication to treat a rare disease from $1.50 to $30 per pill. While that may not have been illegal, it was certainly immoral.

Yes, morality is not black and white. Even in the Martin Shkreli Case
I think orphan drugs are different than drugs given to a large population. Daraprim treats a few thousand people that suffer from toxoplasmosis. Over half of this group is given the drug for free or a dollar(a team is in place, dedicated to make sure people get it), while the rest is paid by the insurance companies.

Also some news outlets say there is no need to increase the price to $750 a pill in order to pay for the RnD(research and development) of a new and better drug, because daraprim works fine. However, if you call destroying the body in order to destroy the disease is fine, then sure, you can say the drug is fine. Daraprim is a very toxic and outdated(created in the 1952) in of itself and many people that suffer from toxoplasmosis really need a new drug. Because only 2,000 people suffer from the disease in the US alone, at the 13.50 price it was at before, there was no incentive to create a better drug.

People will say that premiums will rise because of the price-jacking of these orphan drugs. But these drugs are given to a small percentage of the US population, it is only a drop in the bucket. Also note that there are many different types of rare diseases that only affect hundreds/thousands of people, and many don't have a current cure for. There really is no incentive to make these drugs unless they can make a profit from them, and doing the RnD to get to the final product is expensive.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/30/2017 03:41PM by DavePi.

If the only incentive is profit, you are right. IMO there is incentive beyond profit for a truly moral person.

You are exactly right.

Some of these pharma companies are risking 10s of millions of dollars in hopes of creating a life saving drug, yet there is a high chance it will not get approved by the FDA.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/30/2017 03:55PM by DavePi.

@MFJohnston wrote:

So... Legally, yes, your income should be reported. However, I don't equate "legal" with "moral."
Report your income within the parameters of the law.

Exactly. People who can afford to hire CPAs that let them avoid (not evade, but avoid) are perfectly within the law. It's one reason I think a Fair Tax (a tax not based on income, but on spending) is a more just system. As long as we're allowed to write off mileage, claim lodging and meals, or deduct a "therapeutic" massage, there's little reason not to do so. I wholeheartedly agree with MFJohnston that legal does not equate to moral, and illegality does not necessarily mean immorality.

@LisaSTL wrote:

Laws are based on moral codes. Unlike law, morality is not so black and white. Jean Valjean broke the law by stealing bread to feed starving children. Was it an immoral act?

I'm sure the person from whom he stole found it immoral.

Why am I not surprised.

"Clowns entertaining goats" seems like an apt metaphor for some of the pot-stirrers on the forum and those that follow them.

There was a case here recently where a contractor hired an assistant under the table. The Contractor had a license and used it for a residential homeowners project. The assistant was hurt, pretty bad actually, on the job. He had huge and mounting medical bills. When asked, at the hospital, what happened he told them. The hospital billed the Contractor as a workers comp claim. The assistant hired an attorney who sued the Contractor and the homeowner and both of their insurance companies and won. Even if you are being paid under the table, you and they, are still liable to each other if something happens, given a shark of an attorney gets involved. There was a babysitting case but that is too oulandish to discuss.

House cleaners if gotten hurt on your property can sue you in CA.....you need Ins. today, so it is risky. Workers on your property can sue if hurt...in the good ole days this wasn't so, they are trying to have you hire licensed workers. The thing is house cleaners have no money to hire an atty., and they come with 3 or 4 people and get in and out in 2 hours which saves you a ton of money. What I was talking about were the illegal's from Mexico working for builders who wouldn't dare sue as they didn't want to be deported.

It doesn't matter if one's income is reported by the payer to the IRS or not. The recipient must report ALL income. That includes fees earned by shoppers. It also includes income earned from illegal activates such as fraud and theft.

@Rousseau wrote:

It doesn't matter if one's income is reported by the payer to the IRS or not. The recipient must report ALL income. That includes fees earned by shoppers. It also includes income earned from illegal activates such as fraud and theft.

Very interesting. But would one feel safe disclosing that they deal in illegal behavior?

Hypothetically, let's say I stole a Playstation 4 from a walmart. I then sell it for $120 for a quick sell. I think you could either fill it in the 1040 as other income(line 21) or a schedule C (However you can not deduct any expenses)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2017 12:43PM by DavePi.

I would think that criminals, by their very nature, would be inclined to not report their ill-gotten gains to the IRS. They are criminals after all. It would be very funny actually to see a criminal steal goods from someone and be ok with that crime, but come tax time say, "Oh, I better claim this gain on my taxes so I don't inadvertently steal from the IRS.: