GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-31-2013, 06:23   #201
cyphertext
Senior Member
 
cyphertext's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
Ok.

Let me go back and see if what i quoted is different.

Working Condition Benefits

This exclusion applies to property and services you provide to an employee so that the employee can perform his or her job. It applies to the extent the employee could deduct the cost of the property or services as a business expense or depreciation expense if he or she had paid for it. The employee must meet any substantiation requirements that apply to the deduction. Examples of working condition benefits include an employee's use of a company car for business, an employer-provided cell phone provided primarily for noncompensatory business purposes, and job-related education provided to an employee.


All of an employee's use of a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is a working condition benefit. A qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is any vehicle the employee is not likely to use more than minimally for personal purposes because of its design.



Nope. Still the the same.

The IRS publication still states
The employee must meet any substantiation requirements that apply to the deduction.

Right under that:

Vehicle allocation rules. If you provide a car for an employee's use, the amount you can exclude as a working condition benefit is the amount that would be allowable as a deductible business expense if the employee paid for its use. If the employee uses the car for both business and personal use, the value of the working condition benefit is the part determined to be for business use of the vehicle. See Business use of your car under Personal versus Business Expenses in chapter 1 of Publication 535. Also, see the special rules for certain demonstrator cars and qualified nonpersonal-use vehicles discussed below.

Dana, why do you choose to leave out the part that states "All of an employee's use of a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is a working condition benefit. A qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is any vehicle the employee is not likely to use more than minimally for personal purposes because of its design."

A police car is listed as a qualified nonperonal-use vehicle and is a working condition benefit, and as such is exempt. All of the employee's use, not just back and forth to work...All use.

It is not the same a having a company car... notice that the qualified non-personal use vehicles are emergency vehicles, hearse, dump truck, school bus, delivery van, etc... I don't know of any officers that load their family up in the squad car and go to the mall, but I know many executives that do just that with the company car. Now, an officer may run to the grocery store in the squad car, but when he does, he is going to take, at a minimum, credentials, firearm, and quick cuffs. Sounds like to me he is still prepared to carry out his duties and is not just running around in a police car for personal use.
cyphertext is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 06:41   #202
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,072
I am not sure exacty what the IRS says but at least around here it seems a strong presumption that there is no tax liability attached to take home cruiser. And it seems to have been that way for more than a few years.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 10-31-2013 at 07:06..
Bruce M is online now  
Old 10-31-2013, 06:59   #203
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyphertext View Post
Dana, why do you choose to leave out the part that states "All of an employee's use of a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is a working condition benefit. A qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is any vehicle the employee is not likely to use more than minimally for personal purposes because of its design."

A police car is listed as a qualified nonperonal-use vehicle and is a working condition benefit, and as such is exempt. All of the employee's use, not just back and forth to work...All use.

It is not the same a having a company car... notice that the qualified non-personal use vehicles are emergency vehicles, hearse, dump truck, school bus, delivery van, etc... I don't know of any officers that load their family up in the squad car and go to the mall, but I know many executives that do just that with the company car. Now, an officer may run to the grocery store in the squad car, but when he does, he is going to take, at a minimum, credentials, firearm, and quick cuffs. Sounds like to me he is still prepared to carry out his duties and is not just running around in a police car for personal use.

I did not leave that out. I quoted that, but there are qualifiers.

This is under

Working Condition Benefits

One of which says that everything in this section must:

"The employee must meet any substantiation requirements that apply to the deduction."

Which includes:
"If the employee uses the car for both business and personal use, the value of the working condition benefit is the part determined to be for business use of the vehicle."

And under where you quote the "all of the use"

All of an employee's use of a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is a working condition benefit. A qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is any vehicle the employee is not likely to use more than minimally for personal purposes because of its design.

The "minimally for personal use" is the key to whether it is allowed or not.

You would reference this publication

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc514.html

Although commuting costs are not deductible, some local transportation expenses are. Deductible local transportation expenses include the ordinary and necessary expenses of going from one workplace (away from the residence) to another.

What this tell you is that GOING to work is personal use. If someone took home a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle (such as a dumptruck or semi) 5 or 6 times a year, that would likely be minimal personal use. Do it 30 times, is that minimum? Maybe, maybe not. Do every night, not minimum personal use.

Now with an emergency vehicle, you have a few extra things that you would look at to see if it is personal use. Are they an exempt or non-exempt employee. Do the live in the jurisdiction they are in? As an example, if there was an exempt employee living in the jurisdiction, when are they "on duty"? They never punch in.

One of the keys of when you are considered to be working is when and where you punch in (or if you are required to record hours).

Basically, use the duck test. If it seems like it is more then minimal personal use, then it is.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 07:02   #204
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
I a not sure exacty what the IRS says but at least around here it seems a strong presumption that there is no tax liability attached to take home cruiser. And it seems to have been that way for more than a few years.
You can do anything you with taxes UNTIL you are caught.

Business owners also use their vehicles as personal use and take it off 100% for business.

Think of it like sales tax for something you buy over the internet. Almost every state that has sales tax requires you to pay it on out of state purchases, yet how many people do it?
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 07:05   #205
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,072
How long have some state law enforcement and sheriff's agencies had take home cruisers?
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is online now  
Old 10-31-2013, 07:10   #206
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
How long have some state law enforcement and sheriff's agencies had take home cruisers?
How many times do people driver 10mph over the speed limit on the highways?

How often do people pay sales tax on their internet purchases?

You are trying to say that "since person X has done something and gotten away with it, it not illegal"

That is the ironic part.

You can read what the IRS says. It has rules on commuting to/from work and personal use of said vehicles. I would find it strange that someone trusted with enforcing laws, would try and say that they shouldnt have to follow tax laws. Do we get to pick and choose which laws we like?
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 07:16   #207
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
How long have some state law enforcement and sheriff's agencies had take home cruisers?
And just so you are aware:

If you were reimbursed for travel or transportation under an accountable plan, but at a per diem or mileage rate that exceeds the federal rate, the excess should be included in the wages on your Form W-2. The amount up to the allowance would be reported in box 12 of your Form W-2.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc514.html

The employee is responsible for reporting personal use of a vehicle on their W2 (the instructions for employees to report in in box 12 is on the W2 form).
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.

Last edited by DanaT; 10-31-2013 at 07:16..
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 07:42   #208
cyphertext
Senior Member
 
cyphertext's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
I did not leave that out. I quoted that, but there are qualifiers.

This is under

Working Condition Benefits

One of which says that everything in this section must:

"The employee must meet any substantiation requirements that apply to the deduction."

Which includes:
"If the employee uses the car for both business and personal use, the value of the working condition benefit is the part determined to be for business use of the vehicle."

And under where you quote the "all of the use"

All of an employee's use of a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is a working condition benefit. A qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle is any vehicle the employee is not likely to use more than minimally for personal purposes because of its design.

The "minimally for personal use" is the key to whether it is allowed or not.

You would reference this publication

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc514.html

Although commuting costs are not deductible, some local transportation expenses are. Deductible local transportation expenses include the ordinary and necessary expenses of going from one workplace (away from the residence) to another.

What this tell you is that GOING to work is personal use. If someone took home a qualified nonpersonal-use vehicle (such as a dumptruck or semi) 5 or 6 times a year, that would likely be minimal personal use. Do it 30 times, is that minimum? Maybe, maybe not. Do every night, not minimum personal use.

Now with an emergency vehicle, you have a few extra things that you would look at to see if it is personal use. Are they an exempt or non-exempt employee. Do the live in the jurisdiction they are in? As an example, if there was an exempt employee living in the jurisdiction, when are they "on duty"? They never punch in.

One of the keys of when you are considered to be working is when and where you punch in (or if you are required to record hours).

Basically, use the duck test. If it seems like it is more then minimal personal use, then it is.
All that tells me is that if I use my own car, then driving back and forth to work is not a deductible expense, but if I have a take home police cruiser, it is exempt from being a taxable benefit.
cyphertext is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 08:14   #209
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyphertext View Post
All that tells me is that if I use my own car, then driving back and forth to work is not a deductible expense, but if I have a take home police cruiser, it is exempt from being a taxable benefit.
You are missing the "minimal personal use" statement and the

"The employee must meet any substantiation requirements that apply to the deduction" statement.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.

Last edited by DanaT; 10-31-2013 at 08:15..
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 08:31   #210
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,072
double tap
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 10-31-2013 at 08:33..
Bruce M is online now  
Old 10-31-2013, 08:32   #211
Mushinto
Master Member
 
Mushinto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne, Florida, USA
Posts: 12,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pwhfirefighter View Post
Question, doesn't LEOSA allow private property owners to exercise their rights to control who carries a weapon on their property? I know this does not apply to LEO in performing their official duties.
No, LEOSA does not address this. It is clear, however, that states can only bar qualified LEOSA people from carrying on government (not private) property.
__________________
ML

Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind, always.
Mushinto is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 08:32   #212
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
...
That is the ironic part.

You can read what the IRS says. It has rules on commuting to/from work and personal use of said vehicles. I would find it strange that someone trusted with enforcing laws, would try and say that they shouldnt have to follow tax laws. Do we get to pick and choose which laws we like?

No I think the ironic part is the part about "minimal personal use" that seems to be missed here. What exactly do you picture guys doing with their cruisers?


The Okie Corral



I think it is reasonably settled (for most, apparently including the IRS) that the above is not really all that common and that there really isn't alot of personal business that is being done with the cruisers that involves factors such as the officer not being armed, not being basically observant, not monitoring a radio, not being willing to take action if necessary, etc.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 10-31-2013 at 08:34..
Bruce M is online now  
Old 10-31-2013, 08:34   #213
Cavalry Doc
Silver Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,189


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
No I think the ironic part is the part about "minimal personal use" that seems to be missed here. What exactly do you picture guys doing with their cruisers?


The Okie Corral



I think it is reasonably settled (for most, apparently including the IRS) that the above is not really all that common and that there really isn't alot of personal business that is being done with the cruisers that involves factors such as the officer not being armed, not being bascially observant, not monitoring a radio, not being willing totake action i necessary, etc.
There are four cruisers parked on my street (a cul-de-sac) from time to time. I'm not sure how much that might make some would be bad guy pick another street, but I'm OK with them being there.
Cavalry Doc is online now  
Old 10-31-2013, 08:39   #214
racerford
Senior Member
 
racerford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: DFW area
Posts: 4,871


DanaT,

The fact that this argument has continued on for so long, and the thousands of officers that take home cruisers, are not audited, penalized and fined every year, tells you it is not clear.

If you cannot see that, you are not as smart as I thought you were. Or you are just arguing to argue.

I stand by my statement that if tax regulations were clear we wouldn't nearly so many tax accountants and tax lawyers.
racerford is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 09:18   #215
The Fist Of Goodness
Senior Member
 
The Fist Of Goodness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falling into Crime's Dinner Party.
Posts: 2,061
Regarding take home cars: At a federal LE level (and I would bet that it is the same at the state and local level), a take home vehicle is for the benefit of the agency or government, not the individual employee. Having agents respond directly where needed, as opposed to rushing to their duty station to pick up their GOV is in the government's best interest. There are very clear prohibitions on using personal vehicles on duty.

That bring said, they are not for commuting. If an agent does nothing but drive their GOV to and from the office every day, they might end up using their POV to drive to work.



Sent from my HTC One X+ using Ohub Campfire mobile app
__________________
Quote:
Don't forget that everything we know is being filtered through the media which is like playing a game of telephone with mentally challenged people in the middle.
The Fist Of Goodness is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 09:24   #216
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerford View Post
DanaT,

The fact that this argument has continued on for so long, and the thousands of officers that take home cruisers, are not audited, penalized and fined every year, tells you it is not clear.

If you cannot see that, you are not as smart as I thought you were. Or you are just arguing to argue.

I stand by my statement that if tax regulations were clear we wouldn't nearly so many tax accountants and tax lawyers.
You are mixing enforcement with statute.

Many (I would say the majority) of business owners who buy "business vehicles" and take a section 479 deduction on a luxury SUV (they must be over 6000lbs GVWR to qualify for a 479) take a 100% deduction yet use the vehicles for a lot of person use (dare I say many buy a personal vehicle and take it as a business expense). The IRS doesn't monitor business/personal use but the tax payer is responsible for self reporting. This is the "voluntary" part of the tax system.

Where people get caught is when someone is POed at them

and someone finds this website:
http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/How-D...ud-Activity%3F

It could be a disgruntled ex-employee. It could be an ex-wife. Etc. etc. In the instance of police car/dump truck/etc maybe the ex drives buy every morning and takes a picture of the vehicle at home and turns it into the IRS.

Personal use of a business vehicle is clearly taxable income by the statutes and is supposed to be reported. Whether a person reports the income as they are supposed to is second question. If the IRS enforces is yet a third question.

As an example, how many people file with their state the required personal property tax forms? How many people even know they are supposed to? How many people get away with not paying it on a yearly basis when they actually should?


An example
http://www.oregon.gov/DOR/ptd/Pages/valfact.aspx
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 09:46   #217
cyphertext
Senior Member
 
cyphertext's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,487
I just texted one of my friends who is a cop and has a take home cruiser... When he gets in his cruiser to "drive to work", he let's dispatch know that his is in the car and is in service. That is not personal use.
cyphertext is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 10:46   #218
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,588
Blog Entries: 1


Bingo.

More of the same. Some who've shown time and again they have no problem talking about things they don't know about. The arrogance of ignorance leads them to think they can Google any subject and become an instant expert, because they're so intelligent. The exercise of bias/agenda prevents any possibility of learning (the proof of which is we've seen this same show over & over...).

Anyway, happy Halloween folks!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 4
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?

Last edited by TBO; 10-31-2013 at 10:47..
TBO is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 13:04   #219
Snaps
Hail 2 The King
 
Snaps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: SWPA sticks
Posts: 3,222
Not really the topic but it's in this thread. Friend of mine is an air Marshall and doesn't fit tne description previously given when he does fly
__________________
Brad
Snaps is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 13:06   #220
rppnj
Senior Member
 
rppnj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 527
The ranks of the NFL are so filled with thugs, management should be worried more about the players being armed, not the Police. Police spend their hard-earned money to buy outrageously overpriced tickets so that they can take their kids to a game (maybe once a year if they can afford it) so management can pay their NFL prima-donnas millions of dollars. These same 'chemically enhanced' thugs would be sweeping up at Micky D's if not for the steroids that turn them into 'Incredible Hulks' with uniforms.
__________________
'Life is tough...it's even tougher if you're stupid!'
-John Wayne

'Integrity is who you are and what you do when no one is watching.'
-rppnj
rppnj is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 18:02   #221
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyphertext View Post
I just texted one of my friends who is a cop and has a take home cruiser... When he gets in his cruiser to "drive to work", he let's dispatch know that his is in the car and is in service. That is not personal use.
Amazing. I already addressed this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post

One of the keys of when you are considered to be working is when and where you punch in (or if you are required to record hours).

Basically, use the duck test. If it seems like it is more then minimal personal use, then it is.
So you are trying to say an employee on the clock is not using something for personal use? Whoa. What a revelation.

You know what else, before he called in (which is his "punch in") he wasnt covered by workers comp. As soon as he is on the clock he is covered by workers comp.

In fact, if they were not worried about the personal use issue, why would they even need to bother calling in?

Isnt it great when you follow logic and the statutes?
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 18:04   #222
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaps View Post
Not really the topic but it's in this thread. Friend of mine is an air Marshall and doesn't fit tne description previously given when he does fly
Go ask him what passengers being moved from seats next to the cockpit for "security grounds" mean?

Are you saying that he does in fact drink alcohol while on duty on a flight? Are you saying he wears headphones and while watching the TV? Are you saying that he flys in a middle seat in the middle of the airplane? You said he doesnt meet the profile I described.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 18:40   #223
cyphertext
Senior Member
 
cyphertext's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
Amazing. I already addressed this.



So you are trying to say an employee on the clock is not using something for personal use? Whoa. What a revelation.

You know what else, before he called in (which is his "punch in") he wasnt covered by workers comp. As soon as he is on the clock he is covered by workers comp.

In fact, if they were not worried about the personal use issue, why would they even need to bother calling in?

Isnt it great when you follow logic and the statutes?
You are so wrong and can't even admit it. He reports in so that dispatch is aware of where he is, so that he can be routed to an emergency if he is the closest. His shift has not started yet.
cyphertext is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 18:50   #224
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi View Post
A cops place of business is his jurisdiction.
You should probably brush up on what tax law says is the primary place of business...

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/280A

280A(c)

(A), the term “principal place of business” includes a place of business which is used by the taxpayer for the administrative or management activities of any trade or business of the taxpayer if there is no other fixed location of such trade or business where the taxpayer conducts substantial administrative or management activities of such trade or business.

I.e. for an LEO that would be the police station/city hall/sheriff's office/etc.

The shoulder of an interstate is not considered a "principal place of business" under tax law. You may conduct business there (just a ditch digger conducts business there) but that is not the "principal place of business" for him either. He may hardly ever set foot in the principal place of business, but principal place of business is defined.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 10-31-2013, 19:13   #225
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,829
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyphertext View Post
You are so wrong and can't even admit it. He reports in so that dispatch is aware of where he is, so that he can be routed to an emergency if he is the closest. His shift has not started yet.
You are now trying to mix compensate hours as defined in FLSA.

Many employers try and play games to not pay what is required under FLSA even though be definition the employee is "on the clock"

The general statement by the Department of Labor about FLSA is:

Travel That is All in a Day's Work: Time spent by an employee in travel as part of their principal activity, such as travel from job site to job site during the workday, is work time and must be counted as hours worked.


Home to Work Travel: An employee who travels from home before the regular workday and returns to his/her home at the end of the workday is engaged in ordinary home to work travel, which is not work time.

The home to work travel, matches what the IRS says is personal.

I personally dont like paying the amount of taxes that Americans pay. I also think all this crap with the American tax system is really broken.

People can easily take advantage of the tax code for legal tax breaks. I am not saying legal tax breaks are fair or right. I personally believe too many special interest groups have gotten so many special tax breaks added that the tax code is sickening.

That said, I have a problem with people that knowingly take non-allowed deductions for the simple fact they can get away with it. An example, is earlier I said business owners with 479 deduction on SUVs and basically use the vehicle as personal use. Yes, they almost always get away with it but they also knowingly are taking a non-allowed deduction. I feel the same about using a company vehicle as an employee for personal use and not claiming it as income. There is a difference between the employee that uses the company car for "minimal personal use" in commuting and one that uses it more often then not. This is the same as business owners; using the 479 deducted SUV occasionally for personal use is one thing but using it as a primary personal vehicle is another.

In general, why my tax advisers have told me.

Do not have a business owned vehicle and not a separate personal vehicle; you cannot make the argument that the business vehicle is not for personal use.

For the business vehicle, have anyone who uses them write in a log the starting mileage, ending mileage, purpose of use and sign and date. This way if someone is audit it can be shown it was used for business and not personal use.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:04.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,123
328 Members
795 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42