however, when a taxpayer files both, Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC, for a actor for the same year, there is a proletarian classification topic based on facts of the encase .
IRC Section and Treas. Regulation
- IRC Section 7436
- IRC Section 6011
- IRC Section 6041
- IRC Section 6051
Resources (Court Cases, Chief Counsel Advice, Revenue Rulings, Internal Resources)
When the taxpayer filed both Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC for a proletarian, the examiner should consider whether :
- The worker was treated as an employee for part of the year and an independent contractor for a separate part of the year (i.e., payments reported on Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC were for the same services but distinct periods of time during the year).
- The worker was performing two or more distinct services and the taxpayer considered the worker to be an employee for one service and an independent contractor for the other service (i.e., dual status worker).
- The payment reported on Form 1099-MISC represented additional compensation to the worker in his capacity as an employee for which he received compensation reported on Form W-2 (e.g., a bonus payment).
Worker was treated as an employee for part of the year
Examiners often encounter situations where a actor was treated as an employee for character of the year and an independent contractor for a separate part of the class. The interrogation of whether the actor should have been treated as an employee for the period of time the actor was treated as an independent contractile organ is a proletarian classification consequence. The fact that the taxpayer treated the worker as an employee for part of the year does not turn the examination of the time period of time the proletarian was treated as an mugwump contractor into a engage consequence.
The taxpayer treated the workers as employees from January 1, 2019, through June 30, 2019. All recompense paid to workers for this period was reported as wages on Forms 941 and the taxpayer filed Forms W-2 reporting the recompense paid to the workers for this period. The taxpayer reclassified the workers as independent contractors beginning on July 1, 2019 and continued to treat the workers as freelancer contractors for the remainder of 2019. The compensation paid to the workers for the period from July 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, was reported on Forms 1099-MISC as non-employee recompense in box 7. The workers performed the same services and there was no change in control factors for the menstruation from July 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019 .
Since the taxpayer treated the workers as autonomous contractors for a menstruation of time distinct from the period of time the workers were treated as employees, an examination of the status of the workers for July 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019 is a proletarian classification issue .
Dual Status Workers
When a taxpayer files both a Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC for a worker for the like year, and payments reported on each information come back were made during the same period of time, the taxpayer may argue that the worker was performing two separate and clear-cut services – one as an employee and one as an freelancer contractile organ. Examiners must develop the facts to determine whether the workers were truly performing separate and distinct services as an employee and independent contractor. The examination of whether the worker was clearly performing classify and distinct services, and whether the worker was an employee for Form 1099-MISC services, is a actor classification write out. The facts relating to Form W-2 services would not be considered in deciding whether the actor is an employee for Form 1099-MISC services. If the worker was not performing separate and distinct services concurrently, the return will be a wage offspring, not a worker classification issue.
During an employment tax examen, the examiner found the taxpayer filed both a Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC in the same year for a worker. The taxpayer explained that the actor performed dual services. The proletarian was treated as an employee for services performed as an car mechanic. The proletarian was treated as an independent contractor for services performed as a car salesman. The examiner determined that the worker performed services as an car machinist on Monday through Thursday each week and as a car salesman on Friday and Saturday. As an car mechanic, the worker was paid an hourly rate of $ 40 per hour which was reported on Form W-2. As a car salesman, the worker was paid entirely a commission for each car sold. The examiner verified the perpetration payments based on sales records and confirmed these amounts were reported on Form 1099-MISC .
The examination of whether the worker should have been treated as an employee for services performed as a car salesman is a proletarian classification return. The fact that the worker was treated as an employee for services performed as an car mechanic is not relevant to the emergence of whether the worker is an employee for services performed as a car salesman. alone the facts particular to his services as a cable car salesman must be analyzed to determine whether the actor is an employee with deference to services as a cable car salesman.
During an interrogation of a taxpayer ‘s 2019 employment tax returns, the examiner found the taxpayer filed both Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC for several workers. The taxpayer explained that the workers were mortgage brokers performing double services. The taxpayer considered the workers to be independent contractors for selling mortgages, and employees for the time spent completing the paperwork to process the mortgages. The workers were paid a flat hourly rate for all services ; however, the taxpayer allocated the recompense to the workers as 80 % for selling mortgages and 20 % for completing paperwork. The examiner concluded that completing the paperwork to process the mortgages sold is region of the same services provided by the workers for selling the mortgages. Since alone one service is provided, these are not double condition workers. The interrogation is a engage return because the compensation reported on Form 1099-MISC was for the same services for which wages were reported on Form W-2 .
Additional Compensation Payments Reported on Forms 1099-MISC
When a taxpayer files both Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC for a worker for the same year, and the requital reported on Form 1099-MISC can intelligibly be identified as extra recompense ( such as a taxable fringe benefit ), the interrogation of whether the extra recompense is subject to employment tax is a wage issue. The consideration is whether the payment meets the definition of wages or is excludable under a specific Code part .
During an examination of the taxpayer ‘s 2019 use tax returns, the examiner found the taxpayer filed both Form W-2 and Form 1099-MISC for respective workers. The taxpayer explained that the amounts reported on the Forms 1099-MISC were year-end bonuses paid to employees. Since bonuses were paid to workers for services performed as employees, the bonus payments are considered extra wages subject to employment taxes. The examination would not be considered a worker classification issue .
Issue Indicators or Audit Tips
- Prior to contacting the taxpayer, the examiner should review the tax returns and IDRS information to identify potential issues. This may include reviewing Forms W-2 and 1099 filings to identify potential worker classification issues, or whether the taxpayer is filing both Forms 1099-MISC and Forms W-2 for any worker.
- Compare Forms W-2 to Forms 1099 to see if the taxpayer filed both forms for any worker.
- Inquire during taxpayer interviews whether they have workers paid both as an employee and contractor.
- Review the organizations payables for payments to the same workers for different categories, such as salary and then also as “contract”.