Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck United States

IRS Delays Gig-Tax Filing Rule for Side Hustles of More Than $600 (wsj.com) 125

Posted by msmash from the some-relief dept.
The Internal Revenue Service on Friday gave millions of Americans a one-year reprieve on new tax-reporting requirements, delaying implementation of a law that requires e-commerce platforms such as eBay, Etsy and Airbnb to give the tax agency information on users with more than $600 in revenue. From a report: The delay means the platforms won't have to send sellers and the IRS a blizzard of 1099-K tax forms early in 2023, and it gives opponents of the $600 threshold more time to push for a change in the law next year.

"The additional time will help reduce confusion during the coming 2023 tax filing season and provide more time for taxpayers to prepare and understand the new reporting requirements," said Acting IRS Commissioner Doug O'Donnell. Congress passed the $600 threshold for Form 1099-K reports as part of the American Rescue Plan Act in March 2021, scheduling it to take effect for tax year 2022. Until the change, platforms had to report users' income to the IRS if they had more than 200 transactions and $20,000 of revenue. Lawmakers lowered the threshold to boost tax compliance in an area where it is often lacking -- unreported business income.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IRS Delays Gig-Tax Filing Rule for Side Hustles of More Than $600 More

IRS Delays Gig-Tax Filing Rule for Side Hustles of More Than $600

Comments Filter:

  • This Rule Was Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jwhyche ( 6192 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @04:13PM (#63153690) Homepage

    Every month my roomate paypals me $600 for rent and bills. Every few weeks I have lunch with my daughter and when we split the check I cashapp her a few dollars or she does me. Now how do I prove these are not payments but just paybacks?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by kmoser ( 1469707 )
      When sending money, Paypal asks whether it's for business or personal use.No idea if Cashapp or Venmo do the same thing, but presumably they'll start, so people can make a distinction.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by kellin ( 28417 )

        Venmo added an option for "business or friend" earlier this year. I dont use cashapp so I have no idea if they do. Presumably they will have to, as well.

        • Re: This Rule Was Bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)

          by saloomy ( 2817221 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @05:11PM (#63153792)
          This all has nothing to do with it. It is election season, so expect this to be delayed again. This is in lieu of audits by the IRS for hundreds of tax dollars /person. What we should do is forego income entirely, from businesses and individuals. We should tax only on consumption. A nations sales tax. No IRS. No returns. Incentivize saving money in your local bank so they can lend it out, paying interest to you, collecting interest from lendees. That would be the best solution. Every billionaire with a yacht would pay hefty consumption tax and the rate can be adjusted annually to the prior yearâ(TM)s expenditures. We get all the government we pay for. We allow the existing bonds to expire over the next 30 years, and issue no new bonds. We will be debt free and fully funded. Everyone pays their share

          • Try one weird trick that no civilization has ever made work! (Tax collectors hate it!)

            Also, snark aside, we had an election just over a month ago. If it is "election season" again already, then we should be happy that our representatives feel so accountable.

            • Tax collectors hate it because it simplifies tax collecting and allows no subsidies or special interests. No civilization has made it work? You must not be from one of the 44 states with sales tax. Also, those are not decent counterarguments. No civilization had made electricity work, so maybe Edison and Tesla should have gone into other fields

            • It will be election season FOR SURE in January, 2024, and the likelihood that this level of tax documentation will be generated when the current administration is trying to get re-elected.

              Starting this on 2023 (for tax year 2022) made sense because it put some distance between the new policy and their re-election campaigns.

            • lol @ thinking there haven't been civilizations that lasted with income tax. you're not reaching very far back in time there, are you?

          • Re: This Rule Was Bullshit (Score:5, Informative)

            by stabiesoft ( 733417 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @06:28PM (#63153910) Homepage
            You must certainly be aware billionaires would evade the tax by buying it out of the country. NY state has huge problems collecting art purchases for this very reason. Rich buy it out of state. How hard do you think it is for the very rich to buy it out of the country. And as you are also certainly aware, sales taxes are highly regressive. Income taxes at least can try to be progressive and usually are up to the very rich. It is impossible for someone working at google making 300K/yr to not claim the income. The W-2 is pretty obvious.

            • sales taxes are highly regressive.

              A pure sales tax is regressive.

              In practice, sales taxes usually exclude food, rent, and other necessities[1], making them much less regressive.

              Everything doesn't have to be taxed at the same rate. We already have higher taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and gasoline. We could do the same for luxury goods like yachts and expensive cars.

              [1] In California, flower seeds are taxed, but vegetable seeds are not. I tried to argue with the cashier that some flowers, such as nasturtiums, are edible, but she just laughed at

              • Hawaii is great; sales tax is on services, food, rent, diapers... everything is equal!

                Fortunately it is 5%, but still a painful tax.

                Well, not as painful as the transient occupancy taxes (to which they add sales tax as well...)

              • Everything doesn't have to be taxed at the same rate. We already have higher taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and gasoline. We could do the same for luxury goods like yachts and expensive cars.

                This backfires every time it's tried - I remember when the US gov't had the brilliant idea to tax luxury yachts to finally get millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share, only it clobbered the shipbuilders and ancillary industries putting thousands of workers out of their jobs.

                https://www.nytimes.com/1992/0... [nytimes.com]

                • it clobbered the shipbuilders and ancillary industries putting thousands of workers out of their jobs.

                  This is the Broken Window Fallacy [wikipedia.org].

                  If vandals don't break windows, glaziers will be unemployed. If rich guys don't buy yachts, shipbuilders will be unemployed.

                  But in both cases, the money will be spent on something else (or invested), generating jobs elsewhere in the economy.

            • How are sales taxes regressive if everyone pays the same rate on every thing? That is perfectly, absolutely fair. Neither regressive nor progressive
              • If you do not understand this fundamental fact of economics, useless to discuss with you. I'm out.
                • Great argument. Sales Taxes are neither regressive nor progressive. They are perfectly fair. Everyone should be paying the same rate. Progressive Taxes are poorly named (maybe punitive would be better) and regressive taxes are what we actually have in many circumstances since the wealthy used the 14,000 page tax code better than some poor schmuck getting his W2 paycheck taxes paid to the government for him whether he likes it or not.

              • Because the 7% tax on an item "hurts" the lower-income person than the wealthy person.

                The fact that everyone pays the same amount on their purchase of the same item at the same price, while mathematically fair can easily be described hurting the lower-income voter for political advantage, claiming "they can't afford it."

                Politicians have convinced people that pay no net income taxes that people that actually pay any net income taxes are somehow not paying their fair share and need to be paying more...

                • What is fair is fair. Regressive taxes tax poor people more, like income vs capital gains. What is what we have now. Progressive taxes tax wealthier people more like the buckets of income tax.

                  A sales tax is neither regressive nor progressive if all services are taxed at the same rate.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by stikves ( 127823 )

              It is called a "use tax", and California has this.

              Basically, if you buy anything in California, you pay a roughly 9% sales tax.
              If you import anything out of state, you pay a similar 9% use tax.

              So, no you cannot buy your Tesla and have it delivered to Nevada to avoid the tax. You'll have to pay up the difference to "use" it in California.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by narcc ( 412956 )

            So your solution is a regressive tax that would hurt the people you allege this negatively impacts far more?

            You should have posted AC. This is embarassing.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            The problem with consumption tax is that it hits the ordinary people and the poor much harder than the rich. It's easier for the rich to dodge too.

            The burden would be too high if the tax take was too be maintained.

            • The consumption tax can be limited to non-essential items, excluding things like rent, medical expenses, food, clothes, etc. - this isn't anything different than our current sales tax system where 'essentials' are tax-exempt.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                Doesn't really help that much. For example, businesses are usually exempt so people who can buy things through their businesses. Ordinary people who just work for a salary or wage can't use that dodge.

                • You got to start somewhere. And most likely moving personal expense to your business is tax fraud. For instance business suits are not considered business expenses.

                  If you get caught by the tax auditor, the fine will probably be substancial.

          • We should tax only on consumption. A nations sales tax. No IRS. No returns. Incentivize saving money in your local bank so they can lend it out, paying interest to you, collecting interest from lendees. That would be the best solution. Every billionaire with a yacht would pay hefty consumption tax and the rate can be adjusted annually to the prior yearâ(TM)s expenditures.

            Yep. Check it out. www.fairtax.org.

            And its better than a flat tax because there is a prebate every month to reimburse you for what you would spend up to the poverty line for necessities. So the poor could effectively pay zero taxes still. Low income folks are impacted more on a flat tax than the affluent.

            But dont let the lies of the detractors fool you. Yes its a 23% tax, but the IRS is GONE (by law it cant kick in until the IRS goes away) so you get most of that back by taking home your entire paycheck. So

            • I actually checked out FairTax.org. The name sounded nice; they lost me at "Learn how the Biden Administration is weaponizing the IRS." The irony of ignoring how the Trump Administration actually did weaponize the IRS kind of kills any potential credibility.

              Don't get me wrong-- of course the IRS is a weapon, just like it is a tool for revenue generation for operation of government. Threats of audits are scary if you have complicated taxes. I'm not threatened anymore... I made my taxes simpler to the poin

              • The irony of ignoring how the Trump Administration actually did weaponize the IRS

                Yes and? Is Trump president?

                News flash, every president weaponizes the IRS!! Obama did also! But what good is it talking about that now, only what the current president is doing matters and can be changed.

          • It is election season

            I'm pretty sure I can find a reference to this reasoning being given literally every month of every year here on Slashdot. The USA is in constant state of either having elections or campaigning. "Election season" has lost all meaning.

            • But real election season just the first 6 years of a presidency. Want something like this? Do it after your second midterm in office. You aren't running for anything anymore and can make stupid decisions
      • And where in the new law does it say the $600 threshold only applies to transfers declared as business, rather than personal use? If the law doesn't make that distinction, it's absolutely irrelevant whether you declare it as business or personal - the current lawmakers want their cut.

        • And where in the new law does it say the $600 threshold only applies to transfers declared as business, rather than personal use?

          I can't find reference to it but I am pretty sure I read it did include that exemption.

          However that makes the whole thing pointless since everyone will just tell you to mark it personal.

          So basically a bad law, either evil or pointless, that should be tossed out not just delayed.

      • When sending money, Paypal asks whether it's for business or personal use.

        And what is to stop people from marking every transaction they ever send as personal?

        I am on some forums where people buy/sell things, as a side business - they already explicitly state all buyers need to pay marking the transaction as friends/family.

        So what good is a rule the entire population will simply hack around? Why even have it, except to use as a tool to punish selected targets?

    • Intent. The first is clearly related to their share of rent, the second is clearly a familial relation. In neither case are you generating any income from the event.

      Try harder.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Ok genius, everyone is aware of that...but you still have to PROVE it to the IRS. Otherwise it's just a "magical" credit to your account, that is being relayed to an agency that can punish you in various forms.

        • Ok genius, everyone is aware of that...but you still have to PROVE it to the IRS. Otherwise it's just a "magical" credit to your account, that is being relayed to an agency that can punish you in various forms.

          The IRS is not going to take one look at this. And even, if by chance, they do, they'll clearly see the intent.

          What they are looking for is a constant stream of money coming in in varying amounts from some type of employment. That is why the business part is required to submit their portion. The IRS can match up what the business part is saying with what shows on your return. Just like is done now on places such as Onlyfans.

          • The IRS has already calculated how much revenue the newly-authorized 87,000 new employees will generate. The bulk of those workers will be performing audits, and the bulk of the audits performed historically are targeted at "lower income" earners (under $250K).

    • Why are you still using Paypal... they will take your money, and you will also owe tax on it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by narcc ( 412956 )

        Most people aren't scumbag tax cheats and thus have no problem whatsoever with this change.

        • Most people aren't scumbag tax cheats

          Spoken like a true elitist scumbag! The kind the peasants would have paid special attention to in the French Revolution.

          A guy just making ends meet in an expensive city has a moral duty to evade taxes as much as possible, as they effect that individual to a far more unfair extent than the elite like yourself living in that same city.

          How cruel, and frankly evil of you to attempt to pry money out of them for your own needs.

          But then we all know you are "Narcc", ultimate to

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jwhyche ( 6192 )

        Because my dumbass room mate won't use anything else.

    • it's easier than you think. paypal won't report this transaction because it's a friends and family transaction. only payments made for "good and services" will be reported. so even if this law were to apply for filing 2022 taxes next year you would have not had to declare them at all

    • > Every month my roomate paypals me $600 for rent and bills. Every few weeks I have lunch with my daughter and when we split the check I cashapp her a few dollars or she does me

      I don't get why you'd have to justify that, is paypal really considered a platform 'such as' these:

      "a law that requires e-commerce platforms such as ***eBay, Etsy and Airbnb*** to give the tax agency information on users with more than $600 in revenue"

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by narcc ( 412956 )

      Oh, such a mystery...

      Should I just assume that everyone complaining about this is incapable of simple math or filling out a tax form?

      This should only affect you in a meaningful way if you're actively cheating on your taxes.

      • You probably should replace actively with creatively

      • Once implemented, this rule will cause countless 1099K forms to be sent to you and the IRS, and if you choose to not account for them on your income tax filings, the IRS will certainly want you to explain why.

        You will be on the defensive, trying to explain you were only selling un-needed household items and it wasn't a taxable "side hustle"... Good Luck.

        I understand many Americans decline to deduct home office expenses because it is a red flag for tge IRS to audit your return. I suspect countless Americans

        • Please tell me how I am going to get countless forms!

          I don't sell on hustles platforms. I use cash apps occasionally, but all these transactions are for friends and family and are tagged as such. So none of my usage fall into the "goods and services" criteria.

          So who is going to send me tax forms exactly?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by narcc ( 412956 )

          if you choose to not account for them on your income tax filings, the IRS will certainly want you to explain why.

          I want to to explain why as well! Why are you trying to hide your income?

          Stop trying to defend scumbag tax cheats.

          You will be on the defensive, trying to explain you were only selling un-needed household items and it wasn't a taxable "side hustle"... Good Luck.

          You're a lying sack of shit. It's trivial to tell the difference between a yard sale and a business.

          I understand many Americans decline to deduct home office expenses because it is a red flag for tge IRS to audit your return.

          You're an idiot and so is anyone who declines to deduct home office expenses because of some nebulous fear that they'll be "audited". Not that it should matter even if you weren't full of shit. An audit is nothing if you're not a lying scumbag. The only reason to fear an audit is if you're

    • If you make $7200 a year off a room, you should include it in your income declaration and pay income tax on that. If it's more splitting bills with a common landlord, you two should pay separately.

      Lunch money have to be much lower amounts than rent, nothing that tax services will go after you about. If you are concerned you could just alternate payments and take note of the sums but only transfer once a year, it's only going to be a very small amount lower than tax threshold.

      • If I eat a $50 lunch with a friend every week, and if that friend sends me his $25 share of the bill over a payment service, that adds up to about $1,250/year, far in excess of the $600/yr threshold.

        If cognizant of the above possible tax implications you alternate, you each take turns paying the lunch bill, you'll still exceed the $600/year threshold.

        The only way to avoid the above scenarios is to either split the check at the restaurant, or simply take turns paying the bill without reimbursing each other..

        • that adds up to about $1,250/year,

          I meant you pay in turns and transfer the *balance* once a year. The balance after one year of paying in turns is what is going to be very small (standard deviation of the invoices along the year divided by square root of number of weeks in the year see https://stats.libretexts.org/B... [libretexts.org] equation 5.3.6). Calculating balance is certainly unnecessary, but GP seems to enjoy mathematical precision by transferring "few dollars" to his daughter (or receiving few dollars) every week.

    • I for one seriously have to be skeptical of a federal income tax return that refers to business plans as hustle or gig Soon it might even ask if I tip waitresses.

    • Don't worry, we're unlikely to see this ever be implemented, since they've now "kicked-the-can" to 2024, which just happens to be an election year, and it would be a horrible time for the current administration to be seen as "sticking it to the little guy" by going after their side-hustle income...

      I think it will be tough for them to claim they're going after the millionaires and billionaires by tracking YOUR side-hustle income selling handmade items on Etsy...

    • Cash and barter are the sole transaction methods which offer privacy. The race to a cashless society put convenience over everything else, as if cash was somehow difficult to use.

      Cash also works during grid and network outages. I carry about a thousand dollars (fear not, thieves don't yet have X-ray vision) which is not a lot in 2022 and of little consequence were I mugged (I refuse to live and work and play where that is reasonably likely, having grown up in a place where it WAS likely!).

      I also tip in cash

      • Being slightly blunt helps: "I tip in cash, fuck the Man" goes over very well

        Another way to get across this message is to write "Taxes are theft" in the tip line then tip in cash, which I have seen some people do as well.

    • Now how do I prove these are not payments but just paybacks?

      Keep accurate records. And if you're unable to keep records indicating they are paybacks then they are not and you should pay taxes on them.

    • With more than half the US population not paying any federal income tax but voting on what the government should be spending money on, the current administration needs to find more sources of income, hence this new law. Believe it or not, if your daughter cooks you dinner or washes your dishes, technically you owe taxes on that service you received from her, our politicians just haven't figured out how to enforce it yet.

  • 600 seems low (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @04:29PM (#63153714)
    That’ll sweep up a ton of casual transactions, create serious headaches for people, and it won’t really increase tax revenues much. 6000 would be much more reasonable. If you’re recieving more than 5k in a year through paypal, you aint some just getting payback for picking up a lunch tab, you’re running a busineess and uncle sam is due his taxes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kmoser ( 1469707 )
      One of your criticisms of the $600 limit is that it "won't really increase tax revenues much," but do you realize that your suggestion to raise the limit to $6,000 would result in even *less* tax revenue?

      • it's funny when a site that uses to represent nerds, misses a simply inverted mythical-man month fallacy...

        Yes, you end up with more taxable "revenue" which largely will be deducted since most of it isn't "revenue". So to try to capture that tax, you might try to increase auditing but even if you didn't on whatever would be currently audited, you increased your work. Now all those people at the IRS get paid and by Including so many transactions you exponentially grew this problem. So ultimately there is a b

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Most of the auditing will probably be automatic. If you get work though Fivr or some similar service, they can simply report your income to the IRS.

      • The issue is that if selling a sofa for $600 qualifies as business income then it also has business expenses associated with it, and it is likely a money losing transaction. The resulting administrative and accounting expenses, fights with the IRS, audits, and legal expenses are likely to cost more than the resulting revenue.

        It will be a clear win for the lawyers and accountants involved. The additional paperwork should generate significant revenue, which can definitely be claimed as a business expense.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by slazzy ( 864185 )
        While that's true, I think it would be better to charge a slightly higher tax rate on that $6,000 than waste millions of hours of peoples time on meaningless accounting troubles for non-business people. In the dystopian future, I'm sure they'll be tracking everything to the penny but for now let's not waste too much of peoples time.

      • It is estimated that this rules change will generate an additional $8 billion in tax revenue through 2032. Doesn't seem worth it to hassle millions of Americans with additional filing requirements for such a small sum of Federal tax revenue. Unless you're a tax accountant.

        • It is not going to change tax filing for most americans because they don't sell on those platforms. Your weekly $25 venmo from your friend for repaying lunch does not qualify as a business expense. So it won't count toward that $600 limit and you won't get a tax form!

    • Re:600 seems low (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @05:13PM (#63153804)
      There's already talked in Congress of a law to raise it. Usually when you have a valueless low it's specifically meant to Target lower income people so that the IRS is busy with them and can't go after the super Rich.

      Stuff like this is bau functioning as designed. It also serves a double purpose and that it pisses people off and makes them angry at taxation which you can then use to argue against taxation in general and then cut taxes on those super rich people.

      It's all the giant trick.

      • Work, income, capital gains, dividends, gifts, inheritance should not be taxed at all. Only destruction of resources (consumption that destroys products and consumes services) should be taxed if anything should be taxed at all (I am against all taxes, everything should be paid for by user fees and donations).

        People's work must not be taxed by those who have the political power, they must not be allowed to tax work. There must not be any forced redistribution of work, income, investment capital, inheritanc

    • It's $600 aggregate, an easy amount to exceed if you're paying a cleaning service, handyman, babysitter, etc. for service over the course of a year.

  • Use cash or crypto, people (Score:4, Informative)

    by bigbang137 ( 2953369 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @04:37PM (#63153728)
    Cash exists. Crypto exists. Private wallets exist. Stablecoins, gold-backed coins (PAXG), bitcoin lightning, and Monero exist. Learn to use them.

    • crypto is property according to the IRS so guess what, if you buy a pizza with crypto you will have to pay capital gains if the bitcoin price was higher than what you paid for it.

      crypto is tax hostile and that's why it will NEVER succeed as a currency unless the tax laws are changed.

      • Rather, the IRS is hostile to crypto.

        Multiple nations now reflect BTC as currency, and thus don't have this tax implication.

        If/when BTC gets wider recognition, the IRS may follow suit. This means that as long as BTC is stable an unchanged, this increases the likelihood that the IRS will change.

    • You know they're regulating crypto now too right? But even if they weren't what good is it going to do to have crypto if you can't spend it anywhere. The reason this is a problem is because you get people who are just selling a handful of things on eBay or paying somebody back for lunch. You can't really do that with crypto because cryptos value swings too wildly to make it a useful store of value.
      • Stablecoins don't swing a tall. PAXG doesn't swing much since it matches the price of gold. Bitcoin will always swing, but the more that people will use Bitcoin, the less the swings will matter. DCAing into Bitcoin over two years can make it a store of value.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by narcc ( 412956 )

      LOL! Crypto is a scam, not a currency. Unlike cash, Crypto leaves an indelible paper trail. Only an idiot would try to use crypto to hide income form the IRS.

      Then again, criminal scumbag tax cheats like you aren't known for being the best and brightest.

      Good luck unloading your monopoly money. You're very rapidly running out of suckers.

      • It is you who is the criminal scumbag for hiding the truth about national fiat currencies. They have devalued over 99% over the last one hundred years. They're subject to prolonged high rates of inflation. In comparison, gold has preserved value pretty well. Dumbasses like you are the reason the government fucks over the people.
    • Great idea, let me use a bullshit ponzi coin that can tank value at any time.

    • Cash exists. Crypto exists. Private wallets exist. Stablecoins, gold-backed coins (PAXG), bitcoin lightning, and Monero exist. Learn to use them.

      One of those is not like the other. Specifically you have be quite stupid to use crypto - a system that maintains a public an open ledger of transactions in any attempt to dodge taxes.

      But then you're promoting the use of crypto so stupid is par for the course.

      • Only a stupid person would make such simplistic assumptions. Layer 2 Lightning transactions with Bitcoin are not done on easy trackable ledger. Secondly, Tor and open wifis exist. Third, Monero is not an open ledger. You're assuming the use of unsafe crypto, so ignorant is par for the course. Next time, remember to use a comma.

  • The rule was bullshit indeed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Fworg64 ( 6172828 ) on Friday December 23, 2022 @04:39PM (#63153734)
    What if instead of going after people who make nik-naks in their studio apartment they added a heavy tax on people/corporations that own more than one house? I guess that would hit the "wrong" people
    • s/was/is. It is still effective for transactions starting Jan 1, 2023.
    • Most states tax property, some like texas substantially so. In TX, you get to claim the homeowners exemption on only one property if you have multiple. And it must be your "primary". This is precisely what Herschel W in some trouble, While running for Senate in GA he was claiming homeowner exemption in TX, Oops. If he had a nice house in TX, say 5M value, multiply by .02 and get 100K due annually. Exemption saves a bit, so he claimed it.

    • I lnow people who make about $100k off etsy, facebook market, and ebay. They should be paying their taxes just like me. It's only fair.

      • I agree that if you make 100k from your activities, that should be taxable. I think most people that understand the necessity of taxes would agree. After a couple dozen thousand dollars, your side hustle might be becoming your main hustle and actually be paying your bills. The change to this law to reduce the limit is hard to construe as anything other than a grab at struggling people's money. I'm having trouble thinking of ways to take rich (actually rich, not "I have money left after rent and groceries" r
  • Why is it $600? Why not just go ahead and look at everything that is $666 dollars?

  • May have to wait until after the 2024 election.

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close