| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 1,494 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
421 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2424 Posts |
i kinda like the idea.
it lowers your tax-bracket and you pay less taxes... I guess if the price of silver dropped, they would adjust it accordingly.
also, you would definitely need a bank on board or something, that would ensure you get the value of silver your employer gave it to you at. I mean, if your employer gave you 14 silver coins worth $500, if you took those to the coin shop, you would not get that, youd get maybe %85 of that. So having a bank that would take your silver coins for the price your employer gave them to you at would be KEY.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
264 Posts |
@SDcoinguy Exchanging your silver for a fair rate is why the concept for the article sounds great but in reality will not happen. It would be an accounting and programmer's nightmare trying to individually track each coin for exchange. Don't get me wrong, our money should be backed by silver or gold again. But rather than use this method, we should be able to exchange our American Eagles at 100% of US dollar at any bank in the USA.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
122 Posts |
Seems to me that the added cost of acquiring these coins would not make it pay off. You'd have to use that price in figuring how many to pay to the employees. The employees could not sell them for that price. If the city decided to mint their own silver coins, they'd have the high cost of minting tem. One way or the other, they'll be paying more than the spot price. Plus the proce changes a lot, so they'd have to refigure it as they pay it out. Seems like a lot to trouble. Interesting idea, though.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
362 Posts |
It seems like you could get in trouble for tax evasion or something lol
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2661 Posts |
The IRS would never let it happen. I think by law the employee would still have to pay income taxes on the full $1000 no matter what method was used to pay that sum. Sounds like nothing more than a tax scam to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Japan
666 Posts |
ASE are legal tender ... with $1 face value ...in US employer just passes the tax obligation to employee do not think there is any regulation of how to account for different legal tender assets
|
|
Valued Member
United States
162 Posts |
The article itself points out that IRS regulations already address this kind of thing explicitly. It's illegal for both employer and employee, and no mercy would be shown in the inevitable sentencing, as there is no argument you can make that it was accidental - the stated intent is to avoid required taxes.
By the same logic should someone who steals 50 ASEs from a shop only be charged with petty theft, because they only stole $50? Of course not.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
Quote:
"And so the IRS is going to take the fall for it, and they're not going to be happy.'' Somehow, I don't think that this story is going to have the happy ending that Shapiro and others are thinking. The IRS is VERY much aware of the fact that payment for services (including employment) need not be in US dollars and that they are going to tax the employer and the employee on the VALUE of the payment, not on the denomination of the payment. The business man in Las Vegas who tried something similar to this may be getting some company in that prison cell of his.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
410 Posts |
I think I'll keep my direct deposit.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
493 Posts |
If I could get paid in gold or silver every payday I would be ecstatic. Depending on the size of the employer they could get quantity discounts and pass the savings on to the employees.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
Quote:
Depending on the size of the employer they could get quantity discounts and pass the savings on to the employees. Yes, that could happen but it is more likely that the employer would simply keep any extra money that came out of this deal. It's a bit like those social security arguments on the Internet where people claim that if we did not have 6.2% from our employer going into SS to match our 6.2% "contributions", we would get that as higher pay. NOT! The employer would simply keep it. Human nature being what it is, we can pretty much count on that. |
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,494 |
|
Posted 02/13/2012 1:59 pm
