1997-07-22 - Re: House Tries to Liberate ICs

Header Data

From: jbaber@mi.leeds.ac.uk
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Message Hash: dc2f7645ff83751e1ca0073a089a3d706e491eb818930510717b49559fc8bbdb
Message ID: <9927.9707220856@misun2.mi.leeds.ac.uk>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-07-22 09:06:52 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:06:52 +0800

Raw message

From: jbaber@mi.leeds.ac.uk
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:06:52 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: House Tries to Liberate ICs
Message-ID: <9927.9707220856@misun2.mi.leeds.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Duncan Frissell writes:
> Notice how the following article does not mention the fact that ICs sometimes 
> neglect to send those quarterly tax payments in on time and this is why the 
> Feds dislike them.  It's not going to happen, but it would be fun if it 
> did...

The same thing is happening over here. Buisness is pushing for independant
contractors (and also heading more and more towards bonuses) whereas the
government (particually in the building industry) has changed from encouraging
this to making it harder and harder to qualify because they have just realised
that they are missing out on a great deal of tax because Employers do not have
to make National Insurance contributions for contractors and the contractors
themselves tend to pay a lot less.

Jon 






Thread