TaxMama.Com
Ask TaxMama.Com
Tax Information With A Mother's Touch
line
Published by Eva Rosenberg, MBA, EA

Volume 6, Issue 285        November 26, 2004
Home Ask TaxMama Subscribe Ask TaxMamas Secrets
For Tax Pros Gift Shop Relax FAQs Contact Us Site Search
This Week's Issue
arrow Giving Thanks to Friends and Newest skills
arrow Saints on Wheels
arrow Pets R Us
arrow Roommates and Rents
arrow Because We Care
 
TaxMama's Resources and Specials
 
IRS News
arrow IRS: When Income is Subject to FICA Taxes
 
Money Funnies
arrow "Twas Right After Thanksgiving
 
Investment Secrets
Tootin` Her Own Horn
Free Workshops
Previous Issues
Our Privacy Policy

printer friendly version

line
 Current IRS Resources

» Insiders Series
Tax Seminar
» IRS Forms
»  State Tax Forms
» IRS Publications
» IRS Forms by Topic
» IRS Small
Business Resources
» U.S. House
of Representatives
» Cornell University
» John Walker of
the Swiss Fourmilab
» Tax Case Law
& Research
» John Wiley & Sons
Tax Bookstore
» John Wiley & Sons
Accounting Bookstore
» Professor
Spalding's Tax Links
» Santucci's
Bookmarks
» IRS Fun Page?!
line
Recommend TaxMama to a friend
line
E-Mail
This Page To A Friend
Your email:
Your name:
TO email:
line
line

RESOLVE to have
Perfect Credit!
Equifax
IRS News

IRS Issues Guidance on When Income is Subject to FICA Taxes


[Excerpt from Revenue Ruling 2004-109]

Situation 1
Baseball Club negotiates an employment contract with an individual player.  It is the first contract between the Club and the player.  The contract provides that the player receives a signing bonus if he reports for spring training at the time and place directed by the Club.  The contract provides that the signing bonus is not contingent on the player's future performance of services. 

Answer
Under the facts presented in Situation 1, the individual receives the signing bonus in connection with establishing the employer-employee relationship.  The individual does not provide clear, separate, and adequate consideration for the payment that is not dependent upon the employer-employee relationship and its component terms and conditions.  Thus, the signing bonus is part of the compensation the Baseball Club pays as remuneration for employment, making it wages regardless of the fact that the contract provides that the bonus is not contingent on the performance of future services.   

---

Situation 2
An employer negotiates a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with a union representing a group of its employees.  The CBA will take effect on the "ratification date," which is the date it is ratified by a majority of the union members covered by the agreement.  The CBA provides that each employee covered by the terms of the agreement who is employed by the employer as of the ratification date receives a bonus. 

Each such employee is paid the same amount regardless of compensation, seniority, position and whether or not the employee voted for ratification.  In addition, each eligible employee receives the payment even if the employee had not performed services for the employer before the ratification date.  Finally, the CBA provides that the payment is not contingent on the employee's future performance of services.

Answer
Under the facts presented in Situation 2, the employees receive the ratification bonus payments as part of a bargain that establishes the terms and conditions of the employment relationship with all of the employees covered by the CBA.  The employees do not provide clear, separate, and adequate consideration for the employer's payments that is not dependent upon the employer-employee relationship and its component terms and conditions.  The payments are part of the compensation the employer pays as remuneration for employment. Thus, the ratification bonuses are wages regardless of the fact that they are uniform in amount, do not vary based on seniority or position or any other factor, and are not explicitly contingent on the performance of services.

These rulings will appear in Internal Revenue Bulletin
2004-50, dated  December 13, 2004 ]

 

 

Interesting. This contradicts the spirit of previous rulings. Clearly, IRS is under pressure to do their best to replenish the Social Security coffers. You may want to read this whole analysis to see how they arrived at this decision.

 




TaxMama's Secrets





Library of Congress - 
ISSN 1532-0790
Copyright © 2000-2007 -
Eva Rosenberg
Subscribe | Ask TaxMama ~ Send Her Your Questions | Site Search
Home | This Week's Issue | Articles by TaxMama | For Tax Pros
Investment Secrets | IRS News | Smart Tax Moves | Critical Dates
Using Money Wisely | Money Funnies & Inspiration | Because We Care
About TaxMama | Our Privacy Policy | Legalese and Disclaimer | Press Page
Serenata Design
Site design by Serenata Design.