On Jun 20, 4:11 pm, Jeff Wisnia wrote:
Abe wrote:
I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a bill.
The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink make
check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so I
want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and my
neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business or to
the owner?

Hmm. A couple of ways to go on this.

You could call him and say that if he wants this to be off the books,
then offer me a substantial discount.

Is that how you operate? The contractor completes the work to your
satisfaction, then you try to back-end in a discount by squeezing the
guy?

Only if he tries to get me to poay him off the books. Fair is fair.

And I agree, because avoiding paying his fair share of income taxes
means the hohorable tax payers have to pay more than their fair share.

I think anyone stupid enough to either brag about their cheating on
taxes or who asks for payment in a way which makes you suspect he is
doing so.....deserves any "dissing" he gets.

It might not just be taxes though, perhaps he's got judgements against
his business for not paying bills and is trying to avoid having your
payment grabbed for those.

Care to extrapolate beyond reason any more, or are you done? Hell,
the guy could be a mass murderer and he'll be using the money to fund
terrorism! Police! Police!

We're talking about a business arrangement. I am not in charge of
running anyone else's life other than my own. I don't want to be your
nanny, your mother, your guardian, your judge and jury, or anything
else. I expect to be treated squarely, and I'll do the same with
you. I expect you to talk to me. If you have special requests, let
me know what they are beforehand. If you mess with me, I'll smack you
down. I'm very good at that.

I do my due diligence before I hire someone. I'll know before I sign
anything if there are judgments and other complaints. I don't guess
as to someone's motivation and how they handle their finances. I
simply protect my own interests. I'm very good at that, too.

Some may want to play cop. That's fine. They're free to handle their
affairs any way they want. If I don't like the arrangement, I won't
sign on.

BTW, I've never met an "honorable" tax payer. Every single one I've
ever met has felt that they are paying too much in taxes. Haven't met
one that decided they weren't getting taxed enough and sent extra
money in to make up the difference. That's what an honorable tax
payer would do, right?

If you want to feel you're not paying any more in taxes than you have
to, you don't go running around beating up on little guys, you work
the proper channels and let your opinion be known on the _huge_
amounts of wasteful government spending. How many one-man-band
contractors would you need to bust to equal one hour of the war in
Iraq? How about tax breaks and windfall profits for Big Oil,
Halliburton (still love their briefcases), etc.?

R

RicodJour wrote:

On Jun 20, 4:11 pm, Jeff Wisnia wrote:

snipped



If you want to feel you're not paying any more in taxes than you have
to, you don't go running around beating up on little guys, you work
the proper channels and let your opinion be known on the _huge_
amounts of wasteful government spending. How many one-man-band
contractors would you need to bust to equal one hour of the war in
Iraq? How about tax breaks and windfall profits for Big Oil,
Halliburton (still love their briefcases), etc.?

R


Two wrongs still don't make a right, do they?

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.

"RicodJour" wrote in message

Is that how you operate? The contractor completes the work to your
satisfaction, then you try to back-end in a discount by squeezing the
guy?

it's called lets make a deal!

Sheesh. No one cares about who's name is on the flippin' check! As
another post mentioned, just reference the invoice number in the memo
area on the check.

I think contractors should be compelled to show each customer where the
money went

fritos
beer
fried chicken
WHAT? YOU HAD FRITOS ON MY MONEY? WHAT?!? I CAN'T BELIEVE IT!!!???

On Jun 20, 10:25 am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article .com,





RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 20, 9:49 am, Smitty Two wrote:
"Toller" wrote:
Well, if you made a check out to my company name I couldn't cash it
because
I don't have a bank account in my company name.

That's your problem, not your customer's problem.

It also sounds like you have a problem. A business agreement is a two
way street - doesn't make much sense to go half way down it before you
see the ONE WAY sign.

Talk first, sign later.

R

Yep, I have a problem -- with people who misrepresent themselves.

I pay cash to the woman who cuts my hair. And I write personal checks to
my mechanic. But my plumber, who is also a sole proprietor, is doing
business as Blue Mountain Plumbing, so I make checks out accordingly.

And I'm sure the world can sleep safe tonight, knowing your
discriminating practices are keeping us safe. The guy did the
freeking job, just like the woman who cuts your hair. Pay him and
move on.



Suppose you came to me and said your name was Barney Rubble, and you did
some work and then you asked me to pay Fred Flintstone. I'd say nuts, I
hired Barney Rubble, that's who I'm paying. Is it up to the customer to
ask the contractor, in advance, as to whether he's lying about who he
is?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 20, 12:40 pm, Pat wrote:
On Jun 20, 12:33 pm, RicodJour wrote:





On Jun 20, 12:19 pm, "longshot" wrote:

Careful. If he is trying to avoid sales taxes, some areas put the onus on
the customer to ensure that they are paying the taxes and theoretically

I'd love to see where this is written

Unfortunately that love will go unrequited. The onus is always on the
contractor to collect he tax.

Now how someone can pretend to know the law in all states and areas is
beyone me. Here in NJ, if you buy a piece of furniture in NC, you are
responsible for paying the tax, even though you bought it out of
state. And yes, they have gone after people.




In NY we have Certificates of Capital Improvements, which, when
properly filled out and signed by both parties, absolves the
contractor from having to collect tax. There are definite requirement
about what constitutes a capital improvement, and does not require the
payment of tax, and repairs, which do.

Note to the OP: Call your contractor and ask if you paid tax on that
$800 of work. If not, please remit the tax you owe immediately.

R

In NYS, you would also not owe sales tax if it is a service, not a
product. If you buy roses for your yard, you pay sales tax on it. If
you hire a landscaper to plant them, but not to provide any physical
things, then it is a service and there is no sales tax. If you pay
the landscaper to provide the flowers AND plant them, then you owe
sales tax on both the flowers and the labor.

However, in either case if the "sale" is over some number (I think
$600) and you are paying an individual, you need to issue a 1099.

Rico might know more about this than I do, but there might also be
differences in insurance coverage for workers comp., disability,
liability, etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 20, 1:05 pm, "Walter R." wrote:
Your contract was with the company, not the owner of the company. They are
totally different entities.

I guess you never heard of or refuse to acknowlegdge what a sole
proprietorship is about.


Make the check out to the company. That way there can never be any argument
as to your payment. All he has to do is to endorse the company check over to
himself, or to "Cash", and cash it or deposit it in whatever bank a/c he
likes.

Oh, please. Like after you pay the guy, with a check made out to
him, he's going to come back and claim he was never paid? Get real!




No problem

--
Walterwww.rationality.net
-"Tube Audio" wrote in message

t...





Hello

I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a
bill. The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink
make check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the
company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so
I want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and
my neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business
or to the owner?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I tend to write check to the same "entity" I record on the contract
agreement. If it's John Smith I signed the contract with I pay John Smith,
if it's ABC Construction I pay ABC Construction. I make it very clear on
the contract agreement whether I am dealing with "John Smith" or "John Smith
of ABC Construction" so my recommendation is to review your contract.

MC

"Tube Audio" wrote in message
t...
Hello



I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a
bill. The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink
make check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the
company.



I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.



The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so
I want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and
my neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business
or to the owner?

On Jun 20, 8:32 pm, wrote:
On Jun 20, 12:40 pm, Pat wrote:

On Jun 20, 12:33 pm, RicodJour wrote:

On Jun 20, 12:19 pm, "longshot" wrote:

Careful. If he is trying to avoid sales taxes, some areas put the onus on
the customer to ensure that they are paying the taxes and theoretically

I'd love to see where this is written

Unfortunately that love will go unrequited. The onus is always on the
contractor to collect he tax.

Now how someone can pretend to know the law in all states and areas is
beyone me. Here in NJ, if you buy a piece of furniture in NC, you are
responsible for paying the tax, even though you bought it out of
state. And yes, they have gone after people.



In NY we have Certificates of Capital Improvements, which, when
properly filled out and signed by both parties, absolves the
contractor from having to collect tax. There are definite requirement
about what constitutes a capital improvement, and does not require the
payment of tax, and repairs, which do.

Note to the OP: Call your contractor and ask if you paid tax on that
$800 of work. If not, please remit the tax you owe immediately.

R

In NYS, you would also not owe sales tax if it is a service, not a
product. If you buy roses for your yard, you pay sales tax on it. If
you hire a landscaper to plant them, but not to provide any physical
things, then it is a service and there is no sales tax. If you pay
the landscaper to provide the flowers AND plant them, then you owe
sales tax on both the flowers and the labor.

However, in either case if the "sale" is over some number (I think
$600) and you are paying an individual, you need to issue a 1099.

Rico might know more about this than I do, but there might also be
differences in insurance coverage for workers comp., disability,
liability, etc. etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In NY, there's a line on your personal income tax return where you
enter the amount of the tax on all of your out-of-state purchases.
It's on the honor system for all items except autos. For those, you
need to pay the sales tax to register the car. If you bought the car
from an individual (or out of state), the County Clerk collects the
tax when you register it.

wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jun 20, 1:05 pm, "Walter R." wrote:
Your contract was with the company, not the owner of the company. They
are
totally different entities.

I guess you never heard of or refuse to acknowlegdge what a sole
proprietorship is about.


Make the check out to the company. That way there can never be any
argument
as to your payment. All he has to do is to endorse the company check over
to
himself, or to "Cash", and cash it or deposit it in whatever bank a/c he
likes.

Oh, please. Like after you pay the guy, with a check made out to
him, he's going to come back and claim he was never paid? Get real!





Oh and all contractors are honorable, ethical and trustworthy. I write the
check to the company I contracted with. If in the initial
negotiation he asks me to pay him cash or make out a check to another entity
or him personally, at that point I want ironclad receipts for payment for
the job with the permit numbers or numbers written on the receipt.
"In God We Trust"

In article .com,
wrote:

On Jun 20, 10:25 am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article .com,





RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 20, 9:49 am, Smitty Two wrote:
"Toller" wrote:
Well, if you made a check out to my company name I couldn't cash it
because
I don't have a bank account in my company name.

That's your problem, not your customer's problem.

It also sounds like you have a problem. A business agreement is a two
way street - doesn't make much sense to go half way down it before you
see the ONE WAY sign.

Talk first, sign later.

R

Yep, I have a problem -- with people who misrepresent themselves.

I pay cash to the woman who cuts my hair. And I write personal checks to
my mechanic. But my plumber, who is also a sole proprietor, is doing
business as Blue Mountain Plumbing, so I make checks out accordingly.

And I'm sure the world can sleep safe tonight, knowing your
discriminating practices are keeping us safe. The guy did the
freeking job, just like the woman who cuts your hair. Pay him and
move on.



Discriminating? You mean paying the person I contracted for the job
instead of someone else? I'd call that rational discrimination. I'm not
being sanctimonious, and I don't really give a rat's ass whether someone
I pay is keeping a legitimate set of books and paying his taxes or not.

Keeping the world safe? Non-sequitur. Anyway, in case you're confused,
I'm not the O.P.

Look, there's no damn difference between a person and the business he or
she owns, if it's a sole proprietorship, so legally all the money goes
into one cigar box.

But someone who pretends to be a "company" with the letterhead and the
business cards and the vinyl sign on the van, and then asks his
customers to make checks to him personally, is acting pretty weasely,
says I. If there's a legitimate reason to conduct business that way, I
haven't yet seen it postulated in this thread.

(imagine a smiley though perhaps slightly sardonic emoticon here, if it
helps)

Tube Audio wrote:

Hello

I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a bill.
The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink make
check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so I
want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and my
neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business or to
the owner?

I always negotiate the deal based on a "cash" price.

I peel off the hundred dollar bills, and he produces a signed receipt -
I'm covered, and I don't care what he reports to the IRS.

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:42:35 -0700, Abe wrote:

I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a bill.
The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink make
check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so I
want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and my
neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business or to
the owner?

Hmm. A couple of ways to go on this.

You could call him and say that if he wants this to be off the books,
then offer me a substantial discount.

or, (and I'd tend to do this for the reasons you cited)

You could call him and just let him know that you don't feel
comfortable doing this off the books because of permitting and other
legal reasons, and let him know you'll be sending the check in the
company name.

I don't like specifying these reasons. It implies that if you didn't
have permit issues, you'd cooperate in his tax evasion.

Even if you would cheat on your own taxes, you're only one person.
Why encourage it in other people, when there are millions of them?

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:40:14 -0700, RicodJour
wrote:


BTW, I've never met an "honorable" tax payer. Every single one I've
ever met has felt that they are paying too much in taxes. Haven't met
one that decided they weren't getting taxed enough and sent extra
money in to make up the difference. That's what an honorable tax
payer would do, right?

No. Why would you say that? An honorable tax payer figures out what
his taxes are supposed to be, according to the rules, taking advantage
of tax breaks that apply to him, as the IRS encourages people to do,
and he pays that amount.

There is no need to pay more, although I think a few people do and I
know a lot of people leave money to the federal and state goverments
when they die.

IF you thought a particular tax break was immoral, that would be an
argument for not taking advantage of it, but for no special reason to
pay more than the properly figured amount is, that is not required to
be honorable.

In article .com,
says...

BTW, I've never met an "honorable" tax payer. Every single one I've
ever met has felt that they are paying too much in taxes. Haven't met
one that decided they weren't getting taxed enough and sent extra
money in to make up the difference. That's what an honorable tax
payer would do, right?

No.

The distinction you're missing is between tax *avoidance* and tax
*evasion*. If you feel you're paying too much in taxes, you can act
within the law to avoid taxes -- find legitimate deductions, change your
investment strategies, defer income, etc. That's all legal and
honorable conduct, it's obeying the letter and the spirit of the law.

Tax *evasion* is when you cross the line and commit fraud or other
crimes to avoid paying taxes. That's no longer legal or honorable, it
is willfully violating the letter and the spirit of the law.

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:49:22 -0400, mm
wrote:


Even if you would cheat on your own taxes, you're only one person.
Why encourage it in other people, when there are millions of them?

That is, the effect on society is worse to encourage other people to
cheat or commit other wrongs, than it is to do so yourself in secret.
When one cheats in secret, he doesn't encourage other people to do so.

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:36:23 -0700, RicodJour
wrote:

On Jun 20, 3:26 pm, dpb wrote:
Cheri wrote:
Phisherman wrote in message
...

Make it payable to their request. A lot of businesses have checks
made out to the owner. Dentist is one example. More power to them
if they can avoid taxes and never get caught.

I never made a check out to a dentist that I didn't put Dr. on it.

That's because that's how most individual dentists list themselves
professionally and do business under that name. At one time I went to a
consortium and they collected all payments under the name of the consortium.

Let's flip this around. I'm sure you've received checks from
customers/clients/friends that were drawn on their business' account,
and whatever the transaction was, it wasn't a "real" business
expense. Do you refuse the check? Do you get all huffy because
they're looking for a deduction?

I don't have a business and don't get many checks.

But I'll tell this story. I was selling my cargo carrier because I
was forced to buy a lighter one. The woman on the phone went into
detail about how they hoped to use one like mine on vacation.

At the end of the conversation, she said her husband was a minister
and asked me if I would give it to their church and take a tax
deduction. She never said a thing about using it for church
business.

It's barely used, good as new, better than new with my reflective
striped tape and carpet bumpers, and assembled by me, and I have the
original receipt, where I paid more than they charge now, so I could
surely save on taxes 30% of the original cost, which is as much as I
can sell it for, but no way am I playing her stinking little game.

And I wouldn't attend her church either.

R

I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a
bill.
The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink make
check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name
as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor
so I
want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and
my
neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business or
to
the owner?

I'd make the check out to the company (especially if its listed on the
permit). Thats how I did it with our granite contractor in AZ. They wanted
the check 'personal' to get the cash right away because (I found out later)
the outfit was going out of business and they didn't want to mistakenly
leave any $$ for their creditors. In theory, if I hadn't paid "the company",
I believe there could have been 'creditors' come after me for a 'company'
bill not paid.

On Jun 20, 9:23 pm, Smitty Two wrote:
In article .com,





wrote:
On Jun 20, 10:25 am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article .com,

RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 20, 9:49 am, Smitty Two wrote:
"Toller" wrote:
Well, if you made a check out to my company name I couldn't cash it
because
I don't have a bank account in my company name.

That's your problem, not your customer's problem.

It also sounds like you have a problem. A business agreement is a two
way street - doesn't make much sense to go half way down it before you
see the ONE WAY sign.

Talk first, sign later.

R

Yep, I have a problem -- with people who misrepresent themselves.

I pay cash to the woman who cuts my hair. And I write personal checks to
my mechanic. But my plumber, who is also a sole proprietor, is doing
business as Blue Mountain Plumbing, so I make checks out accordingly.

And I'm sure the world can sleep safe tonight, knowing your
discriminating practices are keeping us safe. The guy did the
freeking job, just like the woman who cuts your hair. Pay him and
move on.

Discriminating? You mean paying the person I contracted for the job
instead of someone else? I'd call that rational discrimination.


Oh, please. It's the same guy that did the work, not someone else.


I'm not
being sanctimonious, and I don't really give a rat's ass whether someone
I pay is keeping a legitimate set of books and paying his taxes or not.

Keeping the world safe? Non-sequitur. Anyway, in case you're confused,
I'm not the O.P.

Look, there's no damn difference between a person and the business he or
she owns, if it's a sole proprietorship, so legally all the money goes
into one cigar box.

Then pay the guy.




But someone who pretends to be a "company" with the letterhead and the
business cards and the vinyl sign on the van, and then asks his
customers to make checks to him personally, is acting pretty weasely,
says I. If there's a legitimate reason to conduct business that way, I
haven't yet seen it postulated in this thread.

I guess your very impressed with a simple company name that doesn't
mean much at all. If he's a sole proprietorship, which most small
guys are, then you are actually dealing with the individual anyway.




(imagine a smiley though perhaps slightly sardonic emoticon here, if it
helps)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 20, 9:15 pm, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

ps.com...





On Jun 20, 1:05 pm, "Walter R." wrote:
Your contract was with the company, not the owner of the company. They
are
totally different entities.

I guess you never heard of or refuse to acknowlegdge what a sole
proprietorship is about.

Make the check out to the company. That way there can never be any
argument
as to your payment. All he has to do is to endorse the company check over
to
himself, or to "Cash", and cash it or deposit it in whatever bank a/c he
likes.

Oh, please. Like after you pay the guy, with a check made out to
him, he's going to come back and claim he was never paid? Get real!

Oh and all contractors are honorable, ethical and trustworthy. I write the
check to the company I contracted with.

No one ever said all contractors are honest. But you think making the
check out after the job is done to the individual who did the work or
his company name is going to protect you somehow from the
contractor? The job is done and was apparently completed to his
satisfaction. You have the cancelled check as proof that payment
was made.




If in the initial negotiation he asks me to pay him cash or make out
a check to another entity
or him personally, at that point I want ironclad receipts for payment for
the job with the permit numbers or numbers written on the receipt.

Oh, so you want a receipt before the job is even started. That makes
a lot of sense. And if you have any issues or doubts about permits,
that has zippo to do with how the check is made out and should be
dealt with seperately. And again, your cancelled check is proof that
payment was made. Plus you should get a signed receipt or the
agreement marked paid when you hand over the check. Geez, this ain;t
rocket science.



"In God We Trust"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 20, 8:14 pm, "MiamiCuse" wrote:
I tend to write check to the same "entity" I record on the contract
agreement. If it's John Smith I signed the contract with I pay John Smith,
if it's ABC Construction I pay ABC Construction. I make it very clear on
the contract agreement whether I am dealing with "John Smith" or "John Smith
of ABC Construction" so my recommendation is to review your contract.

MC

"Tube Audio" wrote in message

t...



Hello

I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a
bill. The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink
make check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the
company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so
I want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and
my neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business
or to the owner?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


And I hope you realize that in many cases, ie sole proprietorships,
the individual and the company are legally one and the same.

On Jun 21, 12:53 am, mm wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:40:14 -0700, RicodJour

wrote:

BTW, I've never met an "honorable" tax payer. Every single one I've
ever met has felt that they are paying too much in taxes. Haven't met
one that decided they weren't getting taxed enough and sent extra
money in to make up the difference. That's what an honorable tax
payer would do, right?

No. Why would you say that? An honorable tax payer figures out what
his taxes are supposed to be, according to the rules, taking advantage
of tax breaks that apply to him, as the IRS encourages people to do,
and he pays that amount.

There is no need to pay more, although I think a few people do and I
know a lot of people leave money to the federal and state goverments
when they die.

Yeah, it's called escheat.

IF you thought a particular tax break was immoral, that would be an
argument for not taking advantage of it, but for no special reason to
pay more than the properly figured amount is, that is not required to
be honorable.

There's a fine line between "properly figured amount" and fudging.
The odds that everyone would agree on what you considered proper are
rather slim. You makes your choices, you takes you lumps.

I frequent garage sales. I'm always looking for a bargain, and have
had at least my share of luck in finding them at garage sales. At a
recent one, I bought a Trek fully-suspended bike for my sister, a
Physical Training study course for my nephew, a Vornado fan for me,
and a few other things. The woman tallied it up and said $16. I was
a bit embarrassed by the low price and asked her if it was okay if I
gave her $20 to keep it simple. I knew that the people were trying to
raise some money, they had a few little kids running around, and the
$4 wasn't going to bankrupt me.

I have a friend that would have offered her 25 cents for all that
stuff if she'd asked for 50 cents. If she'd asked for a dime he would
have asked to have it for a nickel. He looks at things in a different
way. He's still a good person.

R

On Jun 21, 1:57 am, mm wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:49:22 -0400, mm

Even if you would cheat on your own taxes, you're only one person.
Why encourage it in other people, when there are millions of them?

That is, the effect on society is worse to encourage other people to
cheat or commit other wrongs, than it is to do so yourself in secret.
When one cheats in secret, he doesn't encourage other people to do so.

Right. If you **** in private, it's not ****ting. There's way too
much of that "what you don't know won't hurt you" stuff going on in
the world.

The bottom line of what you are saying is that you don't want to feel
that anyone is paying less than their fair share of the tax - less
than what _you_ consider to be their fair share of the tax.

I'm not on this planet to impose my views and morals upon others.
There's also way too much of that stuff going on in the world.

R

RicodJour wrote:
....

The bottom line of what you are saying is that you don't want to feel
that anyone is paying less than their fair share of the tax - less
than what _you_ consider to be their fair share of the tax.

The former yes, the latter no...what I _don't_ want (and a prime reason
as noted earlier for using the company name as opposed to individual) is
the deliberate underreporting of business income subject to
self-employment taxes, etc., which afaict would be the only reason to
care how the check was made out.
I'm not on this planet to impose my views and morals upon others.
There's also way too much of that stuff going on in the world.

On Jun 21, 4:34 am, wrote:
On Jun 20, 8:14 pm, "MiamiCuse" wrote:



I tend to write check to the same "entity" I record on the contract
agreement. If it's John Smith I signed the contract with I pay John Smith,
if it's ABC Construction I pay ABC Construction. I make it very clear on
the contract agreement whether I am dealing with "John Smith" or "John Smith
of ABC Construction" so my recommendation is to review your contract.

MC

"Tube Audio" wrote in message

et...

Hello

I hired a contractor to do some work, the work is complete and I got a
bill. The amount is $800. On the invoice at the bottom they wrote in ink
make check payable to "john smith", the owner. Not the name of the
company.

I guess they are doing this to avoid taxes.

The issue is, I would like to make the check out to the business's name as
this work involved a permit and was done over a dispute with a neighbor so
I want a record incase there are any further legal issues between me and
my neighbor. Should I just make the check out to the companies business
or to the owner?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And I hope you realize that in many cases, ie sole proprietorships,
the individual and the company are legally one and the same.

This entire thread had degenerated into "is the person the same as the
DBA and/or corporation". If it is, then some people contend that it
really doesn't make a different. If the contractor is a weasel and
not paying taxes on it, it's no skin off your teeth.

Setting aside the insurance issues, the 1099 issue, and a whole bunch
of other assumptions; you need to remember two things. 1. Many
people think that this person is a weasel for asking. 2. It has been
ASSUMED that the person saying "make the check out to me" is in fact
the owner of the company. If the guy is a weasel, he it may be that
he is trying to scam the owner. Maybe he's an employee and he's just
going to pocket the bling and move on to the next project.

I think MC's point is valid. If the contract is in some name, write
the check to that name. It provides you with additional protect at no
cost. It keeps the real owner from coming after you.

I think MC's point is pretty valid becaus

On Jun 21, 9:28 am, dpb wrote:
RicodJour wrote:

The bottom line of what you are saying is that you don't want to feel
that anyone is paying less than their fair share of the tax - less
than what _you_ consider to be their fair share of the tax.

The former yes, the latter no...what I _don't_ want (and a prime reason
as noted earlier for using the company name as opposed to individual) is
the deliberate underreporting of business income subject to
self-employment taxes, etc., which afaict would be the only reason to
care how the check was made out.

DPB, have you ever been at a BBQ and had a couple of beers and driven
yourself home? Did you stop at the police station and turn yourself
in? I'm sure you've had friends/kids have a couple and drive
themselves home. Do you alert the cops and give them the license
plate number? Have you ever exceeded the speed limit? Do you send
money to the traffic violations boys? Send money to the insurance
company since your rates should have gone up if you were caught? I
could go on, but you catch my drift. Let he who is without fault,
right?

Wishing people would do the "right" thing (right thing in _your_ eyes)
is fine, trying to enforce your wishes is something else entirely.
You may be comfortable playing daddy to other adults, I'm not.

As I said from the beginning, I would not be happy about the
contractor surprising me with a request for payment to himself
personally. I like things to be spelled out up front. You can say
yes or no to the request. Just don't try to sell those actions as
being "for the good of the people", because that's not what it is at
all, and you know it.

R

Pat wrote:
....

This entire thread had degenerated into "is the person the same as the
DBA and/or corporation". If it is, then some people contend that it
really doesn't make a different. If the contractor is a weasel and
not paying taxes on it, it's no skin off your teeth.

Yes and no...tax evasion in general is "skin off" the collective group...

Setting aside the insurance issues, the 1099 issue, and a whole bunch
of other assumptions; you need to remember two things. 1. Many
people think that this person is a weasel for asking. 2. It has been
ASSUMED that the person saying "make the check out to me" is in fact
the owner of the company. If the guy is a weasel, he it may be that
he is trying to scam the owner. Maybe he's an employee and he's just
going to pocket the bling and move on to the next project.

I hadn't added that possible scenario into the mix as it seemed a little
hard to execute in the particular case. The "asking" came in the form
of a handwritten request at the bottom of an invoice. Hence, unless the
whole invoice is a fake including the return address it would take an
"inside job" by someone other than the owner to intercept the check when
it arrives, etc., to get the benefit.

In general, the simplest explanation is usually the most nearly correct
and I think the simplest is the fella' wants to either simply not report
the income or only report it as personal, not business, for tax purposes.

Of course, as someone else has noted, the business could be in deep
financial trouble, have judgment(s) against it, etc., etc., that he's
trying to avoid paying as well. If that's the case, it might behoove
the OP to at least attempt to ensure that the contractor has paid (or
does pay) _his_ suppliers to avoid a possible contractors' lien on his
property on down the road. Remote chance, in all likelihood, but
stranger things happen.

Then again, _just maybe_ there's a completely innocent and "up and up"
explanation, too, and we're all either just too cynical or dumb to
figure out what it is.

I think MC's point is valid. If the contract is in some name, write
the check to that name. It provides you with additional protect at no
cost. It keeps the real owner from coming after you.

It seems that way to me -- the invoice came on a letterhead--pay the
invoice not something/someone else.

imo, ymmv, $0.02, etc., etc., ...

--

RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 21, 9:28 am, dpb wrote:
RicodJour wrote:

....

....Lecture snipped...

As I said from the beginning, I would not be happy about the
contractor surprising me with a request for payment to himself
personally.

Ok, we agree...

I like things to be spelled out up front. You can say
yes or no to the request.

All I did was recommend to OP to say "No" to the request by writing the
check to the name on the invoice letterhead, not the personal name at
the bottom, so it seems we also agree...

Just don't try to sell those actions as
being "for the good of the people", because that's not what it is at
all, and you know it.

Well, you seemed to have made a leap here I didn't take. I said there
was a basic reason behind my logic.

Why that seems to have sent you over the edge I don't know.

Yes, I _do_ have a problem w/ tax evasion as a general premise. Whether
I have or haven't ever slipped and done less than an ideal action on
occasion doesn't seem to me to be of any import nor concern or yours,
either.

--




R

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jun 20, 9:15 pm, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

ps.com...





On Jun 20, 1:05 pm, "Walter R." wrote:
Your contract was with the company, not the owner of the company. They
are
totally different entities.

I guess you never heard of or refuse to acknowlegdge what a sole
proprietorship is about.

Make the check out to the company. That way there can never be any
argument
as to your payment. All he has to do is to endorse the company check
over
to
himself, or to "Cash", and cash it or deposit it in whatever bank a/c
he
likes.

Oh, please. Like after you pay the guy, with a check made out to
him, he's going to come back and claim he was never paid? Get real!

Oh and all contractors are honorable, ethical and trustworthy. I write
the
check to the company I contracted with.

No one ever said all contractors are honest. But you think making the
check out after the job is done to the individual who did the work or
his company name is going to protect you somehow from the
contractor? The job is done and was apparently completed to his
satisfaction. You have the cancelled check as proof that payment
was made.




If in the initial negotiation he asks me to pay him cash or make out
a check to another entity
or him personally, at that point I want ironclad receipts for payment for
the job with the permit numbers or numbers written on the receipt.

Oh, so you want a receipt before the job is even started. That makes
a lot of sense. And if you have any issues or doubts about permits,
that has zippo to do with how the check is made out and should be
dealt with seperately. And again, your cancelled check is proof that
payment was made. Plus you should get a signed receipt or the
agreement marked paid when you hand over the check. Geez, this ain;t
rocket science.



"In God We Trust"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



I have a cancelled check that says I paid someone something. If the name on
that check does not match the name on the permit (the one who pulled the
permit), there is no way I'm writing the check to another individual.
Several years ago I had some work done by a 'reputable' contractor. He asked
that I pay for the material up front, about $800. He also asked me to make
the check out to his supplier so that he didn't have to run to the bank,
deposit it and then write another check to his supplier. Foolish me I
complied. When he completed the job he asked me for a check or cash 'in
total'. I reminded him of the $800 check I wrote out to his supplier but he
had a severe memory lapse and insisted that I either give him a receipt
showing the payment to him or to pay up. I refused. He harassed me and
threatened a lien but after a call from my attorney he backed off never to
be heard of again.
As I said in a previous message:
"In God We Trust.

On Jun 21, 10:16 am, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

On Jun 20, 9:15 pm, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

On Jun 20, 1:05 pm, "Walter R." wrote:
Your contract was with the company, not the owner of the company. They
are
totally different entities.

I guess you never heard of or refuse to acknowlegdge what a sole
proprietorship is about.

Make the check out to the company. That way there can never be any
argument
as to your payment. All he has to do is to endorse the company check
over
to
himself, or to "Cash", and cash it or deposit it in whatever bank a/c
he
likes.

Oh, please. Like after you pay the guy, with a check made out to
him, he's going to come back and claim he was never paid? Get real!

Oh and all contractors are honorable, ethical and trustworthy. I write
the
check to the company I contracted with.

No one ever said all contractors are honest. But you think making the
check out after the job is done to the individual who did the work or
his company name is going to protect you somehow from the
contractor? The job is done and was apparently completed to his
satisfaction. You have the cancelled check as proof that payment
was made.

If in the initial negotiation he asks me to pay him cash or make out
a check to another entity
or him personally, at that point I want ironclad receipts for payment for
the job with the permit numbers or numbers written on the receipt.

Oh, so you want a receipt before the job is even started. That makes
a lot of sense. And if you have any issues or doubts about permits,
that has zippo to do with how the check is made out and should be
dealt with seperately. And again, your cancelled check is proof that
payment was made. Plus you should get a signed receipt or the
agreement marked paid when you hand over the check. Geez, this ain;t
rocket science.

"In God We Trust"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have a cancelled check that says I paid someone something. If the name on
that check does not match the name on the permit (the one who pulled the
permit), there is no way I'm writing the check to another individual.
Several years ago I had some work done by a 'reputable' contractor. He asked
that I pay for the material up front, about $800. He also asked me to make
the check out to his supplier so that he didn't have to run to the bank,
deposit it and then write another check to his supplier. Foolish me I
complied. When he completed the job he asked me for a check or cash 'in
total'. I reminded him of the $800 check I wrote out to his supplier but he
had a severe memory lapse and insisted that I either give him a receipt
showing the payment to him or to pay up. I refused. He harassed me and
threatened a lien but after a call from my attorney he backed off never to
be heard of again.
As I said in a previous message:
"In God We Trust.

Cutting a check directly to a supplier is a major red flag. I
wouldn't do it without lots of verification, signed receipts from both
contractor and vendor, and a long history with the contractor. Glad
you didn't get hung up to dry on yours.

R

On Jun 21, 9:16 am, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jun 20, 9:15 pm, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

On Jun 20, 1:05 pm, "Walter R." wrote:
Your contract was with the company, not the owner of the company. They
are
totally different entities.

I guess you never heard of or refuse to acknowlegdge what a sole
proprietorship is about.

Make the check out to the company. That way there can never be any
argument
as to your payment. All he has to do is to endorse the company check
over
to
himself, or to "Cash", and cash it or deposit it in whatever bank a/c
he
likes.

Oh, please. Like after you pay the guy, with a check made out to
him, he's going to come back and claim he was never paid? Get real!

Oh and all contractors are honorable, ethical and trustworthy. I write
the
check to the company I contracted with.

No one ever said all contractors are honest. But you think making the
check out after the job is done to the individual who did the work or
his company name is going to protect you somehow from the
contractor? The job is done and was apparently completed to his
satisfaction. You have the cancelled check as proof that payment
was made.

If in the initial negotiation he asks me to pay him cash or make out
a check to another entity
or him personally, at that point I want ironclad receipts for payment for
the job with the permit numbers or numbers written on the receipt.

Oh, so you want a receipt before the job is even started. That makes
a lot of sense. And if you have any issues or doubts about permits,
that has zippo to do with how the check is made out and should be
dealt with seperately. And again, your cancelled check is proof that
payment was made. Plus you should get a signed receipt or the
agreement marked paid when you hand over the check. Geez, this ain;t
rocket science.

"In God We Trust"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have a cancelled check that says I paid someone something. If the name on
that check does not match the name on the permit (the one who pulled the
permit), there is no way I'm writing the check to another individual.
Several years ago I had some work done by a 'reputable' contractor. He asked
that I pay for the material up front, about $800. He also asked me to make
the check out to his supplier so that he didn't have to run to the bank,
deposit it and then write another check to his supplier. Foolish me I
complied. When he completed the job he asked me for a check or cash 'in
total'. I reminded him of the $800 check I wrote out to his supplier but he
had a severe memory lapse and insisted that I either give him a receipt
showing the payment to him or to pay up. I refused. He harassed me and
threatened a lien but after a call from my attorney he backed off never to
be heard of again.
As I said in a previous message:
"In God We Trust.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Which proves my point. You had the cancelled check made out to the
supplier. So, what's the big deal? You deducted the $800 from the
final payment. No different than if the guy showed up at the end of
the job and asked for an extra $800 on top of the contracted amount,
which he could have done too. Or if you had paid him the $800 as a
stage payment and he denied you did pay him. Who you made the
check out to made zippo difference. You have the proof in black and
white. In fact, I'd rather make it out to the supplier, because at
least you know it's going to the supplier for materials, instead of
the contractor using it for beer. Of course, you still don't know
it's for your materials, but it's at least a little better.

And getting all wrapped up in what name is on the permit, IMO, has
very little bearing on the payment. The issue is who did the work.
You could have one construction permit that covers mutiple
contractors, so that issue makes little sense.

On Jun 21, 10:14 am, dpb wrote:
RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 21, 9:28 am, dpb wrote:
RicodJour wrote:

...Lecture snipped...

Damn, and I worked so hard on the thing! I hate editors.

As I said from the beginning, I would not be happy about the
contractor surprising me with a request for payment to himself
personally.

Ok, we agree...

Usually we do. If we always agreed I probably wouldn't like you so
much.

I like things to be spelled out up front. You can say
yes or no to the request.

All I did was recommend to OP to say "No" to the request by writing the
check to the name on the invoice letterhead, not the personal name at
the bottom, so it seems we also agree...

Whether it's in the memo field, a signed receipt, whatever, you're
just protecting your interests and there are plenty of ways to do
that. I just don't see the need to get into guessing the contractor's
motivation and all of that. If you have a question, ask it. If you
don't like the answer, do what you feel is best.

Just don't try to sell those actions as
being "for the good of the people", because that's not what it is at
all, and you know it.

Well, you seemed to have made a leap here I didn't take. I said there
was a basic reason behind my logic.

Your replies have been reasonable, though I don't necessarily agree
with them. Some of the other replies are just daft.

Why that seems to have sent you over the edge I don't know.

DPB, this isn't an edge. It'd take a nifong load more to set me off.

Yes, I _do_ have a problem w/ tax evasion as a general premise. Whether
I have or haven't ever slipped and done less than an ideal action on
occasion doesn't seem to me to be of any import nor concern or yours,
either.

Exactly! I'm not living your life - I have my hands full with my
own. That's all I was suggesting about the issue at hand. Don't try
to live a contractor's life for them.

R

RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 21, 10:14 am, dpb wrote:
RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 21, 9:28 am, dpb wrote:
RicodJour wrote:
...Lecture snipped...

Damn, and I worked so hard on the thing! I hate editors.

Ain't science wunnerful?

....

...If we always agreed I probably wouldn't like you so much.

Dang! You WOULD go and throw _that_ in there...

I like things to be spelled out up front. You can say
yes or no to the request.
All I did was recommend to OP to say "No" to the request by writing the
check to the name on the invoice letterhead, not the personal name at
the bottom, so it seems we also agree...

Whether it's in the memo field, a signed receipt, whatever, you're
just protecting your interests and there are plenty of ways to do
that. I just don't see the need to get into guessing the contractor's
motivation and all of that. If you have a question, ask it. If you
don't like the answer, do what you feel is best.
....

I simply recommended my choice in how to protect my interest best for
the specific case--really no more, no less. If an invoice is presented
from an entity, imo payment should go to that entity. A memo field
certainly would have some bearing, but whether there's any difference in
legal status if push came to shove in a formal dispute resolution I
don't know -- I simply know it would be unequivocal if the check were
indeed made to the entity which seems my best protection. That it also
provides at least some assurance that the recipient be required to
follow the rules of the game, so to speak, is a side benefit.

(As a sidelight, if the invoice had actually been submitted on a scrap
of paper in the guy's handwriting and only his signature below it, I
almost certainly would have paid it that way w/o questioning it -- it's
the dichotomy of a prepared invoice and the written request in
contradiction to it that raises the flag. IOW, imo the contractor
brought this on himself in this case. Although if he had up to this
point made proposals on nice forms and presented business cards, etc., I
might have then done the "why no inovice?" question. It all depends on
how it "feels" overall and this just doesn't seem legit.)

That I can't see any other reason than a desire to subvert those rules
(or other similar ones as in the judgment issue, etc.) is certainly part
of it. I look on it kinda' like locks -- they don't prevent the
determined from breaking and entering, but the do serve to keep the
basically honest that way. I like to spread good wherever and whenever
I can...

Are we done now (are we there yet)?

--

Cheri wrote:
Phisherman wrote in message
...

Make it payable to their request. A lot of businesses have checks
made out to the owner. Dentist is one example. More power to them
if they can avoid taxes and never get caught.

I never made a check out to a dentist that I didn't put Dr. on it.

For a thought experiment to illustrate the difference -- think of suing
that same dentist personally and imagine how how high the barriers are
between his personal assets and those of the business under that name!
The probability of you getting to the proceeds of that check you wrote
with his name on it are pretty miniscule...

--

"dpb" wrote in message

For a thought experiment to illustrate the difference -- think of suing
that same dentist personally and imagine how how high the barriers are
between his personal assets and those of the business under that name! The
probability of you getting to the proceeds of that check you wrote with
his name on it are pretty miniscule...

Think you'd do any better suing a contractor? He probably leases all his
equipment from his wife.

This thread really is one of the silliest ever. If the contractor wanted to
evade taxes, he'd want cash, not a check. If you are not willing to go
along (if that was his intent) then next guy will and it does not matter
since he still has to claim some income, be it your or the last/next person.

Trying to sue a contractor is not easy since most assets are in some other
name anyway, or will be the day before he is served court papers.

Which proves my point. You had the cancelled check made out to the
supplier. So, what's the big deal? You deducted the $800 from the
final payment. No different than if the guy showed up at the end of
the job and asked for an extra $800 on top of the contracted amount,
which he could have done too. Or if you had paid him the $800 as a
stage payment and he denied you did pay him. Who you made the
check out to made zippo difference. You have the proof in black and
white. In fact, I'd rather make it out to the supplier, because at
least you know it's going to the supplier for materials, instead of
the contractor using it for beer. Of course, you still don't know
it's for your materials, but it's at least a little better.

And getting all wrapped up in what name is on the permit, IMO, has
very little bearing on the payment. The issue is who did the work.
You could have one construction permit that covers mutiple
contractors, so that issue makes little sense.


To me it boils down to this. I hire ABC Corp to do a job. ABC Corp pulls
permits and does the work. I'm going to pay ABC Corp for the job they did. I
don't care what the contractor does or wants to do with the payment. It's
not my problem. I just want to know that somewhere down the line ABC Corp is
not being sold to someone else who looks in their books and finds I never
paid the corp. for work done and files a lien or that the contractor doesn't
try and pull anything shady on me. I'm sure if I paid him with a check with
someone else's name and address on it he wouldn't accept it.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message
For a thought experiment to illustrate the difference -- think of suing
that same dentist personally and imagine how how high the barriers are
between his personal assets and those of the business under that name! The
probability of you getting to the proceeds of that check you wrote with
his name on it are pretty miniscule...

Think you'd do any better suing a contractor? He probably leases all his
equipment from his wife.

Assuming the guy has any business acumen at all, of course. They'll be
in a LLC or some other way to protect personal assets. The point was
only to illustrate the name isn't _necessarily_ the person....

This thread really is one of the silliest ever. ...

Oh, it has a _long_ way to go to get to that point... (or should
that be )

--

RicodJour wrote:
On Jun 21, 10:14 am, dpb wrote:
....

Yes, I _do_ have a problem w/ tax evasion as a general premise. Whether
I have or haven't ever slipped and done less than an ideal action on
occasion doesn't seem to me to be of any import nor concern or yours,
either.

Exactly! I'm not living your life - I have my hands full with my
own. That's all I was suggesting about the issue at hand. Don't try
to live a contractor's life for them.


I intended to make a comment on this in the other response before I quit
but inadvertently snipped more than I intended.

You seem to be thinking my response is mostly on some "high moral
ground" basis. While "what's right" is part of it, mostly my objection
is really quite pragmatic and self-centered. (Whether in the big scheme
of things it is generally effective in making a difference is, of
course, a totally different question.)

The point is, if I _were_ a contractor (I am self-employed and have been
for some time so I can directly relate) doing business according to the
rules I'd be far less than happy at having to compete against the guy
who isn't. What little I can do to discourage or make that a little
more difficult is only helping me in a competitive sense.

--

On Jun 21, 11:07 am, "jerryl" wrote:
Which proves my point. You had the cancelled check made out to the
supplier. So, what's the big deal? You deducted the $800 from the
final payment. No different than if the guy showed up at the end of
the job and asked for an extra $800 on top of the contracted amount,
which he could have done too. Or if you had paid him the $800 as a
stage payment and he denied you did pay him. Who you made the
check out to made zippo difference. You have the proof in black and
white. In fact, I'd rather make it out to the supplier, because at
least you know it's going to the supplier for materials, instead of
the contractor using it for beer. Of course, you still don't know
it's for your materials, but it's at least a little better.

And getting all wrapped up in what name is on the permit, IMO, has
very little bearing on the payment. The issue is who did the work.
You could have one construction permit that covers mutiple
contractors, so that issue makes little sense.

To me it boils down to this. I hire ABC Corp to do a job. ABC Corp pulls
permits and does the work. I'm going to pay ABC Corp for the job they did. I
don't care what the contractor does or wants to do with the payment. It's
not my problem. I just want to know that somewhere down the line ABC Corp is
not being sold to someone else who looks in their books and finds I never
paid the corp. for work done and files a lien or that the contractor doesn't
try and pull anything shady on me. I'm sure if I paid him with a check with
someone else's name and address on it he wouldn't accept it.


It was never stated that the contractor in the case under discussion
was incorporated. Most small guys are not. As far as pulling
something shady, he can do that regardless of how you paid him. It's
just silly to think that he's gonna get anywhere saying you didn't pay
him when you have the cancelled check made out to him. You really
think he's going to go to court to try to claim that? Especially
when many folks here think his purpose for the check in his name was
to avoid taxes. BTW, I don't necessarily buy that either, because
having a trail of checks that you endorsed and cashed is a pretty
stupid way to try to avoid taxes. Not only is it easy to find, it's
very hard to explain as an oversight, or innocent omission, like some
questionable deduction would be. It's very obvious tax fraud





- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jun 21, 11:07 am, "jerryl" wrote:
Which proves my point. You had the cancelled check made out to the
supplier. So, what's the big deal? You deducted the $800 from the
final payment. No different than if the guy showed up at the end of
the job and asked for an extra $800 on top of the contracted amount,
which he could have done too. Or if you had paid him the $800 as a
stage payment and he denied you did pay him. Who you made the
check out to made zippo difference. You have the proof in black and
white. In fact, I'd rather make it out to the supplier, because at
least you know it's going to the supplier for materials, instead of
the contractor using it for beer. Of course, you still don't know
it's for your materials, but it's at least a little better.

And getting all wrapped up in what name is on the permit, IMO, has
very little bearing on the payment. The issue is who did the work.
You could have one construction permit that covers mutiple
contractors, so that issue makes little sense.

To me it boils down to this. I hire ABC Corp to do a job. ABC Corp pulls
permits and does the work. I'm going to pay ABC Corp for the job they
did. I
don't care what the contractor does or wants to do with the payment.
It's
not my problem. I just want to know that somewhere down the line ABC Corp
is
not being sold to someone else who looks in their books and finds I never
paid the corp. for work done and files a lien or that the contractor
doesn't
try and pull anything shady on me. I'm sure if I paid him with a check
with
someone else's name and address on it he wouldn't accept it.


It was never stated that the contractor in the case under discussion
was incorporated. Most small guys are not. As far as pulling
something shady, he can do that regardless of how you paid him. It's
just silly to think that he's gonna get anywhere saying you didn't pay
him when you have the cancelled check made out to him. You really
think he's going to go to court to try to claim that? Especially
when many folks here think his purpose for the check in his name was
to avoid taxes. BTW, I don't necessarily buy that either, because
having a trail of checks that you endorsed and cashed is a pretty
stupid way to try to avoid taxes. Not only is it easy to find, it's
very hard to explain as an oversight, or innocent omission, like some
questionable deduction would be. It's very obvious tax fraud





- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



And...... exactly what is wrong in making out the check to the
person\company that you contracted to have the job done? I don't care what
the contractor is doing with the money. All I want to do is protect myself.
If the contractor wants to be paid a certain way, let him say it up front or
in the contract and let me decide if I want to do it then not after he's
finished and hopefully sweeping up his mess.

On Jun 21, 1:14 pm, "jerryl" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Jun 21, 11:07 am, "jerryl" wrote:
Which proves my point. You had the cancelled check made out to the
supplier. So, what's the big deal? You deducted the $800 from the
final payment. No different than if the guy showed up at the end of
the job and asked for an extra $800 on top of the contracted amount,
which he could have done too. Or if you had paid him the $800 as a
stage payment and he denied you did pay him. Who you made the
check out to made zippo difference. You have the proof in black and
white. In fact, I'd rather make it out to the supplier, because at
least you know it's going to the supplier for materials, instead of
the contractor using it for beer. Of course, you still don't know
it's for your materials, but it's at least a little better.

And getting all wrapped up in what name is on the permit, IMO, has
very little bearing on the payment. The issue is who did the work.
You could have one construction permit that covers mutiple
contractors, so that issue makes little sense.

To me it boils down to this. I hire ABC Corp to do a job. ABC Corp pulls
permits and does the work. I'm going to pay ABC Corp for the job they
did. I
don't care what the contractor does or wants to do with the payment.
It's
not my problem. I just want to know that somewhere down the line ABC Corp
is
not being sold to someone else who looks in their books and finds I never
paid the corp. for work done and files a lien or that the contractor
doesn't
try and pull anything shady on me. I'm sure if I paid him with a check
with
someone else's name and address on it he wouldn't accept it.

It was never stated that the contractor in the case under discussion
was incorporated. Most small guys are not. As far as pulling
something shady, he can do that regardless of how you paid him. It's
just silly to think that he's gonna get anywhere saying you didn't pay
him when you have the cancelled check made out to him. You really
think he's going to go to court to try to claim that? Especially
when many folks here think his purpose for the check in his name was
to avoid taxes. BTW, I don't necessarily buy that either, because
having a trail of checks that you endorsed and cashed is a pretty
stupid way to try to avoid taxes. Not only is it easy to find, it's
very hard to explain as an oversight, or innocent omission, like some
questionable deduction would be. It's very obvious tax fraud

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And...... exactly what is wrong in making out the check to the
person\company that you contracted to have the job done? I don't care what
the contractor is doing with the money. All I want to do is protect myself.

If you want to protect yourself, buy life insurance. Buy homeowner's
insurance. Buy health insurance. Wear a seatbelt and a condom. But
I don't see making a check out to Jay Stewart Plumbing or to Jay
Stewart making any difference in protecting you from anything. The
risk in fact is on the other side, in that your check could bounce.
It's just laughable to claim the guy is gonna come back and say he
wasn't paid.


If the contractor wants to be paid a certain way, let him say it up front or
in the contract and let me decide if I want to do it then not after he's
finished and hopefully sweeping up his mess.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -