Multiple small businesses to avoid Obamacare and other taxes.

File: 1470554169958.jpg (199KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 800x1000px

>>1438177
Why dont people create lots of Businesses? Because people are generally lazy and prone to taking on risk. Also, im pretty sure some businesses already do that, but there are complications. What if you cant find somone to head the other small businesses? What if it looks suspicious to the IRS that you are the owner of multiple small businesses right underneath the limit and somone calls for an Audit? What if your company continues to grow massively? Do you keep creating small businesses to hire excess people? Who is going to watch each and everyone of those small businesses? How far away are they from each other? How long does it take to travel between them? Are you going to be the only one inspecting them all for quality? If you hire somebody else to inspect them, which department are you going to put him under? What if one of the department businesses goes under or something unpredictable happens, like a union uprising?

Check out this bitching maze.

>>1438177

Pretty sure the IRS and the DOL are aware of this scheme and will investigate the business if they suspect it.

But I suppose it could work.

Really it's not a big deal for employers. Things only change with respect to health insurance. After 50 employees you must provide health insurance to your employees. And even then, they just factor that cost into employee pay and lower the pay.

Employees are aware of this. You have 60+ people bagging groceries these days for $8/hr just so they can get the health coverage. Many of those people have out-of-pocket health costs of $20k+ per year.

>>1438372
>Pretty sure the IRS and the DOL are aware of this scheme and will investigate the business if they suspect it.
yep.

what op proposes is a parent company, and it's governed by the same laws as a company of the same size as all of its holdings.

The feds are well aware of it and monitor it closely. For example there's certain government contracts that are set aside for small businesses. If you happen to be a small business that's owned by a parent company that isn't a small business and you bid on one of those contracts the nicest thing you can expect is fraud charges and to be barred from bidding government contracts for a very long time.

People go to prison for what op suggests, it's not clever and he's not by a long shot the first person to think of it.

>>1438423
>it's not clever
It's also not necessary.

In my main NAICS code a small business can do up to 5 million dollars a year in cash sales or 15 million by accrual and still be considered a small business. Which are basically the same numbers since afaik I'm required to switch to accrual method at 5 million cash per year anyways, and the average length of contract in my field is 3 years, so 5 million a year is equal to 15 million in total assets/sales.

The Obamacare health requirement kicks in at 50 FTE's, which is not coincidentally about where a business breaks over the small-business ceiling.

Point being, if you can't survive just fine on $5 million a year in sales and $15 million in standing assets you've got problems bigger than your tax burden.

Presumably any company making numbers bigger than that will have little trouble paying the extra tax costs of growth. Where the tax becomes burdensome is in industries like fast food where profit margins are tight to begin with. But they'll adapt by raising prices and cutting wages, most of them have already done it without anyone noticing a thing.