Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 408 posts

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#231

Post by lupire »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #96
computator wrote: post #90

> Equifax is now receiving records every pay period from 2.5 million companies. Information in the reports comes from employers and payroll processors. But why do employers and payroll processors give any data to Equifax? I can understand that credit card issuers, and mortgage and auto lenders want to know the credit worthiness of people they'll give credit to, and those types of businesses are likely required to sha…

Because they are lazy. In return for giving up your employee’s payroll data, Equifax provides employment verification through their automated IVR, offloading HR from the task.

More important, Equifax provides salary data so "competitors" can collude to reduce wages.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#232

Post by varispeed »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #45
justinc8687 wrote: post #31

"Equifax flagged 283 contractors for potential 'dual employment,' documents show." Would this not be a big flag to reclassify these contractors as employees? Being able to have multiple clients is one of the factors to determine if you're a contractor...

In the UK there's a set of criteria (IR35) that attempt to codify the distinction. The hiring business has to make the assessment. One of criteria is right to subcontract and freedom to work with multiple clients. If they get it wrong, they're liable for taxes, not the Contractor. HMRC, the UK tax body is responsible for this, and therefore it is an utter mess in practice and has had chilling effects on the UK IT con…

There is a lot of misconceptions about this.

> One of criteria is right to subcontract

It's not entirely true. Just because such right exists in the contract, does not mean it is valid. HMRC guidances have a ton of rules where it does not count. For instance if the business could use the sub-contractor directly.

> and freedom to work with multiple clients.

This is also irrelevant, because exclusive supply agreements is a normal business practice. Also people can hold multiple employments and that does not make them "contractors". People can also be contractors and employees at the same time and anything in between.

> If they get it wrong, they're liable for taxes, not the Contractor.

That's not entirely correct either. The client can claw the money back from the Contractor and very much every contract I have seen has clauses ensuring that any unpaid tax the client is liable for will be re-paid by the contractor.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#233

Post by varispeed »

justinc8687 wrote: post #31

"Equifax flagged 283 contractors for potential 'dual employment,' documents show." Would this not be a big flag to reclassify these contractors as employees? Being able to have multiple clients is one of the factors to determine if you're a contractor...

> Being able to have multiple clients is one of the factors to determine if you're a contractor...

This is very common misconception. People can have multiple employers just like contractors can have multiple clients. It has no bearing.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#234

Post by 988747 »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #226
988747 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And thank God that this idea was abandoned. I won't sign another employment contract in my life, even if you put a gun to my head.

That begs for elaboration. Why don't they fit you?

I don't like to see my money being wasted on taxes. With Polish politicians there's zero chance that taxpayer money will be used reasonably.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#236

Post by revolvingocelot »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #32
justinc8687 wrote: post #31

"Equifax flagged 283 contractors for potential 'dual employment,' documents show." Would this not be a big flag to reclassify these contractors as employees? Being able to have multiple clients is one of the factors to determine if you're a contractor...

You get a lot of this up here in Canada. Companies hire you as a contractor, but prohibit you from working other roles.

I can provide another anecdatum to that claim.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#237

Post by varispeed »

cjg wrote: post #200
trollied wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which means it’s essentially going away. I first encountered it in 2005 when I first contracted & it has never affected me. It nearly affected me with my previous contract a couple of years ago as the business really didn’t understand it and was “playing safe” by trying to go “inside IR35” for the role, but that’s utter nonsense for a 3 month engagement such as the one I was doing. I’ve always paid employers NI etc.…

Even with the current tax rates, it's not clear to me that it's a net tax gain for HMRC to push contractors to being permanent. A contractor typically charges VAT - which can more than make up for other taxes - especially if their day rate is higher than it would be on an employee salary.

I think most people forget that when contractor pays itself a dividend, that money comes from the profit which they also pay corporation tax on. Then it's very much like PAYE. Only difference is that the client does not have to pay Employers NI, which is fine, because they are not an employer.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#238

Post by PedroCandeias »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #167
mellavora wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except the stay at home spouse doesn't get any pension/social security benefits from this, plus it tanks their career with massive impact on future earnings.

SS is split with a partner.

That makes the spouse financially dependent on the partner for life, which can be a bad situation.

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#239

Post by rhn_mk1 »

988747 wrote: post #234
rhn_mk1 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That begs for elaboration. Why don't they fit you?

I don't like to see my money being wasted on taxes. With Polish politicians there's zero chance that taxpayer money will be used reasonably.

How's that different than taxes you pay as a contractor?

Re: Equifax used records it collects from companies to fire employees with 2nd jobs

#240

Post by nulbyte »

varispeed wrote: post #233
justinc8687 wrote: post #31

"Equifax flagged 283 contractors for potential 'dual employment,' documents show." Would this not be a big flag to reclassify these contractors as employees? Being able to have multiple clients is one of the factors to determine if you're a contractor...

> Being able to have multiple clients is one of the factors to determine if you're a contractor... This is very common misconception. People can have multiple employers just like contractors can have multiple clients. It has no bearing.

It is not a misconception in the U.S. This is one of many factors in determining the correct classification.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

Post reply on HN