# Subcontractor wages



## bbair (Nov 18, 2012)

Hi, I'm in the process of switching to a 1099 employee status and was curious what a fair wage would be for a good painter to work as a sub per hour? Any insight would be helpful. This may have been discussed here before, but after looking through threads, I still can't find the answers I'm looking for. Thanks in advance! Let's just say that as an employee, I make $20 per hour. What then is a fair rate to charge as a sub?

Sent from my iPhone using PaintTalk


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

http://www.edd.ca.gov/pdf_pub_ctr/de38.pdf

Here. Look. You can check it out too. disregard what state it comes from. It's Cali. But from what I've researched they are all the same as they take their ques from the I.R.S.. I could not care less myself how anyone makes a living. whatever. Just out of curiosity. Answer the questions truthfully on ur bosses be halfe . what is ur feeling. U know. R u a employee or r u a sub contractor?

If you think u r a sub. Comgrats. You can't be fired, or told how to perform ur duties. It's none of ur 'boss' BI business how you operate.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

bbair said:


> Hi, I'm in the process of switching to a 1099 employee status and was curious what a fair wage would be for a good painter to work as a sub per hour? Any insight would be helpful. This may have been discussed here before, but after looking through threads, I still can't find the answers I'm looking for. Thanks in advance! Let's just say that as an employee, I make $20 per hour. What then is a fair rate to charge as a sub?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using PaintTalk


I know it's commonly used, but there's no such thing as a "1099 Employee". They're either one or the other.

It sounds as if you are the one who's about to become a subcontractor. Is your former employer just doing this to use the "subcontractor dodge" or will you be a real-life subcontractor, free to set your own schedule, work for others, etc. There's a lot more to this, especially in some states. It's worth doing some more research.

The biggest single thing is that you'll have to pay "both sides" of employment taxes, AKA "self-employment" tax.


----------



## DeanV (Apr 18, 2007)

And have to carry liability insurance. And no longer qualify for workman's comp. And no more benefits.

Realize that many times hourly is done with subs at times, but hourly pay is often one of the biggest flags that you are not really a sub but an employee.

If you are only occasionally billing hourly to this person, probably OK, but if this is the source of all your work, you are not a sub.


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

I'd give you $15....maybe $17 if youre better then my best guy.....


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DeanV said:


> And have to carry liability insurance. And no longer qualify for workman's comp. And no more benefits.
> 
> Realize that many times hourly is done with subs at times, but hourly pay is often one of the biggest flags that you are not really a sub but an employee.
> 
> If you are only occasionally billing hourly to this person, probably OK, but if this is the source of all your work, you are not a sub.


Good points.

In a number of states, a sub cannot be performing the same trade as the prime contractor. In other words, a painting contractor cannot have other painting "contractors" working for him. Those states have caught on to that workaround.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

richmondpainting said:


> I'd give you $15....maybe $17 if youre better then my best guy.....


If he's getting paid $20/hr as an employee???


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

Gough said:


> Good points.
> 
> In a number of states, a sub cannot be performing the same trade as the prime contractor. In other words, a painting contractor cannot have other painting "contractors" working for him. Those states have caught on to that workaround.


That doesn't make much sense....or are you just talking hourly subs?


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

Gough said:


> If he's getting paid $20/hr as an employee???


I'm just saying....around here that's top of scale for non union ......house painters...


----------



## DeanV (Apr 18, 2007)

I believe the east coast is that way. A painter cannot 1099 painters.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

richmondpainting said:


> That doesn't make much sense....or are you just talking hourly subs?


????? AKA "employees"??


----------



## bbair (Nov 18, 2012)

richmondpainting said:


> I'd give you $15....maybe $17 if youre better then my best guy.....


Hmm... Thanks for the input.

Sent from my iPhone using PaintTalk


----------



## Rbriggs82 (Jul 9, 2012)

DeanV said:


> I believe the east coast is that way. A painter cannot 1099 painters.


Depends on the state. I know mass is like that but PA, NJ, and SC are not. I wish every state made that rule that'll end the sub loophole once and for all. :yes:


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Gough said:


> Good points. In a number of states, a sub cannot be performing the same trade as the prime contractor. In other words, a painting contractor cannot have other painting "contractors" working for him. Those states have caught on to that workaround.


I went through the twenty questions in quite a few states. Massechuesetts for sure. And I tried to find a way that a paint contractor (what I know to be a conventional paint contractor) could legally operate a paimtimg business with all subs and legally schedule work, and control quality and so on and so forth. I tried to see it beimg legal. It can't be done IMO.

Just answer the questions. It's as simple as that. A sub can't be scheduled, how he performs his work can't be controlled, his equipment, materials and training can't be provided. He can't be fired. He can't quit. He must be available to work for others. 

How can you be a painting contractor if you legally can't schedule, quality control , hire and fire and so on? IMO it can't legally be done. I tried to see it beimg legit. I can't.


----------



## Rbriggs82 (Jul 9, 2012)

Oden said:


> I went through the twenty questions in quite a few states. Massechuesetts for sure. And I tried to find a way that a paint contractor (what I know to be a conventional paint contractor) could legally operate a paimtimg business with all subs and legally schedule work, and control quality and so on and so forth. I tried to see it beimg legal. It can't be done IMO.
> 
> Just answer the questions. It's as simple as that. A sub can't be scheduled, how he performs his work can't be controlled, his equipment, materials and training can't be provided. He can't be fired. He can't quit. He must be available to work for others.
> 
> How can you be a painting contractor if you legally can't schedule, quality control , hire and fire and so on? IMO it can't legally be done. I tried to see it beimg legit. I can't.


My biggest fear would be if a sub got hurt or fell off a ladder and died. You know for damn sure it wouldn't be pretty for all involved. I don't want that kind if liability hanging over my head. :no:


----------



## MikeCalifornia (Aug 26, 2012)

If you are a subcontractor, you will have a sub agreement for each job. It will explain what the job details are and when the job is to be completed for an agreed amount. As the sub you are responsible for getting the job done in the time allowed, purchasing material, hiring men if needed, running the job, etc. 

It's the same as being a paint sub for a general contractor, I don't know why this is such a mystery when it comes to working for a paint contractor. Some paint companies operate this way. It does make scheduling difficult when everyone is busy and you can't find a sub to do the work. I have sub'd for a k&b company when they sell an exterior job. Sometimes they call and say they have a job, if I'm busy I just tell them to call me on the next one. They have a list of guys they call. I get a 1099 at the end of the year for all the work I have done for them. Also when I agreed to become a sub, I signed their company agreement, basically stating that I would not work for the customer on my own, market within a couple of blocks of the house, wear their shirts, etc.

$200/day per person is a pretty standard amount in CA. You're not going to get rich, but it will pay the bills and keep your men busy if they have enough work. This amount is not what is in your contract, but that is what the paint company that sold the work is calculating with.


----------



## Brian C (Oct 8, 2011)

Gawd, you guys pay peanuts. My workers earn $ 30 an hour.


----------



## plainpainter (Nov 6, 2007)

I don't understand this about scheduling, I think you guys are taking the interpretation a little too far. A GC as far as I know can and does schedule in subs on a job.


----------



## MikeCalifornia (Aug 26, 2012)

Rbriggs82 said:


> My biggest fear would be if a sub got hurt or fell off a ladder and died. You know for damn sure it wouldn't be pretty for all involved. I don't want that kind if liability hanging over my head. :no:


You need to have your own heath insurance, liability, and WC if you have employees, same as if you are on your own time, own company.


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

MikeCalifornia said:


> If you are a subcontractor, you will have a sub agreement for each job. It will explain what the job details are and when the job is to be completed for an agreed amount. As the sub you are responsible for getting the job done in the time allowed, purchasing material, hiring men if needed, running the job, etc.
> 
> It's the same as being a paint sub for a general contractor, I don't know why this is such a mystery when it comes to working for a paint contractor. Some paint companies operate this way. It does make scheduling difficult when everyone is busy and you can't find a sub to do the work. I have sub'd for a k&b company when they sell an exterior job. Sometimes they call and say they have a job, if I'm busy I just tell them to call me on the next one. They have a list of guys they call. I get a 1099 at the end of the year for all the work I have done for them. Also when I agreed to become a sub, I signed their company agreement, basically stating that I would not work for the customer on my own, market within a couple of blocks of the house, wear their shirts, etc.
> 
> $200/day per person is a pretty standard amount in CA. You're not going to get rich, but it will pay the bills and keep your men busy if they have enough work. This amount is not what is in your contract, but that is what the paint company that sold the work is calculating with.


This is exactly how certa pro and some fellow followers work....I wish I could do it...and guarantee myself % 50 on every job...


----------



## aaron61 (Apr 29, 2007)

You cannot "sub" by the hour or day. Well,let me rephrase that. You can do whatever you want but that is not how sub contracting works. 

You must sub contract the job to a licensed insured "real" business or company for a set price.


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

aaron61 said:


> You cannot "sub" by the hour or day. Well,let me rephrase that. You can do whatever you want but that is not how sub contracting works.
> 
> You must sub contract the job to a licensed insured "real" business or company for a set price.


I know a few companies up here that have "1099" employees. ..aka "subs"


----------



## TJ Paint (Jun 18, 2009)

Funny threads.


----------



## jacob33 (Jun 2, 2009)

If you are a business that has employees works for lots of different people and gets subbed a job from another painter by the hour its not an issue to do time and material the irs should not care you are an actual business paying workmens comp/general liability insurance, taxes. 

That is the real test are you a real business or a employee.

An Example would be If I got a large contract to big for my small company and I subbed it to another large paint company that should be fine to do by the hour or bid they are a company not an employee. A 1099 would be fine he pays all the stuff on his employees there fore subcontracting is correct.

If you are one person working constantly for 1 company as a subcontractor by the hour that is called an employee not a subcontractor


----------



## MikeCalifornia (Aug 26, 2012)

exactly!!:thumbsup:


----------



## MikeCalifornia (Aug 26, 2012)

richmondpainting said:


> This is exactly how certa pro and some fellow followers work....I wish I could do it...and guarantee myself % 50 on every job...


The key with this is:
a. Not many people who will pay or that you can "sell" into paying double what another paint company will do the job for.
b. You won't be able to get a sub to do a job for half of what you would normally bid a job for.
c. Half is a little excessive for a company who does not pay a sales commission, if you were in the great spot to have too much work and needed to start subbing jobs, keeping 25% of a contract would be more reasonable.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

MikeCalifornia said:


> If you are a subcontractor, you will have a sub agreement for each job. It will explain what the job details are and when the job is to be completed for an agreed amount. As the sub you are responsible for getting the job done in the time allowed, purchasing material, hiring men if needed, running the job, etc.
> 
> It's the same as being a paint sub for a general contractor, I don't know why this is such a mystery when it comes to working for a paint contractor. Some paint companies operate this way. It does make scheduling difficult when everyone is busy and you can't find a sub to do the work. I have sub'd for a k&b company when they sell an exterior job. Sometimes they call and say they have a job, if I'm busy I just tell them to call me on the next one. They have a list of guys they call. I get a 1099 at the end of the year for all the work I have done for them. Also when I agreed to become a sub, I signed their company agreement, basically stating that I would not work for the customer on my own, market within a couple of blocks of the house, wear their shirts, etc.
> 
> $200/day per person is a pretty standard amount in CA. You're not going to get rich, but it will pay the bills and keep your men busy if they have enough work. This amount is not what is in your contract, but that is what the paint company that sold the work is calculating with.


That's the sort of language that lawyers use to take apart the "but I'm an independent contractor" approach. That's toying with the whole "independent" part.


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

MikeCalifornia said:


> The key with this is:
> a. Not many people who will pay or that you can "sell" into paying double what another paint company will do the job for.
> b. You won't be able to get a sub to do a job for half of what you would normally bid a job for.
> c. Half is a little excessive for a company who does not pay a sales commission, if you were in the great spot to have too much work and needed to start subbing jobs, keeping 25% of a contract would be more reasonable.


I'm just saying...I know certa pro does it and another company....

They take advantage of young ..new companies...promises some one who has little to no work and gives them unlimited amount of jobs...most new companies would rather work for less....than not have any work at all.....and going from $10-$15 per hour to subbing jobs and making say $1000 a week is quit the change.....I thought I was on top of the world when I found certa pro...now things are different


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

Rbriggs82 said:


> Depends on the state. I know mass is like that but PA, NJ, and SC are not. I wish every state made that rule that'll end the sub loophole once and for all. :yes:


In my very long experience being a painting contractor in Ma , it's hard to find a real painting contractor who has payroll employees . Most 1099 or pay cash plain and simple. Especially house painters. It's also very big in commercial among all the trades. I'm not saying I agree or condone it but I fully understand why they do it.


----------



## richmondpainting (Feb 24, 2012)

thinkpainting/nick said:


> In my very long experience being a painting contractor in Ma , it's hard to find a real painting contractor who has payroll employees . Most 1099 or pay cash plain and simple. Especially house painters. It's also very big in commercial among all the trades. I'm not saying I agree or condone it but I fully understand why they do it.


I'm sure it is like that all over.....some guys just don't want to be ridiculed on paint talk.....and also think every irs agent and home owner is monitoring there every post.......


----------



## The 3rd Coat (Aug 17, 2013)

That stuff is very common in Australia too. I have never met a painter that was a full time employee with all the benefits etc. Even if they are practically an employee, ie. they work for one single company, are paid by the hour, have to turn up on time etc, they are not paid the extra benefits that go with being an employee. Superannuation most importantly.

That's why no self-respecting painter will "sub" for less than 30 an hour, otherwise better off on the dole and doing cash jobs.


----------



## Brian C (Oct 8, 2011)

Hmmm, I must be the odd man out then. My guys are on permanent casual wages with a 25 % loading for inclement weather or sick days which I don't pay. I do however pay superanuation and Co- invest along with work cover and insurance. 

I have a reliable crew of workers, weeding out slackers and unreliable's in the past, and my team get a nice Christmas bonus from me as well.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

thinkpainting/nick said:


> In my very long experience being a painting contractor in Ma , it's hard to find a real painting contractor who has payroll employees . Most 1099 or pay cash plain and simple. Especially house painters. It's also very big in commercial among all the trades. I'm not saying I agree or condone it but I fully understand why they do it.


That might make for an interesting poll. 

Speaking for us, we've done a payroll since I first started the business, no 1099s, no paying guys cash, no paying guys OTBs.


----------



## Monstertruck (Oct 26, 2013)

Gough said:


> That might make for an interesting poll.
> 
> Speaking for us, we've done a payroll since I first started the business, no 1099s, no paying guys cash, no paying guys OTBs.


Ayuh, same here. 

You may get away with running a cash/subcontractor scam for years.
You may think it's "ok, because everyone else is doing it."
And then one day, you may get caught and lose it all.

Hint: hiring DeadBeat Dads is like sending up a flare begging to be audited.

My wife's cousin who is a GC got caught twice because of this.
Fines over $100k both times.

It's not worth the risk for me.


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

We have employees for our company.
The majority of our competition in Toronto uses employees pays them as such
and treats them like "subs.
It seems to be the same everywhere. 
At the end it just means that the take home pay for a painter is small.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

George Z said:


> We have employees for our company.
> The majority of our competition in Toronto uses employees pays them as such
> and treats them like "subs.
> It seems to be the same everywhere.
> At the end it just means that the take home pay for a painter is small.


I'm not sure what you mean by that. Make them pay for all of the employment taxes? (I'm not sure how that all works in CA) Make them buy their own tools and supplies? Pay them piecework or by the job? Don't pay them? ::whistling2:

Or just hire them when they need bodies?


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

sorry if when reading over this thread quickly, I missed a bunch, but I did read where Mass was mentioned. I was on the "sub-contractor" end of this and it applied to WC premiums. Since I was fully independent, had my own insurance etc, the GC was allowed to hire me as a subcontractor. He was attempting to do the same for his carpenters, but without them being truly independent, He got whacked big time for WC premiums. 

I am sure there are other issues pertaining to taxes. 

here's the Mass law:



> The Massachusetts Independent Contractor Act, M.G.L. 149, sect;148B, provides that Massachusetts workers are presumed to be employees, rather than independent contractors, unless they are able to satisfy all the requirements of a rigorous three-prøng test:
> 
> 1) the individual is free from control and direction in connection with the performance of the service, both under his contract for the performance of service and in fact
> 
> ...



#2 is the most critical. OUTSIDE THE USUAL COURSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER. As a CG, wallpapering and painting would be considered to be WITHIN the GC's usual course of business, as would plumbers and electricians, and MOST definitely his carpenters. 

Every state is different, but I wouldn't be surprised if 90+% had a similar three prøng test.


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

Gough said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by that. Make them pay for all of the employment taxes? (I'm not sure how that all works in CA) Make them buy their own tools and supplies? Pay them piecework or by the job? Don't pay them? ::whistling2:
> 
> Or just hire them when they need bodies?


8 hours x $25, write a cheque for $200. 
You show up and work like an employee and yes, they would be responsible for all the employment taxes.
That is not a legal sub any way you look at it. 

By the way, in Canada an employee receives 9 paid Statutory Holidays
and a mandatory (4% of pay) vacation pay.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

George Z said:


> 8 hours x $25, write a cheque for $200.
> You show up and work like an employee and yes, they would be responsible for all the employment taxes.
> That is not a legal sub any way you look at it.
> 
> ...


Civic holidays for the win!!


----------



## TJ Paint (Jun 18, 2009)

Nov-dec have been good for me. 3 holidays and 8hrs admin comp time!

Holiday pay is @ 2.5x


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

George Z said:


> 8 hours x $25, write a cheque for $200. You show up and work like an employee and yes, they would be responsible for all the employment taxes. That is not a legal sub any way you look at it. By the way, in Canada an employee receives 9 paid Statutory Holidays and a mandatory (4% of pay) vacation pay.


Any employee? Seriously? Can't be. Like is there a minimum time they must work at the job to be eligible? How could in the trades you get paid days off I cannot relate. Where would the day get charged to. what job? It's boggling my mind.

The electrician on the job( it's split. Some trades r union. Some not) he gets paid days off and vaca and stuff. He gets paid for Xmas is how it came up. Union guys we have no paid days off. I can't relate to them or understand what job it gets charged to. I guess it goes to overhead?


----------



## aaron61 (Apr 29, 2007)

It doesn't get charged to any particular job. It is part of overhead


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

It's a job cost, we consider it part of the burden (total about 24%)
If there are no hours worked it doesn't happen, except for OH people.

Mandatory pay for employees here:

4% of pay for vacation pay which is about two weeks off with pay.

Christmas
Boxing Day
New Years
Family Day
Good Friday
Victoria Day
Canada Day
Labour Day
Thanksgiving

You can see why so many try to work around it.


----------



## Repaint Florida (May 31, 2012)

Christmas
Boxing Day 
New Years
Family Day
Good Friday
Victoria Day
Canada Day
Labour Day
Thanksgiving


----------



## aaron61 (Apr 29, 2007)

Hmmmm couple of christian days there I see. Hows that fair?


----------



## wje (Apr 11, 2009)

George Z said:


> It's a job cost, we consider it part of the burden (total about 24%)
> If there are no hours worked it doesn't happen, except for OH people.
> 
> Mandatory pay for employees here:
> ...


 Not sure how you do it George, But I add the 4% to each check, so any time off is on employees dime, but it works out the same based on 52 weeks anyways.. 


For people not familiar with how much an employee cost compared to a sub, in Canada we match pension pay each check100%, pay a 40% match on Employment Insurance, and I pay roughly 7.5% for workers comp. 

EI is relatively cheap but CPP and WC add up every month. Our payroll is due at the 15th of the following month every month. My accountant told me if you fall 2 months behind your file goes to audit automatically. (not sure if this is true, but not wanting to find out)

Going the subcontractor route is very easy and you can see why the government doesn't like it, and once you realize how it is to properly run things, you can appreciate the process and accept the responsibility of being a business owner with EMPLOYEES.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

George Z said:


> 8 hours x $25, write a cheque for $200.
> You show up and work like an employee and yes, they would be responsible for all the employment taxes.
> That is not a legal sub any way you look at it.
> 
> ...





George Z said:


> It's a job cost, we consider it part of the burden (total about 24%)
> If there are no hours worked it doesn't happen, except for OH people.
> 
> Mandatory pay for employees here:
> ...


Civic holiday doesn't count???


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

> Civic holiday doesn't count???


It is off by many but not paid unless you are a gov. worker, & in some other classifications (per collective agreements)



> Boxing Day?


At least Valentine's Day is not.



> Hmmmm couple of christian days there I see. Hows that fair?


Not sure


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

> Not sure how you do it George, But I add the 4% to each check, so any time off is on employees dime, but it works out the same based on 52 weeks anyways..


The same for 90 days then we keep it until they need it. Some request it earlier and have no money for vacation.



> For people not familiar with how much an employee cost compared to a sub, in Canada we match pension pay each check100%, pay a 40% match on Employment Insurance, and I pay roughly 7.5% for workers comp.


It is about a 24% add to wages


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

George Z said:


> It's a job cost, we consider it part of the burden (total about 24%) If there are no hours worked it doesn't happen, except for OH people. Mandatory pay for employees here: 4% of pay for vacation pay which is about two weeks off with pay. Christmas Boxing Day New Years Family Day Good Friday Victoria Day Canada Day Labour Day Thanksgiving You can see why so many try to work around it.


and if I'm not mistaken health care also. That all adds up to a rather sweet fringe package. For every citizen.


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

Oden said:


> and if I'm not mistaken health care also. That all adds up to a rather sweet fringe package. For every citizen.


And some seriously high taxes as well.


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

thinkpainting/nick said:


> And some seriously high taxes as well.


I don't want to make this political it's just a response.
Per capita the US spends way more tax money on health care than Canada.
Not just now but for at least the last 10 years.
These numbers are widely available.
I am not saying tax rates, that is debatable. Talking about taxes spent on healthcare per capita.


----------



## PressurePros (May 6, 2007)

So much discussion when it's not that complicated.

In the US, the IRS defines a sub as being a separate legal business entity. Tons of guys may skirt that but they are juggling swords until their ticket gets punched and they get audited.

*Pay rate is also easy:*
- If you are the contractor, you pay a percentage of what you billed for the job.
- If you are the subcontractor, you either accept what the contractor is paying, or you submit a bid based on what you need to earn a profit.

An agreement is drawn up and if the subcontractor is not a C or S corporation, they get 1099'd.


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

PressurePros said:


> So much discussion when it's not that complicated.
> 
> In the US, the IRS defines a sub as being a separate legal business entity. Tons of guys may skirt that but they are juggling swords until their ticket gets punched and they get audited.
> 
> ...


That's about it in a nutshell! Thanks!:thumbsup:


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

George Z said:


> I don't want to make this political it's just a response.
> Per capita the US spends way more tax money on health care than Canada.
> Not just now but for at least the last 10 years.
> These numbers are widely available.
> I am not saying tax rates, that is debatable. Talking about taxes spent on healthcare per capita.


http://www.investopedia.com/financi...ans-really-pay-more-taxes-than-americans.aspx


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

Nick, that's an editorial piece you linked.

Americans per capita spend more of their tax dollars* on public health care* than people in Canada, the UK, or Australia or anyone else.
These numbers have not changed for years and are impossible to dispute. 
These are figures from the World Health Organization and the OECD.


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

George Z said:


> Nick, that's an editorial piece you linked.
> 
> Americans per capita spend more of their tax dollars on public health care than people in Canada, the UK, or Australia or anyone else.
> These numbers have not changed for years and are impossible to dispute.
> These are figures from the World Health Organization and the OECD.


I know and it said what you said to be true I was wrong I always thought you paid much more in taxes and in some ways you do but all in all seems we pay more. As for health care no offense but being close to Boston hospitals is a good thing.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

George Z said:


> Nick, that's an editorial piece you linked.
> 
> Americans per capita spend more of their tax dollars* on public health care* than people in Canada, the UK, or Australia or anyone else.
> These numbers have not changed for years and are impossible to dispute.
> These are figures from the World Health Organization and the OECD.


Even worse, all of the that money spent doesn't come close to resulting in the highest quality of health care, not by a long shot.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

Gough said:


> Even worse, all of the that money spent doesn't come close to resulting in the highest quality of health care, not by a long shot.
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623


http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/09/the-canadian-patients’-remedy-for-health-care-go-to-america/


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

thinkpainting/nick said:


> http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/09/the-canadian-patients’-remedy-for-health-care-go-to-america/


Nick, anyone can have bad stories about whatever, 
the US health care has a few horror stories of it's own. 

Facts please.
We established we pay less for it in taxes and otherwise.
Now the most important metrics, there are more:

- Infant mortality is much lower in Canada and Europe than in the U.S.

- Outcomes with major illnesses, such as cancer and heart disease, are better than in the United States.

- Longevity is better in Canada and Europe than in the U.S.

Not easy to dispute these cause you can't. They are the most important and facts backed independently by numbers

Stories etc. there are many from both sides.

I think this thread should not move to the politics thread as it is not how it started.
Now to bring it back to the subject and how it affects paint contractors and their employees. 
It costs only about 24% burden to give our painters all they need, 
yes, with nine paid Holidays and two week mandatory vacation pay.
That covers Employment insurance, pension, Workers comp etc.
And of course they get (arguably, sure) good healthcare included.
I am sure you know there is no way in hell you can come close to this cost in properly covering your painters to include all the above.
And I think painters taken care of and providing them a good living is what we all talk about right?


----------



## vermontpainter (Dec 24, 2007)

George Z said:


> And I think painters taken care of and providing them a good living is what we all talk about right?


I don't have an interest in the politics of it, but yes I think this is the most important issue. 

This is just a general statement, not a reflection of any of the members in this thread, but sometimes I think that there is a prevailing attitude among paint contractors that its impossible to play by the rules and win, because so few do. 

Sadly, too many paint contractors live their life looking over their shoulder.


----------



## Bender (Aug 10, 2008)

George Z said:


> Nick, anyone can have bad stories about whatever,
> the US health care has a few horror stories of it's own.
> 
> Facts please.
> ...


So if you pay a painter $25 an hour (rounding for simplicities sake) what is their 'average' take home on a 40 hour week?
And are they paying 100% of the cost for insurance or do you _have_ to contribute as an employer?


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

Bender said:


> So if you pay a painter $25 an hour (rounding for simplicities sake) what is their 'average' take home on a 40 hour week?
> And are they paying 100% of the cost for insurance or do you _have_ to contribute as an employer?


I don't do the payroll and mine is salary but found this calculator, it looks accurate:

http://www.paycheckcity.com/canada/coeatonca/caResults.aspx

For two weeks 80 hours take home pay: $1,435.39. 
That is with taxes taken out.
There is no direct Health Insurance payment or deduction.
It is obviously part of the taxes deducted.
Now, anyway you see it, considering that the pay covers taxes, "free" Health Care, Employment insurance, Pension, and Workers comp. 
and if you consider same coverage (apples to apples) with a user pay model,
you can see that our painters as employees are easier to compensate fairly.
Oh let's not forget, the employer is not burdened directly for any healthcare coverage.
So from a paint contractor business sense, we have it easier too.


----------



## Bender (Aug 10, 2008)

Fascinating. This last year I've seriously contemplated dual citizenship.
Not interested in the politics either but I think within the next decade I will move my family out of the US.


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

Sometimes the politics of this screw the reality of it.
There are sales taxes, property taxes etc. waiting for the net pay.
And the issues Nick keeps bringing up with contractors having difficulty when
playing fair and getting paid well are our issues too.

But what Scott said is right:



> but sometimes I think that there is a prevailing attitude among paint contractors that its impossible to play by the rules and win, because so few do.
> 
> Sadly, too many paint contractors live their life looking over their shoulder.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

Bender said:


> Fascinating. I think within the next decade I will move my family out of the US.


California ? Cambridge, Mass ?


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Canadian painters have 2 weeks vaca plus paid holidays and health insurance.
All of them. 

And businesses in Canada, all of them, have employees covered by healthcare and with, well, they all have a fringe package.
at no coast to the business other than in taxes that all of their counterparts also pay.

Must be terrible to live under such oppression.


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

George Z said:


> Nick, anyone can have bad stories about whatever,
> the US health care has a few horror stories of it's own.
> 
> Facts please.
> ...


Here's excellent facts about your healthcare http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-know-about-canadian-health-care-in-one-post/. As for the rest of your post... That's it I'm moving north burning my Bruins Jersey grabbing my broken J.C. Tremblay stick (very valued possession )
And moving north of the border......not. Lets not make it political points made...


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

George Z said:


> Sometimes the politics of this screw the reality of it.
> There are sales taxes, property taxes etc. waiting for the net pay.
> And the issues Nick keeps bringing up with contractors having difficulty when
> playing fair and getting paid well are our issues too.
> ...


I'm stating what I know to be a fact and has been since I started in the construction trades and it gets worse every year not playing by the rules all the way from the top of the big guys to the one man band. Successful painting contractors are far and few between. Number one reason is not charging enough no idea how to rally run a business . We used to have some serious blow outs about this in my old PDCA chapter a long long while back. I've never said I condone it or even agree with it. As I write this I'm sitting with 4 other contractors and the discussion is healthcare in 2014 or Obamacare and how much it will effect costs for business . Taxes are coming that's part of this as is higher unemployment tax in my state. Somewhere along the line you can't just keep passing the rate on to your customers I mean when does stop.... Anyway I'm about to get beat up cause I said I'm gonna burn my Bruins Jersey...


----------



## George Z (Apr 15, 2007)

thinkpainting/nick said:


> Here's excellent facts about your healthcare http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-know-about-canadian-health-care-in-one-post/. As for the rest of your post... That's it I'm moving north burning my Bruins Jersey grabbing my broken J.C. Tremblay stick (very valued possession )
> And moving north of the border......not. Lets not make it political points made...


Not commenting on this, to stop the politics of this discussion,
so you are graciously given last word :thumbsup:

Hockey here sucks. We will never win another stanley cup, so I wouldn't leave the Bruins if I was you.


----------



## TJ Paint (Jun 18, 2009)

Sounds like paradise. Wish my dad was a draft dodger...


----------



## vermontpainter (Dec 24, 2007)

I have decided, based upon this thread, to 1099 myself this year.


----------



## Wolfgang (Nov 16, 2008)

Bender said:


> Fascinating. This last year I've seriously contemplated dual citizenship.
> Not interested in the politics either but I think within the next decade I will move my family out of the US.


 I've had dual citizenship since I was 13. Not as easy to accomplish now days as it was then. I've always had the opportunity to move to Germany and run the family businesses, but ya know... all in all the US is a pretty good place to live. Think I'll just stick it out here.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

George Z said:


> *Hockey here sucks.* We will never win another stanley cup, so I wouldn't leave the Bruins if I was you.


I'd rather Toronto than Vancouver - class has more appeal than whatever passes for sportsmanship out on THAT coast.


----------



## Bender (Aug 10, 2008)

Wolfgang said:


> but ya know... all in all the US is a pretty good place to live. Think I'll just stick it out here.


You would be hard pressed to find a bigger patriot then I but sometimes a gambit is necessary for the long win.


----------



## Tonyg (Dec 9, 2007)

bbair said:


> Hi, I'm in the process of switching to a 1099 employee status and was curious what a fair wage would be for a good painter to work as a sub per hour? Any insight would be helpful. This may have been discussed here before, but after looking through threads, I still can't find the answers I'm looking for. Thanks in advance! Let's just say that as an employee, I make $20 per hour. What then is a fair rate to charge as a sub?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using PaintTalk



Doesn't look like anyone is really addressing your question but rather debating the fine points of of IC v. Employee status. Was just going through year end numbers and was looking at the costs for budgeting temporary labor 

I have a rough chart that I use if I bring on some short term or day labor help. I break down what I pay depending on circumstance. Using a subcontractor without a biz licence may be reclassified by IRS in an audit. I think everyone else listed the specifics for the determination. Let's assume a 10% WC rate (in my state if the sub does not have WC coverage the company is responsible for paying the rate)

A '$20' Employee with my state and federal employment taxes
$18.47 or 92%- net to the employee 
$23.80 or 119% gross to the company

A Sub/IC with a biz lic and no WC receives a $20 payment
$14.94 or 75%- net to the IC
$20.00 or 100% gross to the company

A Sub/IC with no biz lic and no WC (day labor or cash) receives a $20 payment
$20.00 or 100%- net to the worker
$29.20 or 146% gross to the company


So, to your question, If you can legally meet the requirements for Sub/IC status, if they get a business license I believe you would need to pay them roughly $22.25 ($24.72-10% WC) to be equivalent to what they would have received Net before. It would still be about a 4% increase to the company.

Day labor, cash, etc - the company would need to pay no more than $16.30 for cost to be equivalent to what it was paying them as an employee.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Tonyg said:


> Doesn't look like anyone is really addressing your question but rather debating the fine points of of IC v. Employee status. Was just going through year end numbers and was looking at the costs for budgeting temporary labor
> 
> I have a rough chart that I use if I bring on some short term or day labor help. I break down what I pay depending on circumstance. Using a subcontractor without a biz licence may be reclassified by IRS in an audit. I think everyone else listed the specifics for the determination. Let's assume a 10% WC rate (in my state if the sub does not have WC coverage the company is responsible for paying the rate)
> 
> ...


I think bbair is wondering what he would have to charge his former employer when he changes to an IC, so it's kind of the other side of the coin. In other words, what would he have to charge that would be the equivalent of an employee making $20? He would have to pay an additional 7.65% for SE tax, whatever insurance he'll need (if the former employer can cover his WC, then that would be a wash), and the cost of a business lic.(where required). That seems like the absolute minimum. If there were additional employee perks, truck, cell phone, etc., then those would become his costs now, and should be reflected in what he charges his former company.


----------



## Tonyg (Dec 9, 2007)

Gough said:


> I think bbair is wondering what he would have to charge his former employer when he changes to an IC, so it's kind of the other side of the coin. In other words, what would he have to charge that would be the equivalent of an employee making $20? He would have to pay an additional 7.65% for SE tax, whatever insurance he'll need (if the former employer can cover his WC, then that would be a wash), and the cost of a business lic.(where required). That seems like the absolute minimum. If there were additional employee perks, truck, cell phone, etc., then those would become his costs now, and should be reflected in what he charges his former company.


$21.81 plus the cost of WC if needed. Besides benefits he would have to provide all tools and transportation including ladders etc. He could have a lease for ladders, spray rigs, even vehicles, etc. from the company but it would cost either way.


----------



## thinkpainting/nick (Dec 25, 2012)

Tonyg said:


> $21.81 plus the cost of WC if needed. Besides benefits he would have to provide all tools and transportation including ladders etc. He could have a lease for ladders, spray rigs, even vehicles, etc. from the company but it would cost either way.


The sad thing is that's pretty much the same wage a sub would make 20 yrs ago. What's that line --- the more things change the more they stay the same.


----------



## Mrlaroo (Oct 1, 2012)

In Oregon you can run a team of subs, seen both painters and framers doing it. My time on the job when ever an employer wants to 1099 you, they are trying to get out of their own responsibilities. I personally don't think it is worth it, cause you most likely won't be getting to the desired number you are looking for. And owners that pay their top guy 15$ an hour is sad.


----------



## daren (Jul 5, 2008)

Mrlaroo said:


> And owners that pay their top guy 15$ an hour is sad.


Contractors using illegal and under the table workers have kept the wages down for all trades but especially painters. Plus contractors allowing or ignoring drug use and drinking. I've heard many times, "I know he's a drunk but he works cheap."


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

daren said:


> Contractors using illegal and under the table workers have kept the wages down for all trades but especially painters. Plus contractors allowing or ignoring drug use and drinking. I've heard many times, "I know he's a drunk but he works cheap."


That's the sort of behavior that gives us the stellar reputation that we enjoy.


----------



## daren (Jul 5, 2008)

bbair said:


> Hi, I'm in the process of switching to a 1099 employee status and was curious what a fair wage would be for a good painter to work as a sub per hour? Any insight would be helpful. This may have been discussed here before, but after looking through threads, I still can't find the answers I'm looking for. Thanks in advance! Let's just say that as an employee, I make $20 per hour. What then is a fair rate to charge as a sub?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using PaintTalk



You are now your own business. You need to figure out your real costs of doing business. Not just the cost of pushing a brush. Workers comp and liability insurance, taxes, business license, vehicle expenses, phone, utilities, book keeping etc. You know, all those things your old boss is trying to avoid paying. Then figure in that nasty little thing called profit. My guess is that if you are charging less than $40/hr then you are losing money every hour you work for this guy.


----------



## SprayCutAndRoll (Oct 12, 2013)

daren said:


> You are now your own business. You need to figure out your real costs of doing business. Not just the cost of pushing a brush. Workers comp and liability insurance, taxes, business license, vehicle expenses, phone, utilities, book keeping etc. You know, all those things your old boss is trying to avoid paying. Then figure in that nasty little thing called profit. My guess is that if you are charging less than $40/hr then you are losing money every hour you work for this guy.


True, so true.


----------



## premierpainter (Apr 17, 2007)

Looking way too deep into this. It is not this complicated.


----------



## palehorse222 (Oct 22, 2008)

Brian C said:


> Gawd, you guys pay peanuts. My workers earn $ 30 an hour.


Melbourne is a major city, yea? I work Dutchess, Putnam, and Westchester co's which are the 3 co's north /east of NYC...done plaster in NYC, and have 12 paint clients in NYC...$30-$40/hour is not out of the ordinary for SKILLED painters working for clients who CARE ENOUGH AND have the $ (and aren't super cheap) When the economy is good and the fatcats are feeling extra comfy, money flows like heineken on a friday afternoon in the summer. 2005 and 2006 in NYC was like that...painted half a penthouse-4 days-$4000, 2 of us..paid my guy $300 for the day

I've charged $1800 to paint a 20 x 12 bedroom in manhattan and recieved a $100 tip, but if you paid $60 to park the van for the day...it's all relevant also, if you are talking about major cities..plaster repair is ususally par for the course

It does seem unfair when GOOD painters earn only $120/day, but even in upstate NY, competition has stiffened driving wages down...$250/day used to be standard for a skilled painter with GL...now $200 is the norm..It really depends on who you are painting for, and what you are painting. Cheers mate!


----------

