Background Checks Come To Colorado

[Adam]

Those of us in Colorado got emails today from CHSAA stating that we will have to submit an arrest report from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation before the seasons this year.

Some questions raised on our local FB page that aren't answered in the memo from CHSAA:

1. Who stores the information?
2. How is the review board assigned?

And the big question dealing with efficacy: What's to prevent a convicted offender from using an alias to get his officiating license and submitting an arrest report for the fictional alias? I don't recall submitting any ID when I signed up the first time.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Adam

Those of us in Colorado got emails today from CHSAA stating that we will have to submit an arrest report from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation before the seasons this year.

Some questions raised on our local FB page that aren't answered in the memo from CHSAA:

1. Who stores the information?
2. How is the review board assigned?

And the big question dealing with efficacy: What's to prevent a convicted offender from using an alias to get his officiating license and submitting an arrest report for the fictional alias? I don't recall submitting any ID when I signed up the first time.

Fingerprints?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Fingerprints?

Not part of the package at this point.

[rockyroad]

But you will have to provide SSN and DL#, correct?

[MD Longhorn]

An "arrest" report? I don't even know how I'd go about finding that sort of thing on myself. Background checks are one thing - "arrest report" sounds like something entirely different... and the 2 concerns you raised are exactly what I would have a problem with.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

An "arrest" report? I don't even know how I'd go about finding that sort of thing on myself. Background checks are one thing - "arrest report" sounds like something entirely different... and the 2 concerns you raised are exactly what I would have a problem with.

Instructions were given to go to the CBI website and buy the form. Sounds pretty simple, but I'll let you know if it's different. The idea is any arrests you've had will show up and require further documentation to show their disposition. Convictions will require review by a board.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Adam

Not part of the package at this point.

I'm surprised they didn't go with the fingerprint plan first. It wouldn't eliminate fraud but it would make it much more difficult. Plus there's no need to submit anything about your background. If you've been arrested, it'll come up.

NYC started fingerprinting officials in the 2008-09 school year (it's a requiement for anyone doing regular business with the NYC public schools). A lot of people objected but as my BV assignor said, "You don't have to get fingerprinted but you also don't have to work." Let's just say our officiating ranks took a hit at the start of that season. My only objection was we had to pay the $115 for the process.

[scrounge]

Also, a bit tangentially but since it came up, organizations are required to send you a 1099 if you provide over $600 of services, but they're by no means prohibited from sending you a 1099 for less than $600.

The IRS has been pushing for more and more reporting of independent contractor pay for a few years now and leaning on easily identifiable organizations like schools to do so. I got two 1099s this year for less than $600. One school district did it for one game - a 1099 for a single $40 game. I think this will be more and more prevalent in the future.

[bob jenkins]

I think (but am not sure) that the schools report it all to the IRS, but only need send it to you if > $600.

Doesn't matter to me either way -- I report it all whether I get cash, a check for < $600 or a check(s) for > $600.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by Adam

What's to prevent a convicted offender from using an alias to get his officiating license and submitting an arrest report for the fictional alias?

How would the person get paid? I know different places do things differently, but I imaging all sorts of problems come tax time if my W-2 from officiating didn't match my real name.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

How would the person get paid? I know different places do things differently, but I imaging all sorts of problems come tax time if my W-2 from officiating didn't match my real name.

That's funny. Think this through all the way.

Joe Smith applies for officiating as John Doe.
Joe Smith gets regular W2 from his regular job as Joe Smith.
John Doe's W2 goes ... somewhere. Joe Smith doesn't care, and certainly doesn't include it in his taxes.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

That's funny. Think this through all the way.

Joe Smith applies for officiating as John Doe.
Joe Smith gets regular W2 from his regular job as Joe Smith.
John Doe's W2 goes ... somewhere. Joe Smith doesn't care, and certainly doesn't include it in his taxes.

Exactly. I had exactly one 1099 this year, no W2s. Even if Joe Smith claimed all the income on his taxes, he wouldn't need to show the 1099s or W2s to prove anything.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

That's funny. Think this through all the way.

Joe Smith applies for officiating as John Doe.
Joe Smith gets regular W2 from his regular job as Joe Smith.
John Doe's W2 goes ... somewhere. Joe Smith doesn't care, and certainly doesn't include it in his taxes.

First off...neither one is likely to be getting a W-2 for their officiating work. A 1099 is far more likely and only if they get more than $600 from any one source. Joe could even still comply with IRS laws by paying the taxes on the income he really received even if it was not properly attributed to him. He may have violated some IRS regulation here but the IRS mostly cares about whether they got the money or not. If he paid, they're not likely to do much to him if they ever found out.

Secondly, someone could be doing this now. However, unless Joe Smith knows John Doe's SSN, this will get flagged pretty quickly when the organization files their 1099's with the IRS when the provided SSN doesn't match the name that is submitted with it. They might get away with it for one year until the taxes are submitted but that's it. Assuming Joe Smith does know John Doe's SSN, John Doe might face a little grief when the IRS comes looking into why he didn't claim income that an organization said they paid him. But once he proves it wasn't him that received the income, he'll be fine.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

First off...neither one is likely to be getting a W-2 for their officiating work. A 1099 is far more likely and only if they get more than $600 from any one source. Joe could even still comply with IRS laws by paying the taxes on the income he really received even if it was not properly attributed to him. He may have violated some IRS regulation here but the IRS mostly cares about whether they got the money or not. If he paid, they're not likely to do much to him if they ever found out.

Secondly, someone could be doing this now. However, unless Joe Smith knows John Doe's SSN, this will get flagged pretty quickly when the organization files their 1099's with the IRS when the provided SSN doesn't match the name that is submitted with it. They might get away with it for one year until the taxes are submitted but that's it. Assuming Joe Smith does know John Doe's SSN, John Doe might face a little grief when the IRS comes looking into why he didn't claim income that an organization said they paid him. But once he proves it wasn't him that received the income, he'll be fine.

This all assumes that an official gets at least $600 from one source. Now, I didn't have a single school pay me $600 last year, but I still got a 1099 from refpay since several schools use it to pay.

The requirement to use refpay puts a bit of a crimp in the plan if someone wants to create a fake identity to officiate; but I'm sure it could be worked around by an ambitiously twisted individual.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

That's funny. Think this through all the way.

Joe Smith applies for officiating as John Doe.
Joe Smith gets regular W2 from his regular job as Joe Smith.
John Doe's W2 goes ... somewhere. Joe Smith doesn't care, and certainly doesn't include it in his taxes.

Good point. If you're using a fake name, I guess paying taxes properly is pretty low on your list of priorities.