Arbiter Mandate

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Brad

Do you know why he was unhappy about it? Just curious as to what peoples’ aversions are to RefPay and similar payment services.

I know what aversions I've heard. If you want your money for free, you have to manually transfer it. Automatic transfer carries a fee. That's ridiculous.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

If asked to speculate, I'd wonder if he dislikes any form of online banking/payment processing.

Yeah. Sounds about right. Usually it’s because the person wants to avoid reporting the income—whether to the IRS or his wife!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rich

I know what aversions I've heard. If you want your money for free, you have to manually transfer it. Automatic transfer carries a fee. That's ridiculous.

It's no different than cashing a check, though. In fact, it takes less effort: and I can cash checks with my smart phone app.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Brad

Yeah. Sounds about right. Usually it’s because the person wants to avoid reporting the income—whether to the IRS or his wife!

My only aversion is one particular assigner who charges $1 for every RP transaction when he pays for his games.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

My only aversion is one particular assigner who charges $1 for every RP transaction when he pays for his games.

That's because RefPay charges a fee everytime the paying administrator processes a paysheet. It is a sliding scale depending upon how much the individual official is being paid.
That assignor is simply passing on his cost of paying you. Now you can argue that the schools should be assessed that cost or it should be covered by the assignor as part of any assigning fee that he receives, but just as with paper checks, stamps, and envelopes there is a cost associated with making payments to officials. All that needs to be determined is who should pay for it.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Adam

It's no different than cashing a check, though. In fact, it takes less effort: and I can cash checks with my smart phone app.

It would take just as little effort for RefPay to automatically direct deposit the money on a fixed schedule. Oh, wait, they'll do that for a fee.

Many schools locally are starting to pay by Direct Deposit. Only a handful of schools have gone to RefPay.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That's because RefPay charges a fee everytime the paying administrator processes a paysheet. It is a sliding scale depending upon how much the individual official is being paid.
That assignor is simply passing on his cost of paying you. Now you can argue that the schools should be assessed that cost or it should be covered by the assignor as part of any assigning fee that he receives, but just as with paper checks, stamps, and envelopes there is a cost associated with making payments to officials. All that needs to be determined is who should pay for it.

I get that, I do. I just found it odd that he never charged for checks (including the stamp), but now charges for refpay. While it was optional, I opted for the check. It's not a deal breaker, just a curiosity (and admittedly an annoyance) for me.

Some older assignors do not have a computer or know how one works from my experiences

[Andy]

Do you remember about 10 years ago or so, the IRS started going after individuals who made tips as a majority of their income? the IRS felt that most people were under reporting or not reporting that income at all in order not to be taxed on it.

I have heard that the IRS has now turned an eye toward sports officials. There is pressure on officials organizations and state HS governing bodies to account for the payments to officials. In the past, it was "pick up a check or cash as you arrived for your assignment." I only got a 1099 if I was over the $600 limit from one school district.

As of three years ago here, all HS officiating payments are going through RefPay....now I get a 1099 for all of the HS officiating that I did the previous year.

Centralized officiating payment systems are the way it is going.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Andy

Centralized officiating payment systems are the way it is going.

If it streamlines the process and gets me paid quicker, fine by me!

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Andy

Do you remember about 10 years ago or so, the IRS started going after individuals who made tips as a majority of their income? the IRS felt that most people were under reporting or not reporting that income at all in order not to be taxed on it.

I have heard that the IRS has now turned an eye toward sports officials. There is pressure on officials organizations and state HS governing bodies to account for the payments to officials. In the past, it was "pick up a check or cash as you arrived for your assignment." I only got a 1099 if I was over the $600 limit from one school district.

I have heard this too...and I think it is going to change the landscape for a lot of sports officials. I have heard from volunteers who run local leagues for basketball, baseball, softball and football that they are under increasing scrutiny from the IRS and have to start issuing 1099s.

I know one league that started this a couple of years ago and subsequently lost a bunch of officials who did not want any "proof" of income. The head of one small baseball league told me his organization paid $24,000 to umpires last year...but the paperwork burden to him and the treasurer to be in full compliance will be large. (They used to pay cash at the field.)

I know far more officials who work for cash and never report their income than I know those who report every penny, but also keep records to offset that income with legal deductions.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

I know far more officials who work for cash and never report their income than I know those who report every penny, but also keep records to offset that income with legal deductions.

Then you know a lot of criminals.

As I'm sure you know, ALL income, even if it is cash or if no 1099 is issued is taxable income. The $600 limit for 1099's has nothing to do with whether the income is supposed to be taxable, just that the paying organization need not incur the overhead of having to create the 1099 document.

Those skipping out on their taxes like this are just stealing from the rest who properly report their income and pay taxes on it. I'd bet that a lot of them are also the first ones to sign up for government assistance which means they're not only cheating on their taxes but obtaining income-based benefits they don't deserve, further cheating those that pay their taxes and taking limited resource benefits from those that actually deserve them.They probably also are the first to vote to raise taxes on those actually reporting income so that they can get more from those government programs.

If they're not doing it to skip on taxes, then they're doing it to avoid paying child support for their kids....equally despicable, perhaps more.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Then you know a lot of criminals.

As I'm sure you know, ALL income, even if it is cash or if no 1099 is issued is taxable income. The $600 limit for 1099's has nothing to do with whether the income is supposed to be taxable, just that the paying organization need not incur the overhead of having to create the 1099 document.

Those skipping out on their taxes like this are just stealing from the rest who properly report their income and pay taxes on it. I'd bet that a lot of them are also the first ones to sign up for government assistance which means they're not only cheating on their taxes but obtaining income-based benefits they don't deserve, further cheating those that pay their taxes and taking limited resource benefits from those that actually deserve them.They probably also are the first to vote to raise taxes on those actually reporting income so that they can get more from those government programs.

If they're not doing it to skip on taxes, then they're doing it to avoid paying child support for their kids....equally despicable, perhaps more.

I'd like to see how many of those who preach about integrity don't bother claiming officiating income on their taxes unless they're forced to.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Welpe

If it streamlines the process and gets me paid quicker, fine by me!

Other than saving a day or two in the mail, I can't say I've seen a marked time savings.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Then you know a lot of criminals.

I don't make that judgment. I well know the law and know what my Schedule C shows. My comments were meant to be factual about the reality of any cash profession...including officiating.

There is a change coming to how many of us are paid. I was not trying to start a debate here that dovetails into politics, tax law, child support or anything along those lines.