David Frum

ObamaCare's stealth assault on small business

An obscure provision in the new health-care law will require entrepreneurs to spend a great deal more time filling out tax forms. It’s not the sort of change that should have been sneaked through

David Frum

Small-business owners face a world of troubles these days: a weak economy, impending health-care mandates, the prospect of higher taxes.
 
But one concern you hear about more and more is a huge new expansion in their IRS reporting requirements — a paperwork nightmare that will commence in 2012.
 
I got an earful on the subject after a recent speech to a group of employers in a small vacation town. They owned shops, a garage, restaurants. They did all their own bookkeeping at nights and on weekends. They did not enjoy it, but they were used to it. But now, they feared their lives were about to be consumed by a new bureaucracy.
 
They have reason to be afraid. Right now, business owners file two forms when they employ people: a W-2 for employees and a 1099 for freelance contractors. A typical small business files 10 such forms, at a cost of 3–5 hours of time per year.
 
Embedded in the new health-care law, however, is a staggering requirement: using a new form — the 1099k — small businesses will have to start reporting all their purchases of goods from other businesses. (You can see a draft version of the 1099K form on the IRS website.)
 
Did you rent a car or stay in a hotel? 1099K.
 
Buy ink and paper from Staples? 1099K.
 
Lease space in a local mall? 1099K.
 
Collect revenue from PayPal, eBay, or Amazon merchants? 1099K.
 
And don’t forget to collect each company’s taxpayer ID number while you are at it!
 
There are some exceptions: Businesses with revenues of less than $20,000 are exempt, as are purchases that total less than $600 for the year. Non-exempt businesses, however, are looking at a sudden lurch from approximately 10 forms per year to probably several hundred.
 
The IRS intends the measure as a revenue-enhancer. If more transactions are reported, more can be taxed. The provision got tucked into the health-care bill not because it has any relation to health-care, but in order to plump the revenue side of health-care reform—and thus tilt the numbers to make the total bill look less costly.
 
Nobody will excuse tax evasion, of course. But there should be some proportion between the revenue value to government and the time cost to business owners.
 
One reason that the United States does not have a VAT is that Congress has declined to add “tax collector of first resort” to the responsibilities of the small-business owner. If that is now to change, let’s make the change in the full light of day—with a full debate of costs and benefits—not stealthily in an obscure addendum to the most important piece of social legislation since the 1960s.
 
We should have invited those small-business owners I met in that vacation town into the debate in advance of the decision, not after the fact.

Facebook

Twitter

Stumble

Tumblr

RSS

Newsletter

See our bad opinions
Reader Poll Your Opinion Matters

Would Jesus tax the rich to help the poor?

A man rents his living room to Super Bowl fans for $1,600 — and more in our collection of strange revelations about the nation

Robert Shrum
Robert Shrum

Nominating Mitt Malaprop

Romney has the GOP nomination wrapped up — but his serial verbal miscues will haunt him in November

Edward Morrissey
Edward Morrissey

Obama is not the most polarizing president ever

Despite The Washington Post's rather preposterous claim, this president is not the nation's most divisive ever. Not even close

Paul Brandus
Paul Brandus

Obama's 5 biggest mistakes

The president's Republican opponents will surely spend 2012 hammering away at his failures. So what exactly are they?

Yunte Huang
Yunte Huang

Newt the goat

The struggling Republican was born in 1943, the Chinese year of the goat. And as Gingrich's wrongheaded policies prove, the zodiac readings don't lie

Daniel Larison
Daniel Larison

The West's inimical posturing on Iran

The EU approves a ban on Iranian oil imports, but what the West really needs is a complete reappraisal of its dealings with Tehran