PP here. I’m aware of the tax requirements but in my experience the difference was not terribly significant. $3k/year difference for a full time nanny is basically nothing. My point is the people paying their nannies and babysitters in cash as opposed to on the books aren’t actually getting this amazing deal as OP seems to say. Usually the motivation for paying in cash is not cost savings. In my case I have found it very difficult to find people who will show up consistently and be paid on the books. I’m not looking for a discount-just someone reliable and it’s often the Nannie’s demanding cash payment. |
| OP, I hear ya. I follow all the laws, but Trump seems to be flouting them, and Rs are all "yipee". |
Assuming the cash only nanny pays taxes and unemployment. |
| It’s not illegal for aupairs to get paid cash for helping out another family. |
That aupair employed by another family who also works in your house is also your household employee https://www.irs.gov/publications/p926 |
If you want to make childcare more fair, you would realize that the "laws" are rigged to penalize working parents and working poor. Our entire system is designed to make it as difficult as possible for the caretakers and for the families. Just because you can effortlessly afford this luxury and your nanny gets paid benefits doesn't mean this applies to majority of people in this country. Your righteousness is privilege. |
| This is your big concern that you need to rant on DCUM about? Obvious troll. |
It actually is. They’re on a J-1 visa, and they’re only allowed to work for / be paid by the sponsoring family. |
+1 |
What? No, its easily 30-35%. Even more when you get to overtime, which none of the cash nannies are paid. |
| Seriously, the hall monitor attitude in the DC Metro area has got to go. Stop reporting your neighbors people! |
| OP, you are beyond dumb. Those workers are not available to you since you want to hire legally. If they were suddenly unavailable to all the people hiring them (i.e. MORE demand was created for legal workers), what do you think would happen to the cost of the existing supply of legal workers? (hint - it sure wouldn't go down; Econ 101) Let those law breakers do it - they are running the risk for their families and helping hold down costs for you in the legal workforce pool by not competing against you in that pool. |
|
Isn't this the same thing as small stores and shops that decrease their price if you pay all cash?
There's literally millions of them. |
This is super twisted logic. So, you expect us all to look the other way when people are breaking rules. Would you feel that way if your neighbor sees someone breaking into your house? You would just prefer that the neighbor looks the other way? |
And the Democrats in MoCo are all in on ignoring rule-breakers. Zero consequences for those who are undocumented, zero consequences for drivers who don't have car insurance, zero consequences for families who commit residency fraud and attend MCPS. |