Anonymous wrote:For a two year old, I've never heard of daycare being better than a decent nanny. Where are you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't the problem really the nannies? They want to take home insane AFTER-tax per hour pay. So for instance, when we were in our nanny search for our first DS the nannies wanted $14 an hour, but they wanted that net, after taxes. That's really a much higher per hour rate and honestly, as someone who was a full time nanny when I was in college, it's usually not warranted based on the job, level of education, skill, etc. that the nanny has. We ended up doing a nanny share (paying $16.50 per hour before tax rate) but now that we are expecting DC #2 we are considering going under the table because honestly, I can't afford a nanny on my own who makes the type of egregious per-hour salary that nannies apparently expect. We pay taxes because we feel it's the right thing to do, but at some point when you are looking at paying double your mortgage for childcare for two children it starts to make more sense to take the risk and just pay under the table instead. If nannies were charging more realistic rates, I don't think we'd feel that pressure at all and would be happy to pay $14 or $16 an hour before-taxes - a very reasonable rate.

OR you realize you can't afford individualized at home care and send your children to daycare.

PP here, I don't live in DC. In the large city I live in, daycare is MUCH more expensive than nanny care. And honestly, it's better. If I could afford it, I would do it in a heartbeat.

Who pays more for less? How old is your child?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't the problem really the nannies? They want to take home insane AFTER-tax per hour pay. So for instance, when we were in our nanny search for our first DS the nannies wanted $14 an hour, but they wanted that net, after taxes. That's really a much higher per hour rate and honestly, as someone who was a full time nanny when I was in college, it's usually not warranted based on the job, level of education, skill, etc. that the nanny has. We ended up doing a nanny share (paying $16.50 per hour before tax rate) but now that we are expecting DC #2 we are considering going under the table because honestly, I can't afford a nanny on my own who makes the type of egregious per-hour salary that nannies apparently expect. We pay taxes because we feel it's the right thing to do, but at some point when you are looking at paying double your mortgage for childcare for two children it starts to make more sense to take the risk and just pay under the table instead. If nannies were charging more realistic rates, I don't think we'd feel that pressure at all and would be happy to pay $14 or $16 an hour before-taxes - a very reasonable rate.

OR you realize you can't afford individualized at home care and send your children to daycare.

PP here, I don't live in DC. In the large city I live in, daycare is MUCH more expensive than nanny care. And honestly, it's better. If I could afford it, I would do it in a heartbeat.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't the problem really the nannies? They want to take home insane AFTER-tax per hour pay. So for instance, when we were in our nanny search for our first DS the nannies wanted $14 an hour, but they wanted that net, after taxes. That's really a much higher per hour rate and honestly, as someone who was a full time nanny when I was in college, it's usually not warranted based on the job, level of education, skill, etc. that the nanny has. We ended up doing a nanny share (paying $16.50 per hour before tax rate) but now that we are expecting DC #2 we are considering going under the table because honestly, I can't afford a nanny on my own who makes the type of egregious per-hour salary that nannies apparently expect. We pay taxes because we feel it's the right thing to do, but at some point when you are looking at paying double your mortgage for childcare for two children it starts to make more sense to take the risk and just pay under the table instead. If nannies were charging more realistic rates, I don't think we'd feel that pressure at all and would be happy to pay $14 or $16 an hour before-taxes - a very reasonable rate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't the problem really the nannies? They want to take home insane AFTER-tax per hour pay. So for instance, when we were in our nanny search for our first DS the nannies wanted $14 an hour, but they wanted that net, after taxes. That's really a much higher per hour rate and honestly, as someone who was a full time nanny when I was in college, it's usually not warranted based on the job, level of education, skill, etc. that the nanny has. We ended up doing a nanny share (paying $16.50 per hour before tax rate) but now that we are expecting DC #2 we are considering going under the table because honestly, I can't afford a nanny on my own who makes the type of egregious per-hour salary that nannies apparently expect. We pay taxes because we feel it's the right thing to do, but at some point when you are looking at paying double your mortgage for childcare for two children it starts to make more sense to take the risk and just pay under the table instead. If nannies were charging more realistic rates, I don't think we'd feel that pressure at all and would be happy to pay $14 or $16 an hour before-taxes - a very reasonable rate.

OR you realize you can't afford individualized at home care and send your children to daycare.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't the problem really the nannies? They want to take home insane AFTER-tax per hour pay. So for instance, when we were in our nanny search for our first DS the nannies wanted $14 an hour, but they wanted that net, after taxes. That's really a much higher per hour rate and honestly, as someone who was a full time nanny when I was in college, it's usually not warranted based on the job, level of education, skill, etc. that the nanny has. We ended up doing a nanny share (paying $16.50 per hour before tax rate) but now that we are expecting DC #2 we are considering going under the table because honestly, I can't afford a nanny on my own who makes the type of egregious per-hour salary that nannies apparently expect. We pay taxes because we feel it's the right thing to do, but at some point when you are looking at paying double your mortgage for childcare for two children it starts to make more sense to take the risk and just pay under the table instead. If nannies were charging more realistic rates, I don't think we'd feel that pressure at all and would be happy to pay $14 or $16 an hour before-taxes - a very reasonable rate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any nanny who covers all due taxes herself as a 1099 obviously charges higher rates, as does any similar professional.

Or she doesn't know any better and believes what some uninformed, at best, or unscrupulous, at worst, employer tells her. I doubt very highly that employers that 1099 their nannies are paying higher rates to offset it. I would guess that they are cheap in all things, not just some.

You don't seem to know much about this. Lots of newborn nannies are 1099s. Of course they charge more to.

Really, I know nothing about this? You're telling me that new nannies, with little experience, charge MORE than experienced nannies, and people are willing to pay it, to compensate for being a 1099? This is simply not reality. New nannies are duped into the 1099 situation, so employers can skimp on taxes AND claim the childcare deduction. These nannies are paid low entry level nanny rates, and lose almost half of it to taxes. This is what actually happens, and the employers who do it are very sad individuals and completely deserve all of the consequences the law has to offer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any nanny who covers all due taxes herself as a 1099 obviously charges higher rates, as does any similar professional.

Or she doesn't know any better and believes what some uninformed, at best, or unscrupulous, at worst, employer tells her. I doubt very highly that employers that 1099 their nannies are paying higher rates to offset it. I would guess that they are cheap in all things, not just some.

You don't seem to know much about this. Lots of newborn nannies are 1099s. Of course they charge more to.

Really, I know nothing about this? You're telling me that new nannies, with little experience, charge MORE than experienced nannies, and people are willing to pay it, to compensate for being a 1099? This is simply not reality. New nannies are duped into the 1099 situation, so employers can skimp on taxes AND claim the childcare deduction. These nannies are paid low entry level nanny rates, and lose almost half of it to taxes. This is what actually happens, and the employers who do it are very sad individuals and completely deserve all of the consequences the law has to offer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any nanny who covers all due taxes herself as a 1099 obviously charges higher rates, as does any similar professional.

Or she doesn't know any better and believes what some uninformed, at best, or unscrupulous, at worst, employer tells her. I doubt very highly that employers that 1099 their nannies are paying higher rates to offset it. I would guess that they are cheap in all things, not just some.

You don't seem to know much about this. Lots of newborn nannies are 1099s. Of course they charge more to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any nanny who covers all due taxes herself as a 1099 obviously charges higher rates, as does any similar professional.

Or she doesn't know any better and believes what some uninformed, at best, or unscrupulous, at worst, employer tells her. I doubt very highly that employers that 1099 their nannies are paying higher rates to offset it. I would guess that they are cheap in all things, not just some.