Anonymous wrote:There isn't enough availability for after-care right now.

If there is much more demand and families willing to pay for it, businesses will be created to meet it.

Everyone wants cheap. We'll need a whole new bunch of illegals again to do that. Lol.

Anonymous wrote:There isn't enough availability for after-care right now.

Or daycare.

There isn't enough availability for after-care right now.

I can also see more demand for daycare and after-hours care taking the place of nanny care for employers who do not want to deal with payroll.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything, nanny wages will skyrocket. Lots of families will need to take care of their own children.

That is the opposite of what will happen. More families will be asked to pay on the books, which means taxes will have to be taken out, with the nanny receiving less to take home. There will probably be more part-time jobs so employers can avoid paying overtime wages. It will not affect the higher-skilled, more educated nannies, who are already paid on the books and receive higher wages.

What makes you think more parents will pay on the books??

In order to qualify for benefits such as social security, mandated health insurance, medicare and unemployment, the nannies will have to be paid on the books. As the boomers age, more people are going to become aware of how important these benefits are to their future financial security and the security of their families.

Last time illegals became legal, under Reagan, their wages went up by 15%.

Anonymous wrote:With immigration reform the off books nannies will not get the green card equivalent if the stay off books. I would not be surprised to see more on books nannies - they may no longer qualify for benefits unless the go through status adjustment .

And a drop in their income. GL.

With immigration reform the off books nannies will not get the green card equivalent if the stay off books. I would not be surprised to see more on books nannies - they may no longer qualify for benefits unless the go through status adjustment .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:15:56 here. I understand what you say because it was my experience in California that EVERYONE, vendors, service providers, nannies, wanted transact their business under the table to avoid taxes.

A furniture I used would label their goods as services, a jewelry store wanted to be paid all cash, the nanny wanted no part of employee taxes -- it made me uncomfortable because I have always been aboveboard in any tax matter.

How can it be that so many people in this country have no sense of obligation, duty and honesty when it comes to taxes.

Frankly, it makes me believe that
even our newly legal immigrants (after the immigration reform act) will still prefer to get paid off the record.

Well of course, who can afford a pay cut on a nanny income?

If you pay your nanny $18-$19/hour, that is more than many people who do pay taxes on their income in this country make. We really have to educate people that paying above-board and legally is a civic duty, and part of the fabric of American life. Otherwise it is not fair to those who do pay taxes in the same bracket.

Anonymous wrote:15:56 here. I understand what you say because it was my experience in California that EVERYONE, vendors, service providers, nannies, wanted transact their business under the table to avoid taxes.

A furniture I used would label their goods as services, a jewelry store wanted to be paid all cash, the nanny wanted no part of employee taxes -- it made me uncomfortable because I have always been aboveboard in any tax matter.

How can it be that so many people in this country have no sense of obligation, duty and honesty when it comes to taxes.

Frankly, it makes me believe that
even our newly legal immigrants (after the immigration reform act) will still prefer to get paid off the record.

Well of course, who can afford a pay cut on a nanny income?

15:56 here. I understand what you say because it was my experience in California that EVERYONE, vendors, service providers, nannies, wanted transact their business under the table to avoid taxes.

A furniture I used would label their goods as services, a jewelry store wanted to be paid all cash, the nanny wanted no part of employee taxes -- it made me uncomfortable because I have always been aboveboard in any tax matter.

How can it be that so many people in this country have no sense of obligation, duty and honesty when it comes to taxes.

Frankly, it makes me believe that even our newly legal immigrants (after the immigration reform act) will still prefer to get paid off the record.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about those nannies who will still ask to be paid off the books so as to avoid paying taxes, and keep their federal and state benefits?

If you paid them a living wage, what benefits would they need?

I do pay a living wage. I paid this particular legal nanny in California a salary of $18-$19/hour, plus a $40/week gas stipend. When I discussed the quarterly tax return with her, she became quite angry. How dare I file a tax return on her earnings; in twenty years of nanny work no employer had ever filed information on her earnings; this would adversely impact her husband's taxes and benefits; etc., etc. Naturally we had to part ways because she did not want me to pay employee taxes for her. Why do otherwise legal, good nannies, who are being paid well, want to keep everything under the table?

Because its easy to find parents willing to do it, and most people who do it get away with it. If it was as easy in other industries to find a job willing to pay under the table and the chance of getting caught was as small, tons more people would do it. No one LIKES taxes. BTW I am paid legally and am in no way advocating being paid under the table. Just saying that I understand the motivation, and I don't think anyone is the devil for doing it.

I pay well (18 for one child, 37 hours a week) on the books to a nanny who I suspect is illegal because I pay her taxes using a tax id number not a ss number (I pay both her and my portion of fica taxes). I love her more than anything and can't wait for her to be legal. The benefit to me is that she will be able to drive. The loss to me is that I will have to pay health insurance which may mean that either we cut out future raises or I cut her hours to under 35 depending on how much insurance will be (of course I'd prefer to give her insurance, but my family is literally just scrapping by - had to cut our 401ks to nothing to afford her).

She is a broken english nanny, btw, but she is wonderful with my kid (who now knows Spanish!). The choice is not exploited illegal or expensive legal. Some of us pay well to the best person we can find to help us raise our kids, whether she is legal or not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about those nannies who will still ask to be paid off the books so as to avoid paying taxes, and keep their federal and state benefits?

If you paid them a living wage, what benefits would they need?

I do pay a living wage. I paid this particular legal nanny in California a salary of $18-$19/hour, plus a $40/week gas stipend. When I discussed the quarterly tax return with her, she became quite angry. How dare I file a tax return on her earnings; in twenty years of nanny work no employer had ever filed information on her earnings; this would adversely impact her husband's taxes and benefits; etc., etc. Naturally we had to part ways because she did not want me to pay employee taxes for her. Why do otherwise legal, good nannies, who are being paid well, want to keep everything under the table?