Results 1 to 10 of 92

Thread: IRS inquiry: Do incorrect 1099s need rebuttal?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    David: Take a look at ORS 652.110 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/652.html

    I'm curious your thoughts on that.....

    PAYMENT AND COLLECTION OF WAGES GENERALLY



    652.110 Method of paying employees; agreement on method of payment; revocation of agreement. (1) A person engaged in any business or enterprise of any kind in this state may not issue, in payment of or as evidence of indebtedness for wages due an employee, any order, check, memorandum or other instrument of indebtedness unless the instrument is negotiable and payable without discount in cash on demand at some bank or other established place of business in the county where the employee lives or works and where a sufficient amount of funds have been provided and are or will be available for the payment of the instrument when due. The person shall, upon presentation and demand, pay the instrument in lawful money of the United States.

    (2) This section does not in any way limit or interfere with the right of any employee to accept from any person, as an evidence or acknowledgment of indebtedness for wages due the employee, a negotiable instrument, payable at some future date with interest.

    (3) An employer and an employee may agree to authorize the employer to deposit without discount wages due the employee in the employee’s account in a financial institution, as defined in ORS 706.008, in this state.

    (4) An employer and an employee may agree that the employer may pay wages through a direct deposit system, automated teller machine card, payroll card or other means of electronic transfer if the employee may:

    (a) Make an initial withdrawal of the entire amount of net pay without cost to the employee; or

    (b) Choose to use another means of payment of wages that involves no cost to the employee.

    (5) An agreement described in subsection (4) of this section must be made in the language that the employer principally uses to communicate with the employee.

    (6)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, to revoke an agreement described in subsection (4) of this section, an employee shall give the employer a written notice of revocation of the agreement. Unless the employer and employee agree otherwise, the agreement is revoked 30 days after the date the notice is received by the employer.

    (b) To revoke an agreement described in subsection (4) of this section, an employee who works for an employer as a seasonal farmworker as defined in ORS 652.145 or an employee who is employed in packing, canning, freezing or drying any variety of agricultural crops shall give the employer notice of revocation of the agreement either orally or in writing. Unless the employer and the employee agree otherwise, the agreement is revoked 10 days after the date the notice is received by the employer. [Amended by 1975 c.191 §1; 1999 c.59 §191; 2007 c.546 §1]
    I presume that your direct my interest to the term negotiable.

    Our original non-endorsement demanded payment in non-negotiable Federal Reserve notes. Negotiable instruments must be redeemable in equal or better value. This by deduction leaves US notes the non-negotiable instrument in America. Therefore the suitor would demand US notes in the form of FRNs.

    The law above stipulates that the instruments employers use to pay employees be of a set value and that the employee not be required to discount his pay when redeeming the instrument. From the employer's perspective I do not see this having any impact on the employee's demand for lawful money.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Brian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Earth, Alpha Quadrant.
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    I presume that your direct my interest to the term negotiable.

    Our original non-endorsement demanded payment in non-negotiable Federal Reserve notes. Negotiable instruments must be redeemable in equal or better value. This by deduction leaves US notes the non-negotiable instrument in America. Therefore the suitor would demand US notes in the form of FRNs.

    The law above stipulates that the instruments employers use to pay employees be of a set value and that the employee not be required to discount his pay when redeeming the instrument. From the employer's perspective I do not see this having any impact on the employee's demand for lawful money.
    I also found this part interesting "pay the instrument in lawful money of the United States." + the demand part. It seems as though the local law spells it out pretty clearly. Thanks!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •