Introduced by Sen. Alan L. Cropsey (R) on October 9, 2003, to require businesses, including independent contractors, to file a copy of their federal 1099 income tax forms with their state income tax returns. These forms (specifically, the 1099 MISC), are prepared to indicate business payments to nonemployees such as subcontractors.
Referred to the Senate Finance Committee on October 9, 2003.
Reported in the Senate on October 16, 2003, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the Senate on October 22, 2003, to replace the previous version of the bill with one which also requires a person covered by the bill to file 1099 forms with the city reported as a payee’s address on a 1099 form, if the city imposes a city income tax. 1099 forms are prepared to indicate business payments to nonemployees such as subcontractors. The substitute passed in the Senate by voice vote on October 22, 2003.
Passed in the Senate (34 to 3) on October 23, 2003, to require businesses, including independent contractors, to file a copy of their federal 1099 income tax forms with their state income tax returns. These forms (specifically, the 1099 MISC), are prepared to indicate business payments to nonemployees such as subcontractors. The bill would also require a person covered by the bill to file 1099 forms with the city reported as a payee’s address on a 1099 form, if the city imposes a city income tax. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the House on October 23, 2003.
Referred to the House Tax Policy Committee on October 23, 2003.
Reported in the House on October 29, 2003, without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
Passed in the House (75 to 30) on November 5, 2003, to require businesses, including independent contractors, to file a copy of their federal 1099 income tax forms with their state income tax returns. These forms (specifically, the 1099 MISC), are prepared to indicate business payments to nonemployees such as subcontractors. The bill would also require a person covered by the bill to file 1099 forms with the city reported as a payee’s address on a 1099 form, if the city imposes a city income tax. [Vote Details and Comments]
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on November 25, 2003.
1) 1099 State Forms [by Mike Hignite on February 13, 2004] Another idiotic law! I quote from the analysis section:
"The House Fiscal Agency says that the bill would have minimal state and local fiscal impact, noting that the Department of Treasury currently has provisions in place to identify income not reported as the state level but reported at the federal level to the Internal Revenue Service. (HFA analysis dated 10-28-03)"
The Feds already track and verify this "missed" income. Treasury gets this information from the Feds under a matching program. What is the point of requiring businesses to print another copy of the 1099-MISC for the state, and maybe another for cities?
Here are the good reasons for having this law:
1. Jobs increase by adding more accountants to prepare this useless information.
2. More jobs for lumberjacks to cut down trees to make the paper required for this useless information.
3. Increase state revenue from businesses that haven't heard of the new law and get hit with $50 per form penalties.
Do all of us a favor and repeal this stinker. Reply
2) Attaching Form 1099 to state return [by Anonymous Citizen on October 20, 2003] Due to the new regulations from the MI Treasury Department, starting January 1, 2004, any tax preparer who prepares over 200 returns is required to e-file any state return. How is the tax preparer going to attach a form 1099 to an e-filed return? Reply
3) 2003 Senate Bill 770 [by admin on January 1, 2001] Introduced in the Senate on October 9, 2003, to require businesses, including independent contractors, to file a copy of their federal 1099 income tax forms with their state income tax returns. These forms (specifically, the 1099 MISC), are prepared to indicate business payments to nonemployees such as subcontractors. The bill would also require a person covered by the bill to file 1099 forms with the city reported as a payee’s address on a 1099 form, if the city imposes a city income tax
The vote was 34 in favor, 3 opposed and 1 not voting