# Gizmodo Censoring Driver AB5 Feedback In Comments Section



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Have to call Gizmodo out on this!

https://gizmodo.com/[email protected]@@@ing-did-it-1844789970#replies (to see the censored replies, go to pending comments sort sort by newest, the censored @@@@ in the url is the f word, you will have to change that due to UP profanity filters)

Quite annoyed that Gizmodo is censoring anti-AB5 opinions from drivers. Here is what I had to say.

"As a driver I absolutely do not want to be classified as an employee. Right now Uber and Lyft cannot tell me what to do. Once I'm an employee they can. Technically there are things in their agreement if you don't follow it says they will ban you, like not accepting enough rides, but they don't except maybe in very extreme cases. So I can pick rides I think will be most profitable. That will be gone as an employee. Before COVID I drove 40 hours a week on top of my day job, I don't need them to provide health care and as an employee I would now lose more money on payroll and social security taxes, where as in the past my net profit was very close to zero after the IRS mileage deduction, so any payroll and ss contributions were extremely minimal.

AB5 was great when it forced Uber/Lyft to make some positive changes, like drivers setting their own rates, but now that lawmakers say the new changes are not bringing Uber/Lyft in to compliance, its total garbage and a huge loss for both the drivers and Uber.

Only the tax coffers will benefit from this."

One thing I forgot to add is now I will only be able to work for one or the other, which is more lost money.

Here is another driver comment they're censoring.

" I drive for Uber and have no need or desire to be treated as an employee. I prefer to make my own hours and operate how I see fit, that's why I started driving for Uber. Once I become their employee, that changes, and it destroys most of the benefits of being an Uber driver. "

Surprised there aren't MORE dissenting comments from drivers on this thread. This is going to lead to a worse situation for most drivers in CA for the reasons I listed above. We should at least get to choose what our designation is instead of being forced to be an employee, being an employee is probably not a good thing for most of us.

Other than the tax authorities the only people I see potentially benefiting from this are ones who need really expensive health care plans. This is no guarantee though, from what I have read there is no law requiring employers to provide healthcare, only an IRS penalty for companies with 50+ employees who do not offer it to 95% of their employee base.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

ten25 said:


> Lyft to make some positive changes


uber made changes due to AB5, but Lyft? What changes? they have had their head in the sand entire time with the exception of funding Prop 22.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

SHalester said:


> uber made changes due to AB5, but Lyft? What changes? they have had their head in the sand entire time with the exception of funding Prop 22.


My mistake


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

SHalester said:


> uber made changes due to AB5, but Lyft? What changes? they have had their head in the sand entire time with the exception of funding Prop 22.


According to the article I read yesterday, in order for lyft & uber to continue operating the CEOs had to submit a sworn statement that they had a plan in place to become compliant. I don't remember all the details but it was in an article posted in a thread here.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Drivers won't be able to write off their miles on schedule C anymore once they're an employee. (https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-the-411-on-who-can-deduct-car-expenses-on-their-tax-returns)

Now drivers will be responsible for taxes on money they didn't actually earn because that money was spent on gas or repairs etc. Maybe Uber will reimburse drivers for gas or mileage but I wouldn't hold my breath, and I'm sure if they do they'll find some way to shortchange people like only paying on trip miles.

So there goes around 15-25% of your money right there in taxes/medicare/ss , plus the fact Uber/Lyft will probably pay $15 an hour or less guessing more like $10 an hour. But in reality you are making far less when considering car expenses vs now where you can set your own rates, have writeoffs, it's not even close to what drivers are currently able to earn.

Not to mention you can now be fully controlled as an employee including setting hours, requiring you to make pickups you wouldn't have before etc.

Disclaimer: this is not tax advice, im not an accountant etc.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Boca Ratman said:


> CEOs had to submit a sworn statement that they had a plan in place to become compliant.


that's correct, they have until 8/25 to submit and if the judge does't like what is presented the stay will be lifted. However, that isn't a 'change' on Lyft's part due to AB5 I was asking about. Uber made a slew of changes back in Jan and onward due to AB5; Lyft did nothing.


----------



## Johnny Mnemonic (Sep 24, 2019)

ten25 said:


> Surprised there aren't MORE dissenting comments from drivers on this thread.


There are probably more ex-drivers on this board than active drivers, including yours truly. I only keep my Uber account active to have as a back-up in case I lose my job and can't get another one. Don't even get me started on the [email protected] here who have been kicking back since March and don't want to work either way.

I haven't done any rides since Fall '19. I'm not going to be an activist one way or the other on this. Whatever happens, happens.

As far as a two-bit tech blog like Gizmo, who gives a rat's ***?


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Johnny Mnemonic said:


> There are probably more ex-drivers on this board than active drivers, including yours truly. I only keep my Uber account active to have as a back-up in case I lose my job and can't get another one. Don't even get me started on the [email protected] here who have been kicking back since March and don't want to work either way.
> 
> I haven't done any rides since Fall '19. I'm not going to be an activist one way or the other on this. Whatever happens, happens.
> 
> As far as a two-bit tech blog like Gizmo, who gives a rat's ***?


You're right about Gizmodo, it just makes me SICK to see all the big tech blogs and other news sites (not just Gizmodo) promoting this as if it were a positive change. On the face it seems like it would be, but in reality once you get in to the details about taxes, expenses, etc. its going to be an absolute nightmare for drivers to the point it won't be worth doing anymore.

Customers are going to be confused too thinking it was a good thing...


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

Well that’s the so called “tolerant” left for ya.


----------



## May H. (Mar 20, 2018)

ten25 said:


> Have to call Gizmodo out on this!
> 
> https://gizmodo.com/[email protected]@@@ing-did-it-1844789970#replies (to see the censored replies, go to pending comments sort sort by newest, the censored @@@@ in the url is the f word, you will have to change that due to UP profanity filters)
> 
> ...


I'm glad they banned your post. It's very one-sided.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect (Jan 14, 2015)

It's not just Gizmo, it is also Twitter, Facebook, youtube, and Google, just to name a few. The Communist Russian media has taken over folks. Just have a look at Facebooks new board who controls your posts there. Most are backed by Soros.

Find the latest Judicial Watches news letter the Verdict. It is all layed out who's who.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

May H. said:


> I'm glad they banned your post. It's very one-sided.


Can you point out anything I said that isn't true? Can you provide any evidence whatsoever that this is going to be a positive change for the majority of drivers? Because I provided evidence and numbers showing why drivers will be much worse off than they are now. The article provided no evidence or numbers showing how this bill improves anything compared to what drivers currently have. It would be cheaper for most drivers to pay their own health insurance or go through a spouse if they're not single.

The article was fine when it stuck to reporting the facts until they started turning it to an opinion piece with this line, as if Lyft did something wrong by blaming the legislators (who are the very people causing the issues I listed above!)

"And right on cue, Lyft is taking this opportunity to blame local legislators and solicit votes in favor of Proposition 22, which goes to vote in November."

"What Lyft doesn't mention here is that independent contractors would _not_, under Proposition 22, receive the full benefits and protections afforded under full-time employee status-benefits that Uber and Lyft have made clear they do not want to pay for. As of this writing, Uber had not announced that it would also be ceasing operations in favor of making a public spectacle and upending transportation accessibility in California, but it has said it plans to.

This is the cowardly, shitty thing to do-and Lyft ****ing knows it."




Amsoil Uber Connect said:


> It's not just Gizmo, it is also Twitter, Facebook, youtube, and Google, just to name a few. The Communist Russian media has taken over folks. Just have a look at Facebooks new board who controls your posts there. Most are backed by Soros.
> 
> Find the latest Judicial Watches news letter the Verdict. It is all layed out who's who.


I read Judicial Watch on the suggestion of my dad and it's mostly fake news presented in a unique format and/or documentation of Democrats doing what you would expect Democrats to do with a few interesting facts mixed in to make it believable for gullible people... just another rag.


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

ten25 said:


> Can you point out anything I said that isn't true? Can you provide any evidence whatsoever that this is going to be a positive change for the majority of drivers? Because I provided evidence and numbers showing why drivers will be much worse off than they are now. The article provided no evidence or numbers showing how this bill improves anything compared to what drivers currently have. It would be cheaper for most drivers to pay their own health insurance or go through a spouse if they're not single.
> 
> The article was fine when it stuck to reporting the facts until they started turning it to an opinion piece with this line, as if Lyft did something wrong by blaming the legislators (who are the very people causing the issues I listed above!)
> 
> ...


If prop 22 fails, U/L will pull out of California. It's a wrap. The hard left wing of this country will always sensor the facts. Funny I had a member of Facebook's content review team in my car 6 months ago and I basically chewed him out as to why does Facebook censor people who they disagree with. He didn't really give a valid explaintion just a bunch of BS. I was one stop short of calling him a piece of shit. I got off social media 5 years ago. I couldn't take it anymore. Social media is one of the reasons why the county is the way is right now and I told him that.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Steve appleby said:


> If prop 22 fails, U/L will pull out of California. It's a wrap. The hard left wing of this country will always sensor the facts. Funny I had a member of Facebook's content review team in my car 6 months ago and I basically chewed him out as to why does Facebook censor people who they disagree with. He didn't really give a valid explaintion just a bunch of BS. I was one stop short of calling him a piece of shit. I got off social media 5 years ago. I couldn't take it anymore. Social media is one of the reasons why the county is the way is right now and I told him that.


I think they may for a while, however this bill is so bad for drivers that I wouldn't be shocked if the politics are just a dog and pony show & Uber and/or Lyft are actually the ones behind it. Perhaps there could be some loop holes in the tax code where they will save money in the long run by structuring things this way. Maybe an excuse to pay drivers min wage. Very very unlikely but the tax code can be a very complicated thing especially when it comes to corporations...

They'll be back the question is how much will they pay drivers and will it be enough to keep them driving. I'm betting that will be a big no, unless the rates are increased a lot.

Would have been better if the bill just said Uber has to pay drivers at least $x per mile or let them set their own rate (at least $x per mile) and let the drivers decide how to spend the money.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

ten25 said:


> Have to call Gizmodo out on this!
> 
> https://gizmodo.com/[email protected]@@@ing-did-it-1844789970#replies (to see the censored replies, go to pending comments sort sort by newest, the censored @@@@ in the url is the f word, you will have to change that due to UP profanity filters)
> 
> ...


So you'll go ahead and vote for Trump or don't vote at all (favorable to Trump).

Because...

https://www.sandiegonewsdesk.com/2020/06/joe-biden-pushing-for-ab-5-nationwide/
Just wondering, what are you going to do?


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> So you'll go ahead and vote for Trump or don't vote at all (favorable to Trump).
> 
> Because...
> 
> ...


This isn't about Trump or Biden, or Democrats vs Republicans. It's about how to make sure drivers are financially compensated as much as possible. Do you have any evidence that AB5 would help increase drivers compensation??? I presented evidence that it will not, and actually will decrease compensation.

And no, I'm not voting for Trump, he is a POS and so is Biden. I'm voting for Jo Jorgensen in the hopes the LP will get 5% of the vote this year, that way they will be eligible for public funding next election and be able to advertise more. Last election we got a little over 3% despite the fact we don't have hundreds of millions to spend and don't control any major news networks like the Dems & Repubs. The 2 party system is corrupt to the point they have laws on the books that suppress a 3rd party from being successful even though the laws do not explicitly say that's what they're doing.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

ten25 said:


> I'm not voting for Trump, he is a POS and so is Biden.


When Biden promised to push AB5 at a national level, AB5 just became a political matter.

And the truth is that, when democratic voters are split or don't go out to vote, the republicans win.

I won't vote for either of them (2016 was "Neither" as well) as long as the voting ballot has a third empty choice on it anybody can use for their best choice, and not for the better option.

But clearly, because America is brainwashed to accept and feed the binary political system, Trump has a gigantic chance to stay president.

Or, if Biden wins and goes back to the White House, doesn't matter if AB5 is good or bad - he'll push for it.

So it's not about AB5 good or bad for drivers (or other "independent contractors") anymore. It is about the election. And for this additional matter, there is obviously no good choice in sight.

Do you know who messed it up for everybody In CA? Uber and Lyft, by pushing rates so low, the drivers needed help from the local politicians to be able to make it possible to stay on the road.You know they pay for everything regarding the rider transportation process, with no help whatsoever from either of these two companies.

The drivers pushed back, most of them against their own interests because of the corporate greed and abuse.

And once the process got started, suddenly all the other companies (that were not abusing their partners and were doing things right) and other independent contractors from other different fields, got caught in the middle.

All of this trouble only because Uber and Lyft greed, incompetence and abuse.

In my opinion, good or bad (doesn't really matter at this point) AB5 national implementation is only a matter of time. As well as Uber and Lyft bankruptcy is.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

ten25 said:


> Drivers won't be able to write off their miles on schedule C anymore once they're an employee. (https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-the-411-on-who-can-deduct-car-expenses-on-their-tax-returns)
> 
> Now drivers will be responsible for taxes on money they didn't actually earn because that money was spent on gas or repairs etc. Maybe Uber will reimburse drivers for gas or mileage but I wouldn't hold my breath, and I'm sure if they do they'll find some way to shortchange people like only paying on trip miles.
> 
> ...


Or you will have to itemize and save those receipts.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Or you will have to itemize and save those receipts.


And you will not save a penny from itemizing them unless you have over $12,500 (the current standard deduction) in expenses. Where as now you get the $12,500 standard deduction and you can write off .58 a mile or actual expenses on your schedule C, plus 20% of any profits remaining after your mileage deduction /actual expenses are non taxable. Ex: if I drive 5 miles to a trip and 5 miles on the trip I can write off $5.80 ... Which is usually the entire amount I earned from the trip or within a dollar or two. Then I get to reduce that amount by 20% because of the pass through deduction in the tax cuts and job act of 2017 for sole proprietors.

IRS guidance proving you can't itemize deductions unless you have over standard deduction.
https://www.irs.gov/publications/p529HR block link saying the same:
https://www.hrblock.com/tax-center/filing/adjustments-and-deductions/unreimbursed-employee-expenses/
Next?

(Disclaimer this is not tax advice and I'm not an accountant)



jocker12 said:


> When Biden promised to push AB5 at a national level, AB5 just became a political matter.
> 
> And the truth is that, when democratic voters are split or don't go out to vote, the republicans win.
> 
> ...


I'm no fan of Uber or Lyft, gig companies etc. They are definitely abusing drivers, however passing a piece of legislation where "the cure is worse than the disease" is not helping us.

Frankly I'll laugh my ass off if Uber and Lyft go bankrupt because they deserve it for not having high enough rates. People are willing to pay more and drivers could make more while Uber/Lyft could also actually make a profit instead of burning through billions ... yet they insist to keep the rates at half or less of taxis in most areas, when they only need to beat them by a quarter per mile or so to be a much better option.

I also feel bad for any drivers who are math or tax filing challenged and think this is something good.

Side note, you're right that it's now a political issue and I'd rather vote Trump than Biden but I'm not going to. Mostly because I think economic issues are much more important than social issues. Corona would have spread roughly the same regardless of our pres because a lot of people are not complying and will not comply with any lockdowns or mask rules. So can't blame him for the Corona related economic dip, despite his overall poor handling of the situation. Economic issues effect every single persons day to day life. We've seen with this example of AB5 among other things (ACA) what happens when Democrats get involved in economic issues and tax issues. You end up making less money and have things forced on you like being an employee or having to get health insurance or pay a penalty. The health care plan I had under ACA before I got my current day job was going to be like $200-$300 a month when I was only making a bit under $35k. And it didn't even cover a penny of anything that wasn't a somewhat serious to catastrophic medical issue, because it had a giant deductible of several thousand. Now with my current employer and before counting rideshare income, I'm making 56k and pay $100 a month for all my insurance combined (vision, health, dental) and without the huge deductible. Prescriptions are fairly cheap when I've needed them also.

Now thanks to Trump, if I don't have health insurance I don't have to pay the penalty tax if I'm without insurance. Plus he is also the reason for the $12,500 standard deduction and 20% pass through deduction I mentioned above.

Still despite the few positive things Trump has done I think he is garbage overall and mostly just concerned with his ego. Biden is more scary to me because the Dems love to regulate anything and everything they can and come up with new taxes and/or raise taxes on individuals.

Here is a list of states with the highest taxes. Notice a trend? All Democrat voting states or swing states with the exception of Iowa maybe. Cities link below, same thing literally all have Democrat mayors.

https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/fun-facts/states-with-the-highest-and-lowest-taxes/L6HPAVqSFhttps://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/fun-facts/cities-with-the-highest-tax-rates/L2WEdS802


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

ten25 said:


> We've seen with this example of AB5 among other things (ACA) what happens when Democrats get involved in economic issues and tax issues. You end up making less money and have things forced on you like being an employee or having to get health insurance or pay a penalty.


Uber and Lyft drivers ended up making less money not because of the democrats or the republicans, but because of Uber and Lyft continuously slashing driver rates while doing everything to increase the corporate share on their partners' expenses, hiding information away from the public or misleading the media into thinking and informing the public, that the drivers are happy and well.

In Ca, the entire gig economy got affected by AB5 only because of these 2 corporations - Uber and Lyft, the same corporations that now, say they fight for their partners/drivers "flexibility" rights.

Politicians only reacted when " Drivers said pay cuts from rideshare companies have left them struggling to afford L.A. rents on top of rising gas prices and necessary vehicle repairs." Also "It goes on to say rideshare platforms "may be creating safer mobility options for residents, but their business model is subverting city policies put in place to protect the most vulnerable members of our community and weakening our social safety net. According to a study from the Economic Policy Institute last year, *drivers take home an average of $9.21 an hour after expenses*." - from https://laist.com/2019/10/15/uber-lyft-minimum-pay-30-dollars-an-hour-la-city-council.php

Biden made it political and he probably lost more followers than he actually gained.



ten25 said:


> "the cure is worse than the disease" is not helping us.





ten25 said:


> Frankly I'll laugh my ass off if Uber and Lyft go bankrupt


On a larger scale, Uber/Lyft and their independent contractors/drivers relationship is very similar to a domestic abuse drama that needs to end because the abusers are taking advantage of their weak partners. There are people saying that the drivers could quit at any time, but that split won't stop the abuser from continuing to abuse others.

I know you see it from the driver perspective, but this is a lot more about the corporations' outrageous and unforgivable behavior.

Uber and Lyft not only misled the public into thinking they are great companies that are fixing transportation by disrupting it (crazy how much of this BS they've got away with), but they've hurt the most valuable asset that they've possible had - the drivers, that invested their time, their cars and their health, into the Uber and Lyft scam.

AB5 is fighting back the Uber and Lyft scam.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> Uber and Lyft drivers ended up making less money not because of the democrats or the republicans, but because of Uber and Lyft continuously slashing driver rates while doing everything to increase the corporate share on their partners' expenses, hiding information away from the public or misleading the media into thinking and informing the public, that the drivers are happy and well.
> 
> In Ca, the entire gig economy got affected by AB5 only because of these 2 corporations - Uber and Lyft, the same corporations that now, say they fight for their partners/drivers "flexibility" rights.
> 
> ...


Yes it's true Uber and Lyft were screwing drivers and they are crap companies. Not denying that, in fact I have said the same before. As I said earlier in the thread, the bill was good when it forced Uber in to allowing drivers to set their own pricing... that was the point at which lawmakers should have turned their attention and started pushing Lyft to do the same. Then it should have been left alone as a barrier to keep gig companies from having abusive business practices as they did before AB5. See the thread of the guy who made $3k pre expenses in a week, yes he drove a ton but the hourly wasn't bad. https://uberpeople.net/threads/anyone-else-making-3000-a-week-driving-with-uber.409126/

AB5 was fighting back and it is hurting Uber and Lyft, but in the end, now it's going to be drivers who will suffer the most, who are supposed to be the people being helped by this bill. We will be hurt by earning lower wages or becoming employees with no actual additional pay, and incurring additional tax liabilities. The only way this ends up being even close to "neutral" on a scale of bad/neutral/good will be if Uber/Lyft greatly raise their rates to cover the additional business costs and pay drivers the same wages they're currently earning. Ex: if driver is making $18 now, they might get $25 an hour with higher rates and AB5, with the remaining $7 per hour going toward things like health care, 401k, to cover car expenses and the additional taxes... Really I'd still rate it "bad" in the end, because nothing really changed for the drivers, they could have just used whats left of the additional $7 an hour after car expenses/taxes to buy their own health care / contribute to a 401k. But in reality, pay will probably be much worse than that. The only winner if this is all finalized will be the government due to tax revenue. Uber/Lyft, Drivers, and Consumers will all lose.

I don't believe the Economic Policy Institute study is accurate, there are too many variables, like are you shopping around for maintenance... doing it yourself... etc. Even if you assume it is accurate, it goes to show how much expenses drivers have to absorb and now they won't be able to deduct the cost of those expenses on their taxes, so it's a double whammy.

Whose fault do you think it is that rent is so high? Look up which party the mayors belong to in the top 10 highest rent cities... only 2 are Republican and the funny part is the 2 that are Republican are the lowest 2 on the list. (https://www.fortunebuilders.com/top-10-u-s-cities-with-the-highest-rents/)

In almost all cases, More regulation = more expensive, lower pay, and/or creating barriers to entry in to an industry. Taxi Medallion system anyone??? Remember $1 million taxi medallions? That meant only very rich people could set up a taxi company, or drivers had to basically dedicate their life to driving by financing a medallion. The Democrats wrap their regulations up in a bow and make it look and sound like they're helping people, and maybe they really think they are helping people... but it's really just destructive in the end. Amazing people buy in to their economic policies when the facts are clear... the cities they run have higher taxes, the states they run have higher taxes, and the cities they run have higher rent because the cost of doing business in these places is so much higher due to all the regulation and in some cases an artificially limited supply of housing. Not to mention that it's also true their cities have higher rates of violent crimes.

I still haven't seen anyone mention a single way this bill will benefit most drivers, which is supposed to be the intent of the bill.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

ten25 said:


> Have to call Gizmodo out on this!
> 
> https://gizmodo.com/[email protected]@@@ing-did-it-1844789970#replies (to see the censored replies, go to pending comments sort sort by newest, the censored @@@@ in the url is the f word, you will have to change that due to UP profanity filters)
> 
> ...


AMERICA !
HOME OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP !


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

ten25 said:


> And you will not save a penny from itemizing them unless you have over $12,500 (the current standard deduction) in expenses. Where as now you get the $12,500 standard deduction and you can write off .58 a mile or actual expenses on your schedule C, plus 20% of any profits remaining after your mileage deduction /actual expenses are non taxable. Ex: if I drive 5 miles to a trip and 5 miles on the trip I can write off $5.80 ... Which is usually the entire amount I earned from the trip or within a dollar or two. Then I get to reduce that amount by 20% because of the pass through deduction in the tax cuts and job act of 2017 for sole proprietors.
> 
> IRS guidance proving you can't itemize deductions unless you have over standard deduction.


Or you could have done what all the drivers should have done by now and incorporated (llc whatever works best) and made your income Pass through, filing all the business expenses itemized. 
Then claim you 12500 personal deduction on your income.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Or you could have done what all the drivers should have done by now and incorporated (llc whatever works best) and made your income Pass through, filing all the business expenses itemized.
> Then claim you 12500 personal deduction on your income.


You can get the same benefits without an LLC. Just file a schedule C as a sole proprietor.

Once you're an employee of Uber / Lyft you cannot do either of these options anymore.

An LLC may help in limiting your liability in a wreck if you do not comingle your personal funds with business funds but besides that no real benefits and you have to pay a yearly fee & file other paperwork.

(Disclaimer this is not tax or legal advice im not an accountant or lawyer)


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

ten25 said:


> You can get the same benefits without an LLC. Just file a schedule C as a sole proprietor.
> 
> Once you're an employee of Uber / Lyft you cannot do either of these options anymore.
> 
> ...


Actually, if you, and every other driver, were to have established your LLC (any incorporation really) as a transportation provider it would have invalidated AB5 as it does not apply to ICs with established businesses in the field they are ICing in.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ten25 said:


> You can get the same benefits without an LLC. Just file a schedule C as a sole proprietor.
> 
> Once you're an employee of Uber / Lyft you cannot do either of these options anymore.
> 
> ...


It's a good thing you put in that disclaimer because it is TERRIBLE advice.

A LLC offers you almost ZERO protection in case of a wreck. Especially one where you are the at fault driver.

LLCs are designed to protect INVESTORS and not owner operators.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Actually, if you, and every other driver, were to have established your LLC (any incorporation really) as a transportation provider it would have invalidated AB5 as it does not apply to ICs with established businesses in the field they are ICing in.


It will only matter if Uber allows it. If prop 22 doesn't pass and block AB5, the first thing that will probably happen is everyone will have to sign up on a wait list to become an employee. Then once it's your "turn" to sign up, you will have to fill out employee details. In other words doubtful the framework will exist to sign up using an LLC.

If Uber does still allow you to go through an LLC that would be awesome news.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ten25 said:


> Drivers won't be able to write off their miles on schedule C anymore once they're an employee. (https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-the-411-on-who-can-deduct-car-expenses-on-their-tax-returns)
> 
> Now drivers will be responsible for taxes on money they didn't actually earn because that money was spent on gas or repairs etc. Maybe Uber will reimburse drivers for gas or mileage but I wouldn't hold my breath, and I'm sure if they do they'll find some way to shortchange people like only paying on trip miles.
> 
> ...


Again, TERRIBLE advice.

In California drivers won't need to deduct miles or repairs.

As an employer in California, Uber must pay at least minimum wage plus ALL tips plus ALL expenses. Gas, repairs, tires, windshields, oil changes.

Everything.



Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Actually, if you, and every other driver, were to have established your LLC (any incorporation really) as a transportation provider it would have invalidated AB5 as it does not apply to ICs with established businesses in the field they are ICing in.


Not true.

If the worker fails any of the ABC tests, Uber must consider the driver an employee.

There is no mention of an exemption for a driver that has an LLC. Exemptions are only made for certain recognized professions.

As an FYI, LLCs cost a minimum of 800 dollars per year.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

observer said:


> Again, TERRIBLE advice.
> 
> In California drivers won't need to deduct miles or repairs.
> 
> ...


Even so, you can bet Uber will not pay drivers for off trip miles, or at least severely limit the number of off trip miles they will pay (i.e. maybe they pay 2 miles after your drop off so you can get to a staging point). Otherwise some guy with a car that in reality costs .15 cpm to drive could just drive off trip as much as possible and get reimbursed at the .58 cpm IRS rate to make a killing.

I'm willing to bet with Uber having to pay their portion of payroll tax, and paying for your expenses, they will pay minimum wage to offset the costs as much as possible.

The only way this has a chance at being equal to the current pay is with a substantial rate increase. Also, for those of us who like to go crazy and drive 100 hour weeks when we can to earn extra money, well that is probably going to be over since it's doubtful Uber will allow overtime.

Looking at my 2019 return I only owed tax on about 5% of my Uber income after writing off miles ... so extrapolating off that if someone earned $40k they'd only owe tax on $2k of it, then take off the 20% passthrough deduction .... so tax on $1600 .

If they're an employee they'd need to be paid about $22.75 per hour which would be 47K per year. Which would leave about $9,000 in taxes.I doubt we'll see this happen with Uber having additional costs (payroll tax, benefits, driver expenses) they will pay $12 per hour + expenses.

(disclaimer again: I'm not an accountant, this is not tax advice)


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

BTW, if prop 22 passes say goodbye to anyone driving full time.

Drivers will be restricted to part time drivers working 20-25 hours a week. Just enough so Uber won't have to pay out their "benefits".



ten25 said:


> Even so, you can bet Uber will not pay drivers for off trip miles, or at least severely limit the number of off trip miles they will pay (i.e. maybe they pay 2 miles after your drop off so you can get to a staging point). Otherwise some guy with a car that in reality costs .15 cpm to drive could just drive off trip as much as possible and get reimbursed at the .58 cpm IRS rate to make a killing.
> 
> I'm willing to bet with Uber having to pay their portion of payroll tax, and paying for your expenses, they will pay minimum wage to offset the costs as much as possible. The only way this has a chance at being equal to the current pay is with a substantial rate increase.


No.

Employers must pay ALL mileage beginning when you log on till you log off. They cannot just shut off your miles.

You must be paid miles and time to pax, from pax to destination then to next pax.

Once logged on Uber must pay you a minimum of two hours or keep you busy those two hours.

Uber is not going to pay you to sit around.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

observer said:


> BTW, if prop 22 passes say goodbye to anyone driving full time.
> 
> Drivers will be restricted to part time drivers working 20-25 hours a week. Just enough so Uber won't have to pay out their "benefits".
> 
> ...


I didn't know that about prop 22, just thought it was maintaining the current status quo. Seems like we're screwed either way in CA then.

"Employers must pay ALL mileage beginning when you log on till you log off. They cannot just shut off your miles."

Yes, which is exactly why they will give you a set number of miles to get to a staging point. Anything further than that they either wouldn't pay you or they would (if law requires them to) pay and then if you do this enough times they just fire you because you're not following instructions to get to a staging point. That means you will be forced to do trips in the most dangerous parts of town whether you want to or not, unless you quit or ignore the requests until they presumably fire you. Or in the case assuming it's legal, where Uber only has to pay up to X miles, you would now have to pay your own way driving away from this part of town... that's assuming Uber doesn't instruct you to stay there and continue pickups in this area


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

> Everything.
> 
> 
> Not true.
> ...


First, I never once used the word "exemption" so you need to try reading.
_
*SEC. 2.*
Section 2750.3 is added to the Labor Code, to read:

*2750.3.*
(a) (1) For purposes of the provisions of this code and the Unemployment Insurance Code, and for the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(A) The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact.
(B) The person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business.
(C) The person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed._

(A) I love when drivers complain that they don't have this freedom. That is not factually correct. Your contract stipulates what you will do, not how you do it. You will be available to accept rides if online and provide those rides. You control this by not being online. You also control the routes you take to pickup and drop off. Obviously if you are attempting to defraud either Uber or the Client by taking unreasonably long routes you can face penalties up to and including termination of the contract. This is not "controlling" your actions.
(B) Uber makes software and connects clients and ICs. It does not, itself, provide transportation. 
(C) This is the part that applies to my comment. As long as the driver has an "independently established trade, occupation, or BUSINESS of the same nature as that involved in the work performed."

All three criteria are met, AB5 does not apply in that case.

Get an LLC and you don't have to worry about being an "employee" if you don't want benefits and minimum pay.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> First, I never once used the word "exemption" so you need to try reading.
> 
> _*SEC. 2.*
> Section 2750.3 is added to the Labor Code, to read:
> ...





ten25 said:


> It will only matter if Uber allows it. If prop 22 doesn't pass and block AB5, the first thing that will probably happen is everyone will have to sign up on a wait list to become an employee. Then once it's your "turn" to sign up, you will have to fill out employee details. In other words doubtful the framework will exist to sign up using an LLC.
> 
> If Uber does still allow you to go through an LLC that would be awesome news.


I could see the LLC as a potential work around to AB5 but only if Uber sets up their systems / sign up forms to allow it ... see my above post. My understanding is with the current system and status quo, you can already sign up as an LLC, but assuming they start abiding by AB5 I doubt that will be the case because their whole system in CA will probably have to be reworked and be based around the fact they now have to abide by AB5.

Hopefully AB5 won't go nationwide and if it does, holding out hope this will work as a workaround.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ten25 said:


> I didn't know that about prop 22, just thought it was maintaining the current status quo. Seems like we're screwed either way in CA then.
> 
> "Employers must pay ALL mileage beginning when you log on till you log off. They cannot just shut off your miles."
> 
> Yes, which is exactly why they will give you a set number of miles to get to a staging point. Anything further than that they either wouldn't pay you or they would (if law requires them to) pay and then if you do this enough times they just fire you because you're not following instructions to get to a staging point. That means you will be forced to do trips in the most dangerous parts of town whether you want to or not, unless you quit or ignore the requests until they presumably fire you. Or in the case assuming it's legal, where Uber only has to pay up to X miles, you would now have to pay your own way driving away from this part of town... that's assuming Uber doesn't instruct you to stay there and continue pickups in this area :smiles:


From the time Uber instructs you to go somewhere you are on their clock and mileage.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

observer said:


> From the time Uber instructs you to go somewhere you are on their clock and mileage.


Yes most likely but if you go somewhere they don't instruct you to, they may have to pay for that mileage in the mean time, but if you keep doing it then you probably will get shit canned for causing them "unnecessary" expenses. :smiles:


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> First, I never once used the word "exemption" so you need to try reading.
> 
> _*SEC. 2.*
> Section 2750.3 is added to the Labor Code, to read:
> ...


Nothing at ALL to do with AB5.

Show me were AB5 exludes drivers that are LLCs.



ten25 said:


> Yes most likely but if you go somewhere they don't instruct you to, they may have to pay for that mileage in the mean time, but if you keep doing it then you probably will get shit canned for causing them "unnecessary" expenses. :smiles:


Nope. As an employee you write down your mileage at beginning of day and at end of day. Only personal miles are excluded.

Uber will likely track miles themselves since they are the ones that will get sued if mileage isn't correct and there will be a lot of people watching.

If you don't follow their directions and pad the miles yes, that would be fraudulent and Uber could can you.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

observer said:


> Nothing at ALL to do with AB5.
> 
> Show me were AB5 exludes drivers that are LLCs.
> 
> ...


Uber will be tracking your every movement. They obviously already have the tech to track you and your miles. They can tell what is personal and what isn't. When you log on they'll have you go to a staging area or straight to a trip if available. Once you're done with a trip they'll give you a set # of miles to get to another staging area or send you another trip.

They're not going to let you abuse the system and drive 10-20 miles across town for no reason when they would have to pay. It's a job now not a "you get to go where you want when you want" situation. Maybe initially they would allow this to launch quicker, and yes they probably would have to pay regardless of whether you're trying to abuse the system, but it would only take a few minutes to few hours to set up a script that finds every single person who is driving miles past the allotted miles to get to staging area on a regular basis & those people would be fired for insubordination and replaced by next person in line on the waiting list.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ten25 said:


> Uber will be tracking your every movement. They obviously already have the tech to track you and your miles. They can tell what is personal and what isn't. When you log on they'll have you go to a staging area or straight to a trip if available. Once you're done with a trip they'll give you a set # of miles to get to another staging area or send you another trip.
> 
> They're not going to let you abuse the system and drive 10-20 miles across town for no reason when they would have to pay. It's a job now not a "you get to go where you want when you want" situation. Maybe initially they would allow this to launch quicker, and yes they probably would have to pay regardless of whether you're trying to abuse the system, but it would only take a few minutes to few hours to set up a script that finds every single person doing this on a regular basis & those people would be fired for insubordination and replaced by next person in line on the waiting list.


If Uber sent you to a staging area, they will have to pay you time and mileage from where you log on.

Uber isn't dumb though. They want drivers to be somewhat happy. They'll try and find fares close to drivers. By the time you drop off your first pax, they'll have your next pax lined up.

Probably what will happen is that you will be given a route to your pax and if you continually deviate too much from the route, you'll be sent a warning. Uber will still have to pay you for the time and miles but after a few warnings, yes they will fire you.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

observer said:


> If Uber sent you to a staging area, they will have to pay you time and mileage from where you log on.


Yes, we agree on that. I'm talking about if you drive outside the staging area after dropping someone off or at the start of your shift before you have anyone. They may have to pay for it but you won't last long if you keep doing it.

I agree the algorithm will get better also as far as keeping your car full.

I see this level of control as a big negative for drivers on top of the tax issues and I still haven't seen anyone say how this is going to increase driver wages or help most drivers in any way. The fact is Uber does face increased costs of payroll taxes, and benefits from these changes, and they will have to try and offset them without raising prices so much that consumers won't use the service anymore, plus probably only paying $12 an hour + expenses. The only thing this really looks to be doing is increasing tax revenue and forcing a big rate increase for customers.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

observer said:


> Nothing at ALL to do with AB5.
> 
> Show me were AB5 exludes drivers that are LLCs.


Are you stupid or illiterate? 
That IS AB5 I quoted.

And read what subsection (C) says and what I wrote.

If you still can't understand it I suggest buying a dictionary and getting an education.



ten25 said:


> I could see the LLC as a potential work around to AB5 but only if Uber sets up their systems / sign up forms to allow it ... see my above post. My understanding is with the current system and status quo, you can already sign up as an LLC, but assuming they start abiding by AB5 I doubt that will be the case because their whole system in CA will probably have to be reworked and be based around the fact they now have to abide by AB5.
> 
> Hopefully AB5 won't go nationwide and if it does, holding out hope this will work as a workaround.


There is nothing that says Uber has to hire Your LLC. 
It is very clear and says YOU have to have a business already established providing the same service.

So, you create a Transportation Provider LLC getting all the required licensing and insurance what ever governing body covers your servic area requires.

That is it.

Then You, the individual, sign up with Uber as an IC. You are able to do that because Your company provides that service and you set up the direct deposits into your LLC paying yourself as a pass through.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Are you stupid or illiterate?
> That IS AB5 I quoted.
> 
> And read what subsection (C) says and what I wrote.
> ...


Reading comprehension.

WHERE does it state that LLCs are EXEMPT from AB5?

Workers are presumed to be an employee unless the employer proves otherwise.

No where does it exempt uber drivers or LLCs.

No where.

Uber has already been proven to fail the ABC test. That is why the state is sueing and the courts have agreed.

You really make it sound so simple.

Just get your LLC, transport license and insurance.

Do you know how long that takes and how expensive that is?

Seriously, you need to stop advising people. You have NO clue what you are talking about.

NO CLUE.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> First, I never once used the word "exemption" so you need to try reading.
> 
> _*SEC. 2.*
> Section 2750.3 is added to the Labor Code, to read:
> ...


Ok let's talk about the 3 parts of the ABC test.

A. This is debatable, for the sake of your argument i'm giving you A. This isn't a laughable interpretation. I could argue A for your side.
B. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uber*Uber Technologies, Inc.*, commonly known as *Uber*, offers vehicles for hire, food delivery (Uber Eats), package delivery, couriers, freight transportation, and, through a partnership with Lime, electric bicycle and motorized scooter rental. 
So... right... OK. Is it a joke to give this one to you? Yes it is a joke.

C. The overwhelming majority of drivers face ARREST for taking customers off-App. This is not in any way shape or form independently established trade/ occupation of business. In order to change this... each driver would need commercial insurance and the permits necessary to driver passengers off app.

So... really? Let's assume that A. and B. Are stretched, and given to uber. Do you REALLY think uber/lyft will function if the drivers are required to have commercial insurance in order to sign up? I mean it would be a MUCH better situation for the drivers who stick around, but it's just not going to happen. My price quote? It was $400 a MONTH... A MONTH! My interpretation of this would be that the drivers would have to be able to function as businesses independently of uber, this is so far from the case it's not even funny.

Sure most of the trips are given by full timers, but i think peak demand is largely covered by part times coming out en masse to cover the heaviest demand then getting off the road.

It would be stellar if you guys all got Chaffeur permits and could hand out cards, build your own client base and could legally drive private customers. The reality is that uber doesn't want tha because their drivers will be competing against uber and sapping customers away from themselves.

Reality is if i give out my card and get a couple customers calling back, like for a return trip back home?

If i just charge them cash, they same price they took going there there's no need to run the meter, the cab company won't find out, they don't care... it saves them on labor because they don't have that customer calling in wasting their time at the call center.
They also get their pound of flesh for the taxi rental.

Uber on the other hand, if you get 2 call backs a day (not hard working full time, i used to get 4+ a day when I actively handed out my card) That's easily... $30 a day in lost revenue to uber. They will bleed business to us and it's going to destroy their bottom line.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Ok let's talk about the 3 parts of the ABC test.
> 
> A. This is debatable, for the sake of your argument i'm giving you A. This isn't a laughable interpretation. I could argue A for your side.
> B.
> ...


If a person were to go through everything. PUC license, commercial insurance, registering an LLC, commercial plates etc.

That will easily take three months BEFORE you can pick up the first paying customer.

Why would they even THINK about working Uber for 3 dollar fares?

Then get deactivated a couple months later.

That's crazy talk.



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Ok let's talk about the 3 parts of the ABC test.
> 
> A. This is debatable, for the sake of your argument i'm giving you A. This isn't a laughable interpretation. I could argue A for your side.
> B.
> ...


Question for you.

How much coverage did that 400 a week get you?

20 years ago we paid 12k a year per truck for a million in coverage just for liability and we just hauled cars around, no pax.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

observer said:


> If a person were to go through everything. PUC license, commercial insurance, registering an LLC, commercial plates etc.
> 
> That will easily take three months BEFORE you can pick up the first paying customer.
> 
> ...


You misread, $400 and change a month. (looked to correct myself and i was right the first time) WHOOPSIES

So you misread it no biggie, there's a bit of a difference between $4,800 a year and $20,000 a year lol.

500,000 liability (to the state requirement for passenger transport) (don't ask what the breakdown was), full collision/comprehensive, uninsured/under-insured, And they threw in roadside assistance with a commercial roadside policy. Then the last year i skimped back the coverage significantly because i saved more than the car was worth at that point dropping the collision coverage.

Your VERY right in that the paperwork to do all this probably takes months, that's another reason i never thought of that uber wouldn't want that.

AND ACTUALLY, with my policy they actually offered me reduced rate until my permits came in (technically it was a cash back credit towards my next bill), I declined because even without the permit I was able to operate in some parts of town without it. One county just requires a business permit and commercial insurance. Naturally i just started operating once i got the insurance while i was waiting for permits to come in. It's very common in Florida for companies to only have permits for one county and or city and draw their service area at the county line.

I had permits for 2 counties (Orange/Osceola county) the counties that Disney world (and the tourist area) falls under.

You'd be amazed what businesses will do if talk to a human being about your needs and concerns.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> You misread, $400 and change a month. (looked to correct myself and i was right the first time) WHOOPSIES
> 
> So you misread it no biggie, there's a bit of a difference between $4,800 a year and $20,000 a year lol.
> 
> ...


Actually, I miswrote, I know that premiums are monthly not weekly. It was a slip up.

Just filing for the DBA takes 30 days. That's the first step. You can't do anything until it's been published.

Then you have to file your LLC. That's 70 dollars plus the yearly 800 state fee. Once you get that done there's a 20 dollar fee for something I don't remember.

If you can figure out how to do all this good, if not you have to pay someone to hold your hand and write up everything. Hopefully they do it correctly. That's probly minimum another 500 dollars.

I don't remember how long that takes.

THEN you can apply for the TCP. Fill out the application and pay the NONREFUNDABLE 1,000 dollar application fee.

Then you go buy insurance. Here in California the minimum is 750K coverage. Not sure how much that is now. Probly 5-6k a year. Like I said we paid 12k monthly per truck for a million dollars coverage and that was 20 years ago. That was for hauling cars around, cars don't sue in accidents, pax do.

As a new company without any previous history you'll be charged a pretty high premium for the first couple years but it will drop if you don't have any accidents.

Then, If you want to pick up at an airport like LAX you go there and pay a 150 yearly fee. That covers you for all the LAWA airports but still have to pay separate fees for other airports.

THEN after all this you have to rely on Uber to give you work. No street hails. You are still one ant among tens of thousands except you have extremely high operating expenses.

If you're going to go through all this trouble just go 100% and build your own business.

All it takes is time and money.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

I forgot (probly forgot a few other things), between filing your DBA and filing for the LLC you can now open a business account for your DBA from which you can now pay everything else. 

Banks won't open a business account until you bring them your DBA filing proof from the newspaper.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

ten25 said:


> Drivers won't be able to write off their miles on schedule C anymore once they're an employee. (https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-the-411-on-who-can-deduct-car-expenses-on-their-tax-returns)
> 
> Now drivers will be responsible for taxes on money they didn't actually earn because that money was spent on gas or repairs etc. Maybe Uber will reimburse drivers for gas or mileage but I wouldn't hold my breath, and I'm sure if they do they'll find some way to shortchange people like only paying on trip miles.
> 
> ...


They won't be able to do the IRS deduction, but Uber and Lyft should give a mileage allowance, as most companies, such as those who hire traveling salesman, often do. If they don't, who is going to drive for them?



observer said:


> I forgot (probly forgot a few other things), between filing your DBA and filing for the LLC you can now open a business account for your DBA from which you can now pay everything else.
> 
> Banks won't open a business account until you bring them your DBA filing proof from the newspaper.


Depends on the city, where I live a business license will get you a business checking account with my bank. The ad in the adjudicated newspaper isn't always necessary.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> They won't be able to do the IRS deduction, but Uber and Lyft should give a mileage allowance, as most companies, such as those who hire traveling salesman, often do. If they don't, who is going to drive for them?
> 
> 
> Depends on the city, where I live a business license will get you a business checking account with my bank. The ad in the adjudicated newspaper isn't always necessary.


Is the business license in your name or is it in the name of a LLC?

From what I was told a LLC has to have a DBA before you can open a bank account.

Business bank accounts in your name don't need a DBA.

I think you are right, if you do the LLC first, you don't need a DBA.

https://www.ftb.ca.gov/about-ftb/newsroom/tax-news/november-2019/guide-to-dbas.html
But you then have to research if your name is available.

No DBA saves you 40-50 bux.


----------



## Paul Vincent (Jan 15, 2016)

Maybe those crazy left-wing socialist are tired of paying for Uber drivers who gets hurt on the job and have no insurance. Paying for unemployment for those Uber drivers who have elected to file for unemployment with no contributions from the Uber/Lyft. Crazy left-wing socialist.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Is the business license in your name or is it in the name of a LLC?
> 
> From what I was told a LLC has to have a DBA before you can open a bank account.
> 
> ...


I had a DBA biz license, and called my bank, she said just bring it in and we can get an account. Not an LLC, though, but I don't see how an LLC changes anything, but, maybe it does.


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

Gizmodo has an anti shill policy on their forums.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Ok let's talk about the 3 parts of the ABC test.
> 
> A. This is debatable, for the sake of your argument i'm giving you A. This isn't a laughable interpretation. I could argue A for your side.
> B.
> ...


Tl;Dr most of it, but skimmed. 
If "the majority" of drivers wouldn't be able to figure out how to incorporate AND wouldn't be able to afford the appropriate insurance and licensing... What do you think this would do to the drivers that did and could?

Would, maybe, their income skyrocket due to having maybe about 1/3000th the competition? Seriously, think. If all those "barely scraping by" drivers were dropped due to not being able to qualify as Independent Contractors you don't see where the income for those that could would offset that increased expense?



observer said:


> Actually, I miswrote, I know that premiums are monthly not weekly. It was a slip up.
> 
> Just filing for the DBA takes 30 days. That's the first step. You can't do anything until it's been published.
> 
> ...


You both have neglected to take notice that AB5 doesn't say that preexisting business has to be licensed throughout the entire state. 
So, you find a place in California with fewer restrictions and establish your transportation business there.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Tl;Dr most of it, but skimmed.
> If "the majority" of drivers wouldn't be able to figure out how to incorporate AND wouldn't be able to afford the appropriate insurance and licensing... What do you think this would do to the drivers that did and could?
> 
> Would, maybe, their income skyrocket due to having maybe about 1/3000th the competition? Seriously, think. If all those "barely scraping by" drivers were dropped due to not being able to qualify as Independent Contractors you don't see where the income for those that could would offset that increased expense?
> ...


That's just it. The requirements are the same no matter where in the state you live.

The only way around the TCP permit, that I can see, is registering in a city as a taxi service. Then you would have to get a permit in each city you work plus airports plus commercial insurance plus if you wanted, a LLC.

The only savings would be the 1,000 dollar TCP application fee.

I'm not sure it would be worth it to not get the TCP in the first place.

Also. Uber would never go for a model that restricts the amount of drivers it could hire.

Uber would not hire any Independent Contractors if it meant they could only hire those that had TCP licenses and insurance.

Uber would have to pay more and it's not going to want to do that.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

The insurance thing is not a big of a an issue as it sounds like.

I know that with my current taxi revenue I can still cover commercial insurance in 2 days. Back in the day when I was an owner operator I managed to cover my commercial insurance costs in the first weekend every month including gas costs for those days.

With the current Uber-x rates I know it would take me closer to a week to cover the costs of commercial insurance.

Mandating that drivers have commercial insurance would have several impacts

1. Improved safety and coverage for the drivers taking customers off app.

2. Standardized labeling of insured vehicles would be very easy to accomplish. The insurance companies could hand out window stickers for their commercially licensed drivers easily with the policy on the stickers. Then you could train customers to look for the stickers.

3. it would have the negative effect of blasting part timers off the road/platforms. However since 80% of rides are given by the full timers.. well...

4. Improved quality of the drivers that are left?
Ok I can dream, reality is that this is a maybe.

5. fleet operators could pop up to provide short term and part time opportunities.
A. Just like I can walk into the cab company on a Friday and sign out a cab, similar arrangements will pop up. You could rent out a commercially covered vehicle for $70-100 and if your getting over $2.00 a mile you’ll cover that in less hours than you would think.


----------



## ten25 (Oct 4, 2015)

Oscar Levant said:


> They won't be able to do the IRS deduction, but Uber and Lyft should give a mileage allowance, as most companies, such as those who hire traveling salesman, often do. If they don't, who is going to drive for them?


Ants.



The Entomologist said:


> Gizmodo has an anti shill policy on their forums.


Yeah, except I'm not a shill. Obviously they wouldn't know it, but I've been posting on this site for a while, and I'm no fan of Uber. Just truly believe there is nothing to be gained (for most people) and a lot to lose from AB5.


----------

