| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/17/2006 10:52:08 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by hankk:
Doc, according to your profile, you are an Allergist/Immunologist. Do you need to take pictures for work? perhaps a record of skin reactions to allergy shots, or some allergic reaction? Do you use any of the pictures you take as marketing material (birthday cards, reminder cards, calenders, business cards, etc)? Talk to a tax expert--there may be some way to use your photos in your work. As a guess, can you sell a picture to your business? This could be for marketing or it could just be to hang on the waiting room wall. |
These are some really good ideas, but I think they almost necessitate taking the highlighted step, as these are all perfectly legitimate tax-reducing strategies which will probably send up skyrockets if not red flags ... if you are going to try and save more than about $500 I'd say hire a pro to handle it for you, and if less, then I'd just forget it for another year.
Of course, the fact that I have to have a serious talk with those folks myself may color my advice just a teensy bit ... : ) |
I forgot to mention that you should charge a fair and reasonable price to yourself. You probably would have issues if you charged at a rate comparable to an original Ansel Adams, but may not have a problem if you charged the same amount that Walmart charges for an Ansel Adams copy :-) And yes, its best to see a pro. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 11:19:21 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by hankk:
I forgot to mention that you should charge a fair and reasonable price to yourself. You probably would have issues if you charged at a rate comparable to an original Ansel Adams, but may not have a problem if you charged the same amount that Walmart charges for an Ansel Adams copy :-) And yes, its best to see a pro. |
Dunno, original Ansel Adams prints used to go for about $10.
Works out around $200 in today's money.
So what's fair and reasonable for your prints ? :)
How much better than Ansel do you think your work is ?
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 12:08:35 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I hope you have professional liability insurance as well. |
I'm not quite sure that's necessary for a nature/landscape photographer... |
Well, that's your decision, after all, it'll be your tallywacker in the blender if something goes wrong. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 12:17:11 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
it'll be your tallywacker in the blender if something goes wrong. |
Now, that's a mental image I didn't need.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 12:19:07 PM · #30 |
You know, I'm just going to play devil's advocate on the liability insurance a bit. We are all like deer in the headlights worrying about "the lawsuit". Believe me, I know all about this. I am, after all, a doctor and wouldn't consider not carrying malpractice insurance.
However, I would be very surprised if anybody knew anybody else who's liability insurance came in handy while shooting anything other than event photography. If you are shooting weddings or portraits or whatever, by all means, liability insurance is a must. But in a risk/benefit analysis, is paying three hundred dollars or so a year worth the miniscule risk I will actually be liable for something while shooting that isn't already covered by my personal liability, car, or homeowners insurance?
How could someone even prove I was "on the job" since I'm not signing contracts with the mountains to shoot them? Gee, Mr. Attorney, this shot was for my own personal use...
I'd like to hear a good argument for it other than, "you never know".
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 12:50:45 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
You know, I'm just going to play devil's advocate on the liability insurance a bit. We are all like deer in the headlights worrying about "the lawsuit". Believe me, I know all about this. I am, after all, a doctor and wouldn't consider not carrying malpractice insurance.
However, I would be very surprised if anybody knew anybody else who's liability insurance came in handy while shooting anything other than event photography. If you are shooting weddings or portraits or whatever, by all means, liability insurance is a must. But in a risk/benefit analysis, is paying three hundred dollars or so a year worth the miniscule risk I will actually be liable for something while shooting that isn't already covered by my personal liability, car, or homeowners insurance?
How could someone even prove I was "on the job" since I'm not signing contracts with the mountains to shoot them? Gee, Mr. Attorney, this shot was for my own personal use...
I'd like to hear a good argument for it other than, "you never know". |
Your own, personal use ceases to exist when you become a professional photographer. What's $300/yr vs the value of your house & property?
R. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 12:54:03 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Your own, personal use ceases to exist when you become a professional photographer. What's $300/yr vs the value of your house & property?
R. |
i would agree. someone could look at the body of your work and make the argument that any landscape or nature shot was for business and not personal. also I can promise that if anyone had the thought of sueing and found out you were a doctor then they would. right or wrong people assume that doctors make lots of money. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 12:57:56 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
How could someone even prove I was "on the job" since I'm not signing contracts with the mountains to shoot them? Gee, Mr. Attorney, this shot was for my own personal use...
I'd like to hear a good argument for it other than, "you never know". |
Should something happen, they wouldn't have to prove you were "on the job" at that specific time, all they would have to establish is that you were photographing something and that you do indeed sell photographs.
Message edited by author 2006-11-17 12:58:22. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 01:17:10 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Your own, personal use ceases to exist when you become a professional photographer. What's $300/yr vs the value of your house & property?
R. |
If I make $350/year in picture sales, it's quite a bit. Not to mention it's keeping you from selling your stuff at all.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Should something happen, they wouldn't have to prove you were "on the job" at that specific time, all they would have to establish is that you were photographing something and that you do indeed sell photographs. |
What are you basing this contention on?
I'm not arguing with you guys because I think you are all a bunch of idiots, I'm arguing because I'm testing the value of the advice. It's possible this advice is worth its weight in gold, but I don't know that until I see what's behind it.
Message edited by author 2006-11-17 13:27:32.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 01:32:15 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If I make $350/year in picture sales, it's quite a bit. Not to mention it's keeping you from selling your stuff at all. |
Well, for me it's more complicated than that. I live on a disability pension, and along with that comes complete medical coverage. So there are other issues. I do sell the occasional print, and that's fine, but I can't be a "professional" anything, turn a profit, and come out ahead unless it's a hell of a profit. Plus I'm not getting any younger...
R. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 01:51:29 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If I make $350/year in picture sales, it's quite a bit. Not to mention it's keeping you from selling your stuff at all. |
Well, for me it's more complicated than that. I live on a disability pension, and along with that comes complete medical coverage. So there are other issues. I do sell the occasional print, and that's fine, but I can't be a "professional" anything, turn a profit, and come out ahead unless it's a hell of a profit. Plus I'm not getting any younger...
R. |
Not setting up a business does not in any way prevent you from selling your work. You just declare it as ordinary "other income" on Form 1040. You only need to file Schedule C if you want to deduct expenses.
If, like most people, your bought your equipment for your own use, but would now like to pick up a few bucks selling prints, just declare the income and pay the tax, forget the deductions and insurance and paperwork, and enjoy your time taking more pictures.
When around half your total income comes from print (or stock) sales, you'll become a "pro" and have to deal with this stuff again ... and be able to afford to hire someone to do so. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 02:07:33 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Should something happen, they wouldn't have to prove you were "on the job" at that specific time, all they would have to establish is that you were photographing something and that you do indeed sell photographs. |
What are you basing this contention on?
I'm not arguing with you guys because I think you are all a bunch of idiots, I'm arguing because I'm testing the value of the advice. It's possible this advice is worth its weight in gold, but I don't know that until I see what's behind it. |
I asked the same question of an attorney when I was looking into setting up a business.
What he told me was, basically, if at the time of whatever you're being sued for happened, you had a camera and you sell photos, your insurance company can and probably will claim that you were working and refuse to pay the settlement/judgement under your personal liability policy. You can try to fight the insurance company in court, but chances are the insurance company has more $$$ and more lawyers and even then, the burden of proof will be on you to somehow prove to the court that you were not working at the time even though you were taking pictures just like the ones you sell. In the meantime, the person who originally sued you will be collecting on their judgement by seizing your assets, placing leins on your house and other unpleasant stuff. All of which further drain your financial resources. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 02:19:40 PM · #38 |
Here's my thouhts on the matter (and they apply to model releases and contracts too).
You are doing whatever you do and and someone is inured (them, their property, their pride - who knows and it doesn't matter really). they may say whatever they like to you and you can ignore them, and they may go away.
Or they may see a lawyer. Should the see a lawyer and he sees merit in the case you will get a scary letter from him. You butt will pucker, you will be pissed off, and perhaps go get drunk. You will disagree with them and their lawyer, but you'll have to get a lawyer of your own now.
If you have no insurance then get out your checkbook and fight to the death.
If you have insurance they may just pay off the injured person and make them go away, and you can go back to sleep, or work, or drinking.
yes, the chances of something happening are small. If something does happen the chances of you coming out of it unscathed without insurance is small.
Insurance is $600/year, so over 20 years that's only $12,000. A 1Ds, 85 1.2 and 70-200 2.8 IS. Half a car. 480 DPC memberships.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 02:42:06 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I\'m not arguing with you guys because I think you are all a bunch of idiots, I\'m arguing because I\'m testing the value of the advice. It\'s possible this advice is worth its weight in gold, but I don\'t know that until I see what\'s behind it. |
Jason,
Why wouldn't you just consult with some one that actually knows the answers to your questions instead of people that can only speculate from what they've heard or read. I realize this place is full of knowlegable people on a lot of different subjects and I'm not saying any of the advice that has been given isn't any good, just that if the concern is that great, I think I would want actual facts not what some one thinks. Cover your ass with facts, not heresay or loose interpretations of laws because that's how/what somebody else says they've done. Their situation may or may not apply to you and yours.
I haven't yet got to the point where I am concerned with these type issues. But when the time comes, I'll go straight to the horses mouth(CPA/tax lady) that does my taxes every year and maybe even consult a tax attorney.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 03:08:32 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I\'m not arguing with you guys because I think you are all a bunch of idiots, I\'m arguing because I\'m testing the value of the advice. It\'s possible this advice is worth its weight in gold, but I don\'t know that until I see what\'s behind it. |
Jason,
Why wouldn't you just consult with some one that actually knows the answers to your questions instead of people that can only speculate from what they've heard or read. I realize this place is full of knowlegable people on a lot of different subjects and I'm not saying any of the advice that has been given isn't any good, just that if the concern is that great, I think I would want actual facts not what some one thinks. Cover your ass with facts, not heresay or loose interpretations of laws because that's how/what somebody else says they've done. Their situation may or may not apply to you and yours.
I haven't yet got to the point where I am concerned with these type issues. But when the time comes, I'll go straight to the horses mouth(CPA/tax lady) that does my taxes every year and maybe even consult a tax attorney.
Just my 2 cents. |
Well, part is to just see what other people's experience is. Another part is the cost/benefit. If my tax guy is going to save me $500/year but costs me $500/year, then what is he doing for me? I'm also not quite there yet, so I'm just asking questions ahead of time. Often questions I didn't even think of come up in conversations like this and then I know what to ask the pros.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2006 03:10:08 PM · #41 |
You probably don't want to inform the IRS too early of your intentions but ...
What about actually asking the IRS? Or at least looking at tax bulletins yourself. |
|
|
|
11/17/2006 03:45:02 PM · #42 |
Years ago i sold real estate part time and that's a 1099 job around here. I had done my taxes up to that point, but i figured I owed $800, and that's $800 i didn't have. I spent $80 at my CPA and got $600 back as a refund. He got a customer for life.
Last year for my wife and I, 2 kids, sched C and depreciation, fully deduction for home and business he charged $180. And that's tax deductible too. I got $4800 back from the feds. All but $500 of what was withheld. I'll get more back this year (i'm self employed but my wife has a real job so it's her taxes we get back). She got a raise and promotion, but I think we'll get ALL our fed WH tax back this year. (yeah, i'm pumped!)
When I had questions about my taxes this year I called him and we chatted for 20 or 30 minutes, no charge.
Make the system work for you!
So go find a CPA. You can't afford not to IMO.
Message edited by author 2006-11-17 15:46:23.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/10/2025 03:47:37 PM EDT.
