Not really OC related, but still carry related. (A question of legality)

Ok so my neighbor owns her own hair salon. I might start working there under the table a few hours a week as her personal assistant. She told me she has absolutely no problem with me carrying, but she prefers me to CC while I'm going to be working there. (I OC there whenever she cuts my hair, and she again has no problem with that). My question is this:

Can I CC there while I'm working without a CHP? It is private property, and I would be doing so with the shop owner's permission. (I would just go to the restroom to switch to OC right before I leave.

Esanders2008 said:

Ok so my neighbor owns her own hair salon. I might start working there under the table a few hours a week as her personal assistant. She told me she has absolutely no problem with me carrying, but she prefers me to CC while I'm going to be working there. (I OC there whenever she cuts my hair, and she again has no problem with that). My question is this:

Can I CC there while I'm working without a CHP? It is private property, and I would be doing so with the shop owner's permission. (I would just go to the restroom to switch to OC right before I leave.

Click to expand...

Private property has nothing to do with it. The Statute says your own place of business....so if you are employed there you can legally conceal but if you're working under the table and have to prove you're employed.....someone's gonna have some splaining to do.

Damn...I'm going over to the hunting forum. Maybe someone needs some knitting advice.:uhoh:

Maybe someone needs some knitting advice.

Click to expand...

Careful, Peter, they'll start calling you that crochet-y guy...

Esanders2008 said:

I might start working there under the table

Click to expand...

Does this mean off the books/illegally?

ed said:

Does this mean off the books/illegally?

Click to expand...

Believe me, I know there are differences between the American English and British English languages, but in the version I've managed to remain somewhat fluent in (despite finding myself using "yall" on a fairly regular basis), "off the books/illegally" is exactly what "under the table" means when talking about 'employment'.

scouser said:

"off the books/illegally" is exactly what "under the table" means

Click to expand...

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

Nobody is advocating that he work off the books. He wants to know if there is a requirement for a CHP at the place where he would be laboring.

18.2-308 states, in relevant part

B. This section shall not apply to any person while in his own place of abode or the curtilage thereof. ¶
Except as provided in subsection J1, this section shall not apply to: ¶
1. Any person while in his own place of business;

Click to expand...

At one time I could have sworn that there was a section about allowing concealed carry by employees of a place that served alcohol for on-premise consumption (we really need a short term for that!) without a CHP but with permission of the owner, but it appears it was deleted when the absolute prohibition against CC in those places was removed.

Which brings us to "his own place of business" -- I read that as referring to the business owner/operator and not extending to employees (legal or otherwise). The situation the OP describes does not seem to constitute a business of his own.

(I had a really good few paragraphs about how this all might play out if he was an independent contractor cutting/styling hair, and then remembered he wil be laboring as a "personal assistant".) The position of "personal assistant" might also qualify as an independant contractor rather than as an "employee" - but it would still require the shop owner to file certain tax documents, which I believe might be the thing everyone is trying to avoid doing.

Until the OP can clarify the employment relationship it appears he will need a CHP to carry while laboring. If the OP elects to go for independent contractor status he and the shop owner will still have to submit tax forms in order to meet the definition of that status. Seems they were right when they said that the two things you cannot avoid are death and taxes.

stay safe.

I'm just amazed that someone would get on an internet forum and explain how they plan to avoid paying taxes by working off the books.

I'm so amazed in fact, that I can't even think to answer the question posed.

you are assuming....

'under the table' means 'off the books(payroll)'. In a beauty salon, it may mean she is giving pedicures at the same time as a person is getting a manacure.

However, comma, as I hear tell from my Navy friends, in the Philippines it means something TOTALLY different that is only legal in Nevada (except Reno and Las Vegas)

skidmark said:

Which brings us to "his own place of business" -- I read that as referring to the business owner/operator and not extending to employees (legal or otherwise). The situation the OP describes does not seem to constitute a business of his own.

Click to expand...

The way it's been interpreted by LE since it's inception (I don't know of any arrests or cases) is it does extend to employees but only in house. This came up here a short time ago.

For instance, a salesman could not carry into a clients office building even though he was working. He could carry in his own office though.

Another of those poorly worded statutes from our friends at the General Assembly.

ProShooter said:

I'm just amazed that someone would get on an internet forum and explain how they plan to avoid paying taxes by working off the books.

I'm so amazed in fact, that I can't even think to answer the question posed.

Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. I am sure thats not what he meant though, because that would be just plain.... well...

crazydude6030 said:

I was thinking the same thing. I am sure thats not what he meant though, because that would be just plain.... well...

Click to expand...

Doesn't surprise me at all. We need a sticky with the definition of "Splaining".:lol:

ProShooter said:

I'm just amazed that someone would get on an internet forum and explain how they plan to avoid paying taxes by working off the books.

I'm so amazed in fact, that I can't even think to answer the question posed.

Click to expand...

Strictly speaking, he never said that he planned to avoid paying taxes. As long as he properly declares the income on his tax forms, then he hasn't violated any law that I know about. For example, a few years ago I did some computer work for a friend's company "off the books". He paid me $500 for it. At tax time, I properly declared that under "other income" and paid taxes because of it (including SS taxes). As such, I didn't break the law.

It's true that most people who work "off the books" do so to avoid taxes, but the mere act of working off the books itself is not illegal. The illegality comes in when you refuse to pay taxes on that income.

grylnsmn said:

Strictly speaking, he never said that he planned to avoid paying taxes. As long as he properly declares the income on his tax forms, then he hasn't violated any law that I know about. For example, a few years ago I did some computer work for a friend's company "off the books". He paid me $500 for it. At tax time, I properly declared that under "other income" and paid taxes because of it (including SS taxes). As such, I didn't break the law.

It's true that most people who work "off the books" do so to avoid taxes, but the mere act of working off the books itself is not illegal. The illegality comes in when you refuse to pay taxes on that income.

Click to expand...

That's true but it does cause problems for the under the table employer unless he/she considers him occasional labor but a 1099 still has to be done and very likely he will have to be included in the Workmans Comp....Etc.

That comes under the definition of "Splaining".

let's be honest . . . .

ed said:

Does this mean off the books/illegally?

Click to expand...

Does all this mean the righteous folks here actually report ALL the income the dear daughter gets for babysitting, or the dear son gets for cutting the grass in yards around the neighborhood, or any other side jobs for cash the adults themselves make for services provided (like doing electrical wiring jobs, pouring some concrete, baking cakes, fixing lawnmowers, fixing computers, having yard sales, etc., etc.)? Are we throwing a few stones . . . . . . . ?

Our government openly and indignantly gives amnesty to illegals invading our country, and this is what we're supposed to get upset about, really?

peter nap said:

That's true but it does cause problems for the under the table employer unless he/she considers him occasional labor but a 1099 still has to be done and very likely he will have to be included in the Workmans Comp....Etc.

That comes under the definition of "Splaining".

Click to expand...

ooooook! This thread got busy pretty quickly. Thank you all for the replies. To clarify, the shop owner explained to me that (this is her talking, not me, as I have not verified this) she could pay me up to $600 a year without actually putting me on the payroll. Now I forgot to quote it here, but someone mentioned (I think in the first post) that if I ever had to prove I was an employee... :uhoh: That is more my concern.

Old Virginia Joe said:

Does all this mean the righteous folks here actually report ALL the income the dear daughter gets for babysitting, or the dear son gets for cutting the grass in yards around the neighborhood, or any other side jobs for cash the adults themselves make for services provided (like doing electrical wiring jobs, pouring some concrete, baking cakes, fixing lawnmowers, fixing computers, having yard sales, etc., etc.)? Are we throwing a few stones . . . . . . . ?

Our government openly and indignantly gives amnesty to illegals invading our country, and this is what we're supposed to get upset about, really?

Click to expand...

+1::lol:

Old Virginia Joe said:

Does all this mean the righteous folks here actually report ALL the income the dear daughter gets for babysitting, or the dear son gets for cutting the grass in yards around the neighborhood, or any other side jobs for cash the adults themselves make for services provided (like doing electrical wiring jobs, pouring some concrete, baking cakes, fixing lawnmowers, fixing computers, having yard sales, etc., etc.)? Are we throwing a few stones . . . . . . . ?

Our government openly and indignantly gives amnesty to illegals invading our country, and this is what we're supposed to get upset about, really?

Click to expand...

No Joe...it means the folks here just know better than to talk about miscellaneous income that may come back to haunt them, the times a gun accidentally fell in their pocket without a permit, letting the air out of peoples tires, too many beers and cat slinging for amusement.

Tossing cigarette butts out of the window is OK as long as it's only done in areas already resembling landfills.

peter nap said:

That's true but it does cause problems for the under the table employer unless he/she considers him occasional labor but a 1099 still has to be done and very likely he will have to be included in the Workmans Comp....Etc.

That comes under the definition of "Splaining".

Click to expand...

Still, that would not be illegal activity on the part of Esanders2008, but on the part of the employer. As we have no evidence to suppose that the employer is a user here, the employer is not violating the rule on advocating illegal activity. As Esanders2008 is not the one violating any laws (assuming that he does report the income properly), then he's not advocating illegal activity either.

Unless someone in this thread is going to advocate that Esanders2008 not pay the taxes due on his "other" income, there is no basis to think that anyone is violating Rule 15, as quoted by ed. Anything beyond that is not the concern of any of us at this board.

grylnsmn said:

Still, that would not be illegal activity on the part of Esanders2008, but on the part of the employer. As we have no evidence to suppose that the employer is a user here, the employer is not violating the rule on advocating illegal activity. As Esanders2008 is not the one violating any laws (assuming that he does report the income properly), then he's not advocating illegal activity either.

Unless someone in this thread is going to advocate that Esanders2008 not pay the taxes due on his "other" income, there is no basis to think that anyone is violating Rule 15, as quoted by ed. Anything beyond that is not the concern of any of us at this board.

Click to expand...

I will report the income. Anyways... back to the question of whether or not it is legal for me to CC while at work with my employer's permission?

Esanders2008 said:

I will report the income. Anyways... back to the question of whether or not it is legal for me to CC while at work with my employer's permission?

Click to expand...

I already answered that!

We're back to how many times I want to chew my backy.