Exactly!!!

A 1099K is the new form that credit card processors are using to report your gross transactions to the IRS.  It was mailed out this year, but you are not required to break out that income on your federal return until next year.  Perhaps this is the 1099 that the legislature is referring to?

But what if you accept checks.  Do you issue a 1099 to yourself?

I think the NAFTA issue may be a valid factor for Canadians.  There are quite a few nonresident owners who are Canadian - and while we think of NAFTA for big companies like the auto industry it is a Trade Agreement between countries for commerce.  A small business of one is still commerce.  Matter of fact even Walmart started with one store in Arkansas.  Not that any of us want to spring up an industry of this, we just want to pay our bills and some want to retire to Hawaii one day.

So, to add to the count of who this Bill offends -- all other 49 states and the country of Canada.

Nobody wants to be labeled that because you come from 49 other states and the country of Canada - therefore you must be cheating on paying your TAT or GET.    Surely there was a less divisive way to go about "tax compliance."

I tried to get on the RBOAA website and could not connect.  Is it up and running?  Also, what about working with he ACLU in Hawaii?  Our right to control our own property/business and proceeds should certainly come under civil rights......

http://www.rboaa.org/

ACLU sounds like an interesting option

Two thoughts.

Since we're talking about a state taking away individual rights of free interstate trade, possibly inquiries sent to our individual US Congressmen asking about the legality of a state hyjacking your interstate business to enrich a third party in the state of Hawaii.  Possibly we need to have a US Congressional inquiry look into this instead of just a bunch of no clout individuals.  I bet if we have enough people writing their US Congressmen about having another state taking away their constituients rights in an election year we might see a better result.

Second thought, the bill states that Any nonresident owner who operates a transient accommodation located in the nonresident owner's private residence is affected by this legislation.  What if we were to set up an S-Corp and retitle the condo in the business name.  At that point it would no longer be qualified as a Private Residence...???

All interesting ideas....I also want to share an email address for the ACLU in Hawaii that deals with legislative issues.  It is legislative@acluhawaii.org.  I have already sent an email and maybe if there were many more they would look into the obvious civil rights violations and discrimination in this bill.