Can Your Parents Make You Work in the Family Business

My question involves child abuse or neglect in the State of: Wisconsin

My dad owns and runs a small business in Wisconsin. I do work for him (cleaning, sweeping, stocking) in the store. He technically pays me a wage ($9.00/hr), but it goes direct deposit into his own bank account.

Right now I only work about three hours a day (after school) during the week, but my dad tells me when I turn 16 that I will have to work four hours every day during the week and eight hours a day on the weekends.

I would refuse, but my dad has told me that if I try to quit or don't show up he would spank me everyday until I was willing to work again. He uses an open hand but I know that he hits hard because he's done it before for other reasons. I'm not tall or strong enough to defend myself against him (he's a large guy and I am not).

Can he really make me work that long when I turn 16? What can I do to stop working for him without being hit? Should I call CPS, run away, or what?

Once you reach the age of sixteen, your state does not limit work hours save for that you can't be scheduled to work when you're required to be in school.

If you believe that your parents are abusing you, you can make a report to protective services or speak to a counselor at school.

Wisconsin Child Labor Laws

https://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/labor_s...labor_laws.htm

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/publica...rd_17231_p.pdf

The hours that 16- and 17-year-old minors may work is not limited, except that they may not work during hours they are required to be in school.

In addition to maximum hours and time of day restrictions, no minor (17 and younger) may work longer than 6 consecutive hours without a 30-minute duty free meal period. No minor under 16, other than those working in agriculture or delivering newspapers, may work more than 6 days in any workweek.

Hours worked during school hours as part of an approved written work experience program do not count as part of the total permitted hours of work per day or per week.


Wisconsin Child Abuse

http://www.co.marathon.wi.us/Departm...ssessment.aspx

Q: Is spanking against the law?

A: Physical discipline is legal in the state of Wisconsin unless there is physical injury that meets the definition of physical abuse; meaning serious injury inflicted on a child by other than accidental means.

Granted that is one county website in Wisconsin - but if you feel that you have serious injury inflicted upon you then you can call CPS or make a report.

Quote:

---

Quoting qwaspolk69

---

Wisconsin Child Labor Laws

https://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/labor_s...labor_laws.htm

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/publica...rd_17231_p.pdf

The hours that 16- and 17-year-old minors may work is not limited, except that they may not work during hours they are required to be in school.

In addition to maximum hours and time of day restrictions, no minor (17 and younger) may work longer than 6 consecutive hours without a 30-minute duty free meal period. No minor under 16, other than those working in agriculture or delivering newspapers, may work more than 6 days in any workweek.

Hours worked during school hours as part of an approved written work experience program do not count as part of the total permitted hours of work per day or per week.


Wisconsin Child Abuse

http://www.co.marathon.wi.us/Departm...ssessment.aspx

Q: Is spanking against the law?

A: Physical discipline is legal in the state of Wisconsin unless there is physical injury that meets the definition of physical abuse; meaning serious injury inflicted on a child by other than accidental means.

Granted that is one county website in Wisconsin - but if you feel that you have serious injury inflicted upon you then you can call CPS or make a report.

---

I would guess that a daily spanking would likely result in injuries sufficient to be considered to be abuse.

Quote:

---

Quoting 123soccerbal

---

What can I do to stop working for him without being hit?

---

Give him back your cell phone, your computer, your TV, your Ipod or stereo, your video games.

Forget getting a driver's license or a car until you are 18 and can go out and work for a living and pay for your own food, transportation, and a place to live.

In other words, you ungrateful little twerp, stop giving your father a hard time and be thankful for the work experience he's giving you and all the advantages his business might provide for you in the future.

Quote:

---

Quoting adjusterjack

---

Give him back your cell phone, your computer, your TV, your Ipod or stereo, your video games.

Forget getting a driver's license or a car until you are 18 and can go out and work for a living and pay for your own food, transportation, and a place to live.

In other words, you ungrateful little twerp, stop giving your father a hard time and be thankful for the work experience he's giving you and all the advantages his business might provide for you in the future.

---

I would be in agreement with what you are saying if sonny boy wasn't getting a salary at all. However, he is getting a salary of 9.00 an hour (which is quite high for a currently 15 year old) which is being deducted from daddy's income for tax purposes, but is going directly back into daddy's pocket.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I would be in agreement with what you are saying if sonny boy wasn't getting a salary at all. However, he is getting a salary of 9.00 an hour (which is quite high for a currently 15 year old) which is being deducted from daddy's income for tax purposes, but is going directly back into daddy's pocket.

---

Might be going into Daddy's bank account but that doesn't necessarily mean that OP doesn't get the benefit of the earnings.

Daddy could just as easily give the kid the money and then charge the kid for food, clothing, and rent if the kid wants to be snotty about it.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I would be in agreement with what you are saying if sonny boy wasn't getting a salary at all. However, he is getting a salary of 9.00 an hour (which is quite high for a currently 15 year old) which is being deducted from daddy's income for tax purposes, but is going directly back into daddy's pocket.

---

I'm mystified by why the tax deduction factors into how you feel about it. He’d get that no matter who he employed to do this work.

None of which changes the fact that until he is 18, if Dad tells Sonny Boy to work at the family business, Sonny Boy works at the family business.

Can he really make me work that long when I turn 16? Yes.

What can I do to stop working for him without being hit? Turn 18

Should I call CPS, run away, or what? If you are being physically abused, call CPS. However, there is a great deal that Dad is allowed to do to compel your obedience for which CPS will not turn a hair. If you run away, you can be dragged back home and then won't you and Dad have fun? Your "what" is to do what Dad says and get to work.

BTW, this should not be taken to mean that I approve of Dad hitting Sonny. I don't. And if Dad is hitting Sonny, I don't have a problem with Sonny calling CPS to report it.

But Sonny should not expect anything to happen except *maybe* Dad being told not to hit him any more. CPS will NOT:

* Tell Dad that Sonny can't be forced to work at the family business
* Prohibit Dad from punishing Sonny in ways that do not involve spanking
* Tell Sonny that he can move out or otherwise "run away"
* Do anything about the situation except *maybe* tell Dad not to hit Sonny any more

In other words, while I don't approve Dad's methods or possibly even his motives, the fact remains that the ONLY thing Dad is doing that MIGHT be illegal, is the spanking. And even that's not a guarantee. Sonny needs to make up his mind to the fact that unless Dad changes his mind, he's going to end up working for his Dad until he's 18. Then and only then can he quit and make it stick.

Quote:

---

Quoting Taxing Matters

---

I'm mystified by why the tax deduction factors into how you feel about it. He’d get that no matter who he employed to do this work.

---

Because he is not actually paying his son...therefore he gets the benefit of a deduction when he isn't actually paying wages.

Dad would get better results from Sonny by takings his phone, laptop/computer, games, tv, etc and not allowing him to leave the house unless he is going straight to school and home. He could even take him to school and pick him up. In other words make Sonny's life as miserable as possible. I bet if Sonny had a choice, he would choose a spanking over other punishment.

Agreed, Mercy, and if Dad were the one posting here, that's what I'd tell him.

A kid who's old enough to be working is too old to be spanked. That's demeaning to both Sonny and Dad. But taking away Sonny's electronics; that'll shape up any kid these days.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I would guess that a daily spanking would likely result in injuries sufficient to be considered to be abuse.

---

Depends on how hard he hits the kid. He would have to leave a bruise or something to show based on Wisconsin law about spanking. It says physical discipline is legal unless there is physical injury.

Maybe he is paying the kid by putting only so much into an account. We do not know. When I was 10 I had a paper route until I was 12. My older brother had one too. We gave our paycheck to our dad. He gave us like $6 to spend and the rest went into a savings account with his name and our name on it.

Quote:

---

Quoting cbg

---

Agreed, Mercy, and if Dad were the one posting here, that's what I'd tell him.

A kid who's old enough to be working is too old to be spanked. That's demeaning to both Sonny and Dad. But taking away Sonny's electronics; that'll shape up any kid these days.

---

This. A million bajazzling gazillion times this.

Posted from the phone of a classmate (with permission) who walked in to buy gummy bears:

I would have responded to everything, but I couldn't post from the school computer labs (where I posted from originally) due to needing all the lunch time to study for final exams.

My dad decided he liked having me work at the store this summer, so I haven't gone home since school got out. I haven't left the store at all, even. He brings in new clothes so I don't smell weird and disgust customers. I only work 22 hours a day because he does give me my 30 minute break every six hours, so that's nice and thank you for that. That break has been the extent of my sleeping for the past 2 weeks.

I suppose he can take the phone that must be sitting in my room somewhere, but given that I haven't had a computer, TV, or video games or anything similar for years, there isn't really anything else for him to revoke. And even if there was, I couldn't use it anyway, because I've been at the store, so revoking it would mean nothing. I don't think he has any method left to punish me with other than spanking.

I'm getting SUPER desperate. Sleep-deprived, cranky, combative, feeling like shit. I already tried pleading several times with Dad over hours. I have no leverage and he has an incentive (tax purposes that I don't understand), so he won't ever budge and has told me so. Please tell me there's something I can do.

Quote:

---

Quoting 123soccerbal

---

Posted from the phone of a classmate (with permission) who walked in to buy gummy bears:

I would have responded to everything, but I couldn't post from the school computer labs (where I posted from originally) due to needing all the lunch time to study for final exams.

My dad decided he liked having me work at the store this summer, so I haven't gone home since school got out. I haven't left the store at all, even. He brings in new clothes so I don't smell weird and disgust customers. I only work 22 hours a day because he does give me my 30 minute break every six hours, so that's nice and thank you for that. That break has been the extent of my sleeping for the past 2 weeks.

I suppose he can take the phone that must be sitting in my room somewhere, but given that I haven't had a computer, TV, or video games or anything similar for years, there isn't really anything else for him to revoke. And even if there was, I couldn't use it anyway, because I've been at the store, so revoking it would mean nothing. I don't think he has any method left to punish me with other than spanking.

I'm getting SUPER desperate. Sleep-deprived, cranky, combative, feeling like shit. I already tried pleading several times with Dad over hours. I have no leverage and he has an incentive (tax purposes that I don't understand), so he won't ever budge and has told me so. Please tell me there's something I can do.

---

Please read the responses again. Particularly post #9.

Quote:

---

Quoting 123soccerbal

---

Posted from the phone of a classmate (with permission) who walked in to buy gummy bears:

I would have responded to everything, but I couldn't post from the school computer labs (where I posted from originally) due to needing all the lunch time to study for final exams.

My dad decided he liked having me work at the store this summer, so I haven't gone home since school got out. I haven't left the store at all, even. He brings in new clothes so I don't smell weird and disgust customers. I only work 22 hours a day because he does give me my 30 minute break every six hours, so that's nice and thank you for that. That break has been the extent of my sleeping for the past 2 weeks.

I suppose he can take the phone that must be sitting in my room somewhere, but given that I haven't had a computer, TV, or video games or anything similar for years, there isn't really anything else for him to revoke. And even if there was, I couldn't use it anyway, because I've been at the store, so revoking it would mean nothing. I don't think he has any method left to punish me with other than spanking.

I'm getting SUPER desperate. Sleep-deprived, cranky, combative, feeling like shit. I already tried pleading several times with Dad over hours. I have no leverage and he has an incentive (tax purposes that I don't understand), so he won't ever budge and has told me so. Please tell me there's something I can do.

---

If you are telling the truth, and not exaggerating at all, then I would suggest that you call CPS or speak to a local police officer.

So you're there 24 hours a day?

You know, there are child labor laws and the fact that the employer is a parent doesn't give the parent the right to violate them. Servitude has been abolished here in the US.

https://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/labor_s..._laws.htm#faq1

Quote:

---

Quoting budwad

---

You know, there are child labor laws and the fact that the employer is a parent doesn't give the parent the right to violate them. Servitude has been abolished here in the US.

https://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/labor_s..._laws.htm#faq1

---

Violate them, no. However, the rules give a pretty broad exemption for working for your parents:

103.67(2)(g) Unless prohibited under s. 103.65, minors 12 years of age or older may be employed under the direct supervision of the minor's parent or guardian in connection with the parent's or guardian's business, trade or profession.

103.67(3) Sections 103.64 to 103.82 do not apply to the employment of a minor engaged in domestic or farm work performed outside school hours in connection with the minor's own home and directly for the minor's parent or guardian.

Quote:

---

Quoting flyingron

---

Violate them, no. However, the rules give a pretty broad exemption for working for your parents:

103.67(2)(g) Unless prohibited under s. 103.65, minors 12 years of age or older may be employed under the direct supervision of the minor's parent or guardian in connection with the parent's or guardian's business, trade or profession.

103.67(3) Sections 103.64 to 103.82 do not apply to the employment of a minor engaged in domestic or farm work performed outside school hours in connection with the minor's own home and directly for the minor's parent or guardian.

---

Still though, making a child go without sleep would likely be considered to be abusive, without the child labor laws even being relevant. Making a child live at a store 24 hours a day might also be considered to be neglect as well. I really hope that this young person is seriously exaggerating.

I'm seriously starting to wonder if we're being trolled.

Quote:

---

Quoting cbg

---

I'm seriously starting to wonder if we're being trolled.

---

I thought about that as well, but trolls don't usually come back and update their threads.

Quote:

---

Quoting flyingron

---

Violate them, no. However, the rules give a pretty broad exemption for working for your parents:

103.67(2)(g) Unless prohibited under s. 103.65, minors 12 years of age or older may be employed under the direct supervision of the minor's parent or guardian in connection with the parent's or guardian's business, trade or profession..

---

Did you read Section 103.65?

Quote:

---

2) No minor under 16 years of age may be employed or permitted to work at any employment for such hours of the day or week, for such days of the week, or at such periods of the day as may be dangerous or prejudicial to the life, health, safety, or welfare of the minor.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting budwad

---

Did you read Section 103.65?

---

He may have turned 16 by now. In his original post it seemed as though age 16 was imminent.

Quote:

---

Quoting flyingron

---

Violate them, no. However, the rules give a pretty broad exemption for working for your parents:

103.67(2)(g) Unless prohibited under s. 103.65, minors 12 years of age or older may be employed under the direct supervision of the minor's parent or guardian in connection with the parent's or guardian's business, trade or profession.

103.67(3) Sections 103.64 to 103.82 do not apply to the employment of a minor engaged in domestic or farm work performed outside school hours in connection with the minor's own home and directly for the minor's parent or guardian.

---

And these are precisely why parents are not - and, for the most part, should not - be penalized for making their kids actually work inside/for the home or for the parent's business

Moreover, the original post specifically asks about not working for the parent ... at all. Not how to reduce hours, but to stop completely. That, in my opinion, speaks more to basic teenage unwillingness and less to potential abuse.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

And these are precisely why parents are not - and, for the most part, should not - be penalized for making their kids actually work inside/for the home or for the parent's business

Moreover, the original post specifically asks about not working for the parent ... at all. Not how to reduce hours, but to stop completely. That, in my opinion, speaks more to basic teenage unwillingness and less to potential abuse.

---

That is why I qualified my advice with "If you are really telling the truth and if you are not exaggerating".

Quote:

---

Quoting 123soccerbal

---

Posted from the phone of a classmate (with permission) who walked in to buy gummy bears:

I would have responded to everything, but I couldn't post from the school computer labs (where I posted from originally) due to needing all the lunch time to study for final exams.

My dad decided he liked having me work at the store this summer, so I haven't gone home since school got out. I haven't left the store at all, even. He brings in new clothes so I don't smell weird and disgust customers. I only work 22 hours a day because he does give me my 30 minute break every six hours, so that's nice and thank you for that. That break has been the extent of my sleeping for the past 2 weeks.

I suppose he can take the phone that must be sitting in my room somewhere, but given that I haven't had a computer, TV, or video games or anything similar for years, there isn't really anything else for him to revoke. And even if there was, I couldn't use it anyway, because I've been at the store, so revoking it would mean nothing. I don't think he has any method left to punish me with other than spanking.

I'm getting SUPER desperate. Sleep-deprived, cranky, combative, feeling like shit. I already tried pleading several times with Dad over hours. I have no leverage and he has an incentive (tax purposes that I don't understand), so he won't ever budge and has told me so. Please tell me there's something I can do.

---

A couple questions. They really are not based in discrimination or are racist based. It's an attempt to understand some of the things you are saying.

Is your family originally from a middle eastern country?

if so, while not excusing what is happening, it does explain why some of it may be happening. In some middle eastern countries it is it unusual to use corporal punishment. Dad whopping an disrespectful child upside the head or spanking them is not uncommon. Working many hours at a business (he mentions store. I wonder if not a 7-11 type store or gas station which is a typical type of business owned by immigrants from the Middle East) and even sleeping at the store is not uncommon in such groups of peoples. I would suspect the father demands nothing more from the son than he expects from other family members or even himself. As well, in such societies a father is considered the lord of his home. His word is expected to be followed lest the non-compliant person subject to punishment, often physical.


To the tax incentive of paying the child but simply depositing it back into his own account; not understanding the claim. When he pays the kid he is obligated to pay the employers share of taxes and such just as any other employer is. In addition he is paying (out of the earnings) the employee share of taxes and such. It would be a lot cheaper if he simply did not pay his child or paid him as an IC. Given the father is likely treating the child unlawfully, why would one think he would care about complying with any law regarding the situation.

As to sleeping only two hours a day;

i have no qualms stating it is unlawful to treat the kid that way but honestly, I suspect the statement is an exaggeration. While some people can function with such little sleep, for a limited period of time, most cannot. Even more serious is enjoying such little sleep is dangerous. It is unhealthy and could lead to much more serious issues. Given the style of writing displayed here by the op, I simply refuse to accept he is getting only 2 hours of sleep daily.

So, if you are being honest, contact child protective services in your area and report the situation

if you aren't being honest there is no help for you.

I will try to explain the tax issue in a clearer way.

I agree that social security and medicare taxes are paid on the money no matter what. That is not the issue.

If dad's marginal tax rate is 25% then he is going to pay 25% federal income tax on the money.

If he pays his son 9.00 an hour but actually pockets the net pay rather than giving it to his son, then he does not pay any tax at all on the first 6100.00 of the amount he paid his son (because the son would not pay tax on that) and only 10% on the next approx. 10k. He is reducing his taxable profit at his marginal rate and lowering the tax bite on the money by reducing it to his son's tax rate.

He cannot pay his son as a contractor because the job the son performs is definitely not a contractor job. He could make his son work for free, but that would not reduce his taxable income. I fired one client because he was doing the same thing (except his children didn't actually have to work in the business). He was issuing w2s to all 4 of his children...He issued the W2s for just below the standard deduction so the children had to pay no tax on the money at all, and he got to pocket the tax savings...AND it made dad eligible for EIC.

Well, ignoring the overtime requirements that would increase the amount drastically, dad is paying son $72,000 per year. I think that defeats most of your arguments all by itself.

in addition you have no idea of dads tax rate or how the business is structured which could radically change the situation.

as to not paying his son as a contractor; dad is violating some laws. I'm quite confident in that. Why would he care whether it legal to treat his son as an IC?

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

Well, ignoring the overtime requirements that would increase the amount drastically, dad is paying son $72,000 per year. I think that defeats most of your arguments all by itself.

in addition you have no idea of dads tax rate or how the business is structured which could radically change the situation.

as to not paying his son as a contractor; dad is violating some laws. I'm quite confident in that. Why would he care whether it legal to treat his son as an IC?

---

Of course he is not paying him for 22 hours a day. I am quite sure that he is only paying for 8.

My example works no matter how the business is structured. It works for a single member LLC, a Sole Proprietorship or an S-corp. It likely works even better for dad if he is in a partnership or a C-corp. If dad is making so little money that it does not benefit him tax wise to pay his son and pocket his son's net pay, then he would be better off making him work for no wage, since he is effectively doing that anyway.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Of course he is not paying him for 22 hours a day. I am quite sure that he is only paying for 8.

My example works no matter how the business is structured. It works for a single member LLC, a Sole Proprietorship or an S-corp. It likely works even better for dad if he is in a partnership or a C-corp. If dad is making so little money that it does not benefit him tax wise to pay his son and pocket his son's net pay, then he would be better off making him work for no wage, since he is effectively doing that anyway.

---

Oh so now we are going to make assumptions (which themselves would clearly be illegal so why you objected to the father classifying the kid as an IC is odd). Why would you even pick 8 hours daily if you refuse to accept he is working 22 hour days and due 22 hours pay? Why not 6 hours, or 4 or 12 or any other number?

your model work with a c Corp? How about a c Corp where dad doesn't own any interest in the company? Why would dad even care in such a situstion?

seriously llworking, we have no idea how or even if this benefits dad regarding taxes. It may be as simple as this is what dad says is going to happen and that's it.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

Oh so now we are going to make assumptions (which themselves would clearly be illegal so why you objected to the father classifying the kid as an IC is odd). Why would you even pick 8 hours daily if you refuse to accept he is working 22 hour days and due 22 hours pay? Why not 6 hours, or 4 or 12 or any other number?

your model work with a c Corp? How about a c Corp where dad doesn't own any interest in the company? Why would dad even care in such a situstion?

seriously llworking, we have no idea how or even if this benefits dad regarding taxes. It may be as simple as this is what dad says is going to happen and that's it.

---

Look, I do tax for a living. I have seen every kind of scam that people can pull, and I know how the tax brackets work. There is no business structure that exists where dad does not benefit from this tax wise, and there is virtually no income level where dad does not benefit. Between tax brackets and EIC one way or another dad is going to benefit.

And if dad does not actually own any share of the business? Then it gets far more complicated.

Seriously, this is a classic "cheat the system" scenario. The only thing a little bit different about this one is that dad has the added benefit of actually getting work from his son rather than just issuing a W2. In fact, its so classic that cbg could be right and the OP could be a troll.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Look, I do tax for a living. I have seen every kind of scam that people can pull, and I know how the tax brackets work. There is no business structure that exists where dad does not benefit from this tax wise, and there is virtually no income level where dad does not benefit. Between tax brackets and EIC one way or another dad is going to benefit.

And if dad does not actually own any share of the business? Then it gets far more complicated.

Seriously, this is a classic "cheat the system" scenario. The only thing a little bit different about this one is that dad has the added benefit of actually getting work from his son rather than just issuing a W2. In fact, its so classic that cbg could be right and the OP could be a troll.

---

Great, you do taxes and you see the scams involved. While this may appear to be a tax scam, claiming it is is speculation. For all we know dad is nothing more than an employee of some big ass corporation and told to maximize the store profits and this was his method. It would provide no tax benefit to the father and unless there is some bonus system involved it would provide the father no financial benefit other than maybe allowing him to keep his job.

Anyway, op is likely a troll. Nobody that gets only 2 hours sleep per day will write as clearly as the op has.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I would guess that a daily spanking would likely result in injuries sufficient to be considered to be abuse.

---

There are ways to spank your child and not have any injuries except for a sore behind. Trust me. I've done it.

Quote:

---

Quoting CourtClerk

---

There are ways to spank your child and not have any injuries except for a sore behind. Trust me. I've done it.

---

I would absolutely agree with that but not if it happened every day. I think that it would be incredibly difficult to spank a 15 year old daily, in a manner that would not result in bruises. Spankings on top of spankings would generally result in pretty serious bruising.

In addition, there is absolutely nothing you could say to convince me that YOU would spank a 15/16 year old.