I'd rather not discuss the state here as under the table work wouldn't really fall into a state by state bases, anyway long story short.
I started working for this small start up company almost 2 years ago and was paid on the books and then when things became bad with the jobs and market we both agreed it would be in both our interest to switch to me under the table. Things were good for awhile until we had a fallen out and I ended up quitting the job. He asked me to hand back any equipment and I did and then he told me that I would be receiving a W9 for my "consulting" work. I told him it wouldn't be a good idea to due that as he never paid any payroll taxes which he just again said that i'll declare you as consulting and I don't need to pay payroll taxes. I told him that if he did I would reveal other things that could get him into trouble which resulted in what I believe is a stalemate. He for the most part went back on this W9 form threat but just in case whats the worst that can happen?
Since its a W9 form and he paid me "under the table" with checks that means he cannot declare more than what I really got right? I mean since they are checks he cannot say he paid me 50,000 for the year but only really paid me 30,000 etc.
also would there anyway to prove or make a case that it wasn't a consulting but really under the table? I know we are at a stalemate here but I want to try to have the upper edge and make it so telling anyone would make it a double edge sword for him. And finally don't you need to get a W9 form BEFORE you are paid. not after?
Yea I know under the table work isnt a liked subject, however if we didn't have so many frigging liberal aholes in the govt people wouldn't be taxed to death.

