Directive DAC7

[Imkylie]

Directive 2021/514 DAC7 In your opinion, does this also apply to sites like Chaturbate even if it is not in Europe?

 

[SMuser69]

Even if it does, it doesn't change anything as Chaturbate is sole seller and tokens are it's sole product. Assuming the EU already has all the information they need as they are collecting VAT from the transactions.

 

[Imkylie]

Even if it does, it doesn't change anything as Chaturbate is sole seller and tokens are it's sole product. Assuming the EU already has all the information they need as they are collecting VAT from the transactions.

I was referring to the models who earn on the site, not the site. New European law says that platforms must communicate user earnings over €2,000 per year

 

[AmberCutie]

I was referring to the models who earn on the site, not the site. New European law says that platforms must communicate user earnings over €2,000 per year

I think he was saying that models are not the "sellers" on the site. Chaturbate itself performs the financial transaction, which is token purchases.

Just interpreting it in the most literal sense, obviously I am no expert.

 

[AmberCutie]

To further explain what I assume is the case, imagine a site like Etsy where items are sold directly between the buyer and the art creator for example.

 

[Slapstick]

I am not a model, lawyer, or accountant. But I do deal with EU compliance issues (GDPR) at work, and IMO the answer is; Yes, DAC7 applies to any web site that does business in the EU.

The data of sellers (users of digital platforms) and the amount of income they have earned, will be reported. [1]

CB may sell the tokens, but models are the sellers of personal services and CB handles collection and disbursement of payments. I can't find the wording now, but I thought I had read that the platform (CB in this case) is also supposed to report to the sellers the amount they reported to the government. And I love how they include wording that the legal nature of the seller does not matter.... basically, "yeah, human trafficking is as illegal as shit... here's your tax bill..."

1. https://www.krgroup.eu/dac7-directive-new-obligations-for-selected-e-commerce-entities/

 

[AmberCutie]

I am not a model, lawyer, or accountant. But I do deal with EU compliance issues (GDPR) at work, and IMO the answer is; Yes, DAC7 applies to any web site that does business in the EU.


CB may sell the tokens, but models are the sellers of personal services and CB handles collection and disbursement of payments. I can't find the wording now, but I thought I had read that the platform (CB in this case) is also supposed to report to the sellers the amount they reported to the government. And I love how they include wording that the legal nature of the seller does not matter.... basically, "yeah, human trafficking is as illegal as shit... here's your tax bill..."

1. https://www.krgroup.eu/dac7-directive-new-obligations-for-selected-e-commerce-entities/

So your interpretation is opposite of the previous assumptions lol.

Guess nobody really knows for sure!

 

[Imkylie]

I am not a model, lawyer, or accountant. But I do deal with EU compliance issues (GDPR) at work, and IMO the answer is; Yes, DAC7 applies to any web site that does business in the EU.


CB may sell the tokens, but models are the sellers of personal services and CB handles collection and disbursement of payments. I can't find the wording now, but I thought I had read that the platform (CB in this case) is also supposed to report to the sellers the amount they reported to the government. And I love how they include wording that the legal nature of the seller does not matter.... basically, "yeah, human trafficking is as illegal as shit... here's your tax bill..."

1. https://www.krgroup.eu/dac7-directive-new-obligations-for-selected-e-commerce-entities/

so, if I understand correctly, even if chaturbate is an American site it is obliged to communicate the data of European models who earn more than €2,000

 

[Vixxen81]

Any other Americans jealous at the 2,000 #? What was Congress trying to nail us for on peer to peer apps, $600 or more?

 

[LaceyRoyce]

Any other Americans jealous at the 2,000 #? What was Congress trying to nail us for on peer to peer apps, $600 or more?

600 - but when i read up on it it's only for business accounts or transactions marked as sales. so like, say i take a cashapp for something, as long as the dude doesn't mark it as a sale for goods or services (where they take a fee and provide some protections to the customer), it isn't reported to the IRS.

I did get hit with it one year where i was told I had to issue 1099's to models to whom I had paid over $600 in the course of the year. That sucked.

 

[Vixxen81]

600 - but when i read up on it it's only for business accounts or transactions marked as sales. so like, say i take a cashapp for something, as long as the dude doesn't mark it as a sale for goods or services (where they take a fee and provide some protections to the customer), it isn't reported to the IRS.

I did get hit with it one year where i was told I had to issue 1099's to models to whom I had paid over $600 in the course of the year. That sucked.

Ouch! That never would have occurred to me that you would need to issue 1099s. Good to know for future reference.

IDK, the government knows way too much about our money and we don't know enough about their (OUR) money.

 

[Imkylie]

So your interpretation is opposite of the previous assumptions lol.

Guess nobody really knows for sure!

for now for sure i just know i read that onlyfans is between platforms

 

[Slapstick]

So your interpretation is opposite of the previous assumptions lol.

lol. They never do actually define (that I could see) what they mean by sellers, but It looks like the purpose of DAC7 is to collect income tax from people that earn income from digital platforms.

so, if I understand correctly, even if chaturbate is an American site it is obliged to communicate the data of European models who earn more than €2,000

Yes, for income tax it doesn't matter where the company is located only where you live.

 

[SMuser69]

but It looks like the purpose of DAC7 is to collect income tax from people that earn income from digital platforms.

Yeh just looks like EU's version of a 1099. Where it would most likely affect models are the ones that live in countries where only the bank deposit are reported so they'll leave their money on their Cosmo or other paycards till they need it, as it largely remains unreported while it stays there. Which to me is still weird it's still pretty common to do even after the firstchoicepay/payoneer crisis.

 

[AmberCutie]

lol. They never do actually define (that I could see) what they mean by sellers, but It looks like the purpose of DAC7 is to collect income tax from people that earn income from digital platforms.

Maybe that's why I misunderstood/interpreted it the way I did, I assumed every country was already like the US in that cam models were already having to file and pay taxes.

 

[mika_kedi]

Maybe that's why I misunderstood/interpreted it the way I did, I assumed every country was already like the US in that cam models were already having to file and pay taxes.

I can respond using Poland as an example - yes, of course cam models already have to file and pay taxes since our work is legal. But some models get their payouts to paxum or cosmo, use their paxum/cosmo cards to take out cash from ATMs and then pay for all they need in cash. With no income passing through their Polish bank accounts, which are the only accounts that Polish counterpart to IRS can inspect they avoid paying taxes, or pay way less than they should if they have other income to report. They are commiting tax fraud but up until now there was virtually no risk of them getting caught unless they tried to buy something really expensive paying in cash or deposited some of that cash in their Polish bank accounts.

 

[Imkylie]

I add… The problem is not paying taxes, the problem is the correct management of each person's data which is not yet clear what guarantees of privacy protection they adopt

 

[Slapstick]

I add… The problem is not paying taxes, the problem is the correct management of each person's data which is not yet clear what guarantees of privacy protection they adopt

Since it is the EU Chaturbate has already been complying with the GDPR[1]. Everyone here in North America has been clicking to accept cookies ever since it went into effect.

1. https://termly.io/faq/does-the-gdpr-apply-to-us-websites/