anyone have any success in doing this?

[iPhoto17]

lenses are way expensive, and i was wondering if anyone has actually gone out and tried to get a lense or other equipment for doing photography for a company or a store or something?

 

[tirediron]

Huh???

 

[chammer]

im guessing what he means is that you get offered/hired/whatever a job to do a shoot for someone or some company, but in order to do so they need to obtain a lens for you to get the needed shot(s). at the end you get to keep said lens as payment.

if thats the case then yes, i believe it's been done before by some people on here.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Well, I plan on buying a 5D through my shop, and being able to write it off as an expense. You know, to take pictures of jewelery.

 

[camz]

Well, I plan on buying a 5D through my shop, and being able to write it off as an expense. You know, to take pictures of jewelery.

:thumbup:

 

[iPhoto17]

im guessing what he means is that you get offered/hired/whatever a job to do a shoot for someone or some company, but in order to do so they need to obtain a lens for you to get the needed shot(s). at the end you get to keep said lens as payment.

if thats the case then yes, i believe it's been done before by some people on here.

yeah, thats what i meant, or also doing some photos for a website for the compnay and they can pay me either with a new lense or enough for a new lense or equipment

 

[chammer]

i imagine you could do that so long as the item value is close to the same monetary value they would otherwise pay you. you'd really have to ask to see if they'd do it, however. i don't think it's something that can really be answered by a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

 

[Plato]

im guessing what he means is that you get offered/hired/whatever a job to do a shoot for someone or some company, but in order to do so they need to obtain a lens for you to get the needed shot(s). at the end you get to keep said lens as payment.

if thats the case then yes, i believe it's been done before by some people on here.

yeah, thats what i meant, or also doing some photos for a website for the compnay and they can pay me either with a new lense or enough for a new lense or equipment

Why not take the cash and buy the lens yourself?

 

[Jeepin59]

You could also rent lens or other equipment until you make enough to buy it out right or just to see if a lens is right for your needs....google renting photographic equipment.

 

[DennyCrane]

It becomes tricky when you're declaring income on your taxes. It's much easier to accept a regular payment, then use that to buy the lens. This way, you have an expense that balances against your income resulting in a zero tax liability. If you're paid in a lens, you now have to declare that value and pay tax on it.

When you BUY something for your business, you get to depreciate it. If you're PAID in a lens, I don't think that's possible.

But then again, I'm not a tax expert. This is something to discuss with an accountant.

 

[Plato]

It becomes tricky when you're declaring income on your taxes. It's much easier to accept a regular payment, then use that to buy the lens. This way, you have an expense that balances against your income resulting in a zero tax liability. If you're paid in a lens, you now have to declare that value and pay tax on it.

When you BUY something for your business, you get to depreciate it. If you're PAID in a lens, I don't think that's possible.

But then again, I'm not a tax expert. This is something to discuss with an accountant.

It gets uglier yet. If in the U.S.A., when the value of the camera is declared as income, the state income tax people will probably coordinate with the state sales and use tax people and he'd also owe sales tax on the camera.

 

[jnm]

im guessing what he means is that you get offered/hired/whatever a job to do a shoot for someone or some company, but in order to do so they need to obtain a lens for you to get the needed shot(s). at the end you get to keep said lens as payment.

if thats the case then yes, i believe it's been done before by some people on here.

yeah, thats what i meant, or also doing some photos for a website for the compnay and they can pay me either with a new lense or enough for a new lense or equipment

friend of mine had a guy at his company that offered to do all the official shots of company outings etc. for free so long as they bought the gear for him and allowed him to keep it. they did and he shot for them for about 6 months and then left the co. taking the gear of course. i dont think they will do that again.

but why wouldnt you just buy it yourself? you have to claim the lens as compensation as if it were a check, so why muddy the transaction? get the money and buy your own lens. in fact that way it is probably easier to show you made $x for your time and also spent $x on a lens so it's a net $0 of income to you. otherwise you would have to show how much your time is worth and the value of the lens as being equivalent.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

It gets uglier yet. If in the U.S.A., when the value of the camera is declared as income, the state income tax people will probably coordinate with the state sales and use tax people and he'd also owe sales tax on the camera.

No, sales tax wouldn't be charged again for an item already purchased and taxed, and then given as compensation. It would simply be "income".

 

[decado]

Well, I plan on buying a 5D through my shop, and being able to write it off as an expense. You know, to take pictures of jewelery.

I also was thinking of asking my boss if she needed someone to take pictures of the jewelry she makes, I may be able to get a macro lens out of it .

 

[Plato]

It gets uglier yet. If in the U.S.A., when the value of the camera is declared as income, the state income tax people will probably coordinate with the state sales and use tax people and he'd also owe sales tax on the camera.

No, sales tax wouldn't be charged again for an item already purchased and taxed, and then given as compensation. It would simply be "income".

If that were true, I would ask my employer to give me his Mercedes instead of a paycheck for the next "X" amount of time. That way, I'd receive the equivalent of the cash, I would pay only income tax and end up with a car that I was going to buy anyway!

Sales & use tax is due every time that an item changes ownership. Most items are not resold so the discussion is moot. However, think of cars that are sold several times during their lifetimes. Each and every owner pays sales & use tax at the time of purchase.

Making it "income" doesn't change anything. If I pay you $1000 and you buy a camera with the money, you will have paid both income tax AND sales & use tax, even if the camera is used and the previous owner also paid sales & use tax on it. You can't beat the tax man by convincing me to pay you by giving you the $1000 camera.

It gets even worse because, in every state of which I'm aware, the laws are written so that the sales & use tax is based on the purchase price or the actual value of the item, whichever is higher. In fact, sales & use tax is due upon receipt of a gift, except from specifically defined relatives such as spouse, parent, child, etc.