Manager writing on the employee's W-4

JPursell

I need some help with this one and I have not been able to find anything in my usual places of resource.  I have a manager that makes this practice mandatory for the recruiters that work under her.  I work for an employment agency (conditional job offers are given prior to interview and completion of payroll material) so the recruiter is supposed to write ON the person's W-4 during their interview with the candidate.  She demands that they write what their employees put down on their W-4.  So the recruiter has to reiterate and write ON the W-4, Married - 2 or Single - 0 and then have it circled.  The manager's reasoning is to make sure that the recruiter has looked to ensure the W-4 is complete.  I want to be able to tell her to STOP this ridiculous and controlling process but I need something legal to back me up.  Help!!

HRPOB

I am not a payroll expert by any means. However, I previously worked for a Fortune 500 company with their own legal department. We were told to NEVER write on an employee's W-4. We couldn't even write on it the date we entered the data into the payroll system. You may want to go to the IRS website to research the topic.

TXHRGuy

I doubt there's anything illegal with it as long as the employee signs the W-4 in their own handwriting.  They are signing, "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this certificate and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it is true, correct, and complete."

That doesn't mean that it's not a ridiculous and controlling process.  It is.  Why isn't he practice to discipline supervisors whose subordinates turn in faulty W-4s if checking them for accuracy is the supervisor's job?  Also, although there may be nothing statutorily wrong with this practice, there could be potential tort violations.  For example, the employee could say that they said "0, single" and the supervisor wrote it wrong, which subsequently led to tax liability that they now wish to sue the Company for.  The Company could be in a pickle if the employee successfully argues that they were coerced into signing the document as-is and that they were not allowed to fill it out themselves.

JPursell

Thank you for the input.  I went out to irs.gov and searched for a bit.  I found one line in their directions that say, "any unauthorized change or addition to Form W-4 makes it invalid."  This could be interrupted in the courts - literally, we made their forms invalid because we wrote all over them. 

I totally agree with the tort issue about giving us the tax liability.  I train my people - if employees ask how to complete it, refer the employee to their own tax preparer or accountant for advice, my people are not allowed to give out tax advice for that very reason.  But how can that be if some of them are writing on the forms.  Just seems really inconsistent.

Thanks for giving me some backup and support that I needed. I'm ready to go ask the manager to cease!

HRforME

I am confused. Is the recruiter filling out the actual sections or just rewriting the same information somewhere else on the form?  I don't see how copying what the employee has written as adding any tax liability.  I have never heard any laws as to not writing elsewhere on the W-4.  I would be hesitant to fill in the actual blanks though.  But the company could be liable if the recruiter misread and miswrote the information and payroll picked up the circled information rather than the information from the blanks.

What would be an unauthorized change would be the employer marking out Single and changing to Married because they know the employee is married or vice versa.  That would fall under the IRS's edict.

I also happen to do payroll and will tell you that is can be nightmare to go back and correct tax issues...especially if it is because the employee didn't fill out the form correctly in the first place.  It sounds like this is being used as a backup mechanism to make sure the recruiter is doing his/her job rather than payroll having to correct it later. What other information is the recruiter being asked to confirm (I-9 etc)?  It would be a better business practice to setup a new hire checklist since I am sure it is not just this one piece of information that might possibly get missed.

I have such a checklist and will admit that I rewrite their W-4 choices on my checklist to make sure it was filled out correctly. 

TXHRGuy

HRforMe is right: we could use some clarity here.  I interpreted the original email to be saying that the recruiter filled out the boxes for the employee and then had the employee sign it.  That should be OK on the face of it although there could be problems down the road if someone ends up with tax liability.  If the recruiter is writing in or around the boxes in addition to what the employee already wrote, then it sets you up for a claim, later, that the document was improperly modified.  In either case, the recruiter shouldn't need to do anything involving writing on the W-4.  The right way to approach this is with accountability on the part of whomever is required to ensure that the W-4s are filled out correctly.  An employee file or orientation check list would be a much cleaner, less obnoxious way to do this.

JPursell

The recruiter is not filling out the boxes and then having the employee sign it.  The employee completely fills it out and then while the recruiter is 'making sure' that everything is filled out writes (copies) what the employee put in the boxes.  The recruiter is writing in the 'directions area' of the W-4 in addition to what the employee already wrote.  We have check lists that they follow and every other kind of check point to catch things before it gets to payroll to make sure the forms are appropriately filled out.  We do not write on I-9s or on direct deposit forms. I

TXHRGuy

Technically, you can cut the W-4 form just above the bottom section and discard the rest.  It says, right on the document, "Cut here and give Form W-4 to your employer.  Keep the top part for your records."  With this understanding of the process, I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with it but there are a few things not right with it. :-)

Adding check boxes to an existing orientation/EE file check list would make more sense.  Writing on documents signed by others is just a bad practice to get into.

HRforME

And with the extra clarification, I am standing right next to TXHRGuy on this one "With this understanding of the process, I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with it but there are a few things not right with it."

There is a better way to accomplish this task, but getting a manager/supervisor to see and understand that is a whole 'nother issue.  Sometimes you just have to pick your battles and honestly this is not one I would fight...especially since you said that the checklists already exist.  If they didn't, I would suggest it as a better HR practice. You could at least suggest adding it to an existing checklist by phrasing/selling it such that whoever is doing the review could look at one document rather than going through a whole set of documents looking for specific marks here and there.  Sometimes it's all in how you spin your presentation.  A complaint vs a solution.