> Self Employment tax is 15%

Something wrong there! There's no such thing as "self employment tax." You are taxed at your marginal tax rate, with can be anything from zero to near 40 percent.

As others have pointed out (I think), FICA tax is roughly 12 percent, with half that credited back to you on form 1040 as a deduction from income. You also get to deduct self-employment health insurance, which for many of us effectively wipes out our self-employment income.

New last year was a 20 percent deduction in an effort to bring self-employment income on a par with corporate income taxes. For me, that netted nothing because the health insurance deduction got there first.

I have always used TurboTax Basic because I like to work directly with the forms, and Basic has all forms, though Intuit would like you to think differently. This year however I spent $50 for "Deluxe" because it includes state tax form. It's well worth the extra $20 to have that filled out automagically (more or less).

If any of you had "issue" who were hit by the Kiddie Tax as obscenely expanded in the 2017 tax law, be aware that the law was changed in 2019. TurboTax hasn't yet amended the 2018 or 2019 software to enable us to recoup some or all of that money, but promises to do so "soon". I plan to file for an extension for the Kiddies, so they can file in September. I'll file as usual on April 1. I figure that's a great time to slip it in, beneath the deluge that's coming from the procrastinators. I had a pal who used to start his tax return on April 15, finish in the early hours of the 16th, then drive to the nearby small city where he worked, where he'd reset the postage meter to the 15th and put it in the outgoing mail.

So, to begin with, I am a pubic accountant. And I say, with all due respect, the idea that there is no "self employment tax" is laughable. As a self employed individual, you are responsible for both employer and employee taxes. The current rate (for the 2019 tax year) is 12.4% for social security and 2.9% for medicare. This 15.3% total make up the FICA taxes. You are responsible for paying the ENTIRE AMOUNT, however, you receive an above the line credit of 50%. This is based on your SE gains and is IN ADDITION to, not included as, your nominal tax rate (look at 1040 line 15. Your nominal tax rate is calculated before that on line 12a)

It looks to me as though they're breaking out income by type as follows:

Createspace - hardcopy
Audible - audio Books
KDP - eBooks
Associates - Affiliate link program.

As an accountant, I would group income by type (as above), and as such, the category would combine domestic and international sales. I would think the Zon, since they're differentiating income, are saying that your affiliate income (which is service, not royalty income) is less than 600 or you're set up as something other than a disregarded entity. If either is true, no 1099 would be required.

I've used a DE for my books. Other than expense, it was a good experience. The editorial evaluation told me where I was weak and need shoring up in both my story and my writing, while the developmental edit took me through the manuscript without pulling punches. My advice, and it is just my advice, if you're new CAN afford one, do it. Just make sure to find a professional with a good reputation. You'll learn alot about yourself and your writing. If you're new and CAN'T afford one, don't worry about it. Get a group of people together to read your MS and give you input. Ask specific questions (eg: how would you describe X's motivations?) instead of general questions (eg: did you like X?). Basically, stay away from anything that gives you single word answers. You'll have to sift through what they give you to get what you need, but if you've asked the right questions, it can be as good or, in some cases, better than a DE.

I believe in limiting any barrier to entry I can. As such, my pen names are always androgynous. I started this originally because my wife, after telling me she loved the first in a series I wrote, told me a lot of women would be put off by a male author writing a female MC. After doing a good amount of research, I realized she was correct. I'd never considered or even cared about the gender of authors I tended to read, but going through the list of my favorites, I realized most of them were male. The fact is, and it has been proven time and time again that an implicit gender bias exists in all of us. There's nothing particularly wrong with that as long as we don't let it impact our lives/careers/others/etc. That being said, I never want my readers to think I'm someone I'm not and at the end of every book I use my real name for contact info, invite them to my FB fan pages where I interact with members as myself, and just generally let them get to know me as a person. If, after reading the first in series (or the couple of stand-alones I have), they don't want to continue reading because I'm a man, I'll wish them well and point them in the direction of great female authors. Those readers are just not my target audience. As an old business 101 professor I had (too many years ago to matter) once said, "If you want to make widgets, make widgets. Just realize not every one wants a widget, not everyone wants your widget, and not everyone will want a pink, green or yellow widget." Not everyone who wants to read will read my genre. Not everyone who reads my genre will read my book. Not everyone who reads my book will like it. Not everyone who likes my book will buy others. But for those people who want to read, read my genre, read my books and like them enough to want more, I will always do my best and try to keep their shelves full.

Interesting that they chose to let you decide whether or not you'd been plagiarized. I've never taught in a significant graduate program, so it's interesting to hear how such accusations are handled at that level. Also, your research sounds totally cool. 

I didn't get to make the final decision, just gave them my opinion - and the research was, and continues to be, awesome.

But I do think the academic approach to plagiarism exerts a formative pressure on how people tend to think of the word -- on their general assumptions about the term.

I agree. My entire academic life, I had their definition of plagarism beat into me (figuratively), just like every American school child. It wasn't until college that I realized (beyond conceptually) that there really hadn't been a new idea in thousands of years. Just old ideas recycled and put in new packaging. And a large part of that followed behind me after I entered the workforce.

in urban fantasy, it might just feel right that your MC is a too-brave-for-her-own-good, not-classically-beautiful-but-somehow-very-attractive leatherclad woman in her 20s with a hard-luck past that's given her a deep-seated fear of commitment who hides her inner marshmallow with a heavy dose of snark and relies on her annoying but helpful supernatural pet while waving around her blade, which may have a name

Hey, that was my idea, lol. I actually just finished the second in a UF trilogy with that tropey MC (minus the blade).

1. Sell a metric [crap]-tonne of books

By comparison, he can also sell two metric s**t loads or 1/2 of a f*** ton.

Coming from a public accountant, a good rule of thumb to follow is thus:

1. If you pay an INDIVIDUAL (as in you made a check payable to John Thomas) more than $600, you issue a 1099 (caveat, this is for US Federal purposes. Check with your state to determine if it complies with Fed filing requirements) if they are independent contractors or W2's if they are employees. There is a vast difference between tax treatments of the two and business people have been taking advantage of this for decades. This is also were CA and other States are most concerned. By paying an individual as an independent contractor, you're not withholding and remitting taxes - money needed by the state/city to pay for things like firefighters, police, librarians or any other public works bill. You're also not paying worker's comp insurance, Family leave, etc, etc. It cuts the state out of what it sees as its fair share of tax revenue, especially when the individual receiving the 1099 may not even file their taxes, or if they do, take improper treatment of deductions to lower their tax liability. Remember, it's the taxpayer's responsibility in this country to prove how much of a return they are entitled to, NOT the government's to prove how much they owe. Sucks, but it's the truth. The alternative is to have a government auditor come into our homes every years, give them access to our bank and financial information, and let them decide how much of our money we should keep. To help combat this, the IRS set standards (not rules) on who is considered to be an independent contractor, standards like controlling when they work, how they work, where they work, conditions for work. Most states follow these standards, though some don't. Because these standards (not rules) are meant to be guidelines, they are left open to interpretation, and employers have interpreted them in so many ways that court cases more than a decade old are still pending. CA's AB5 sought to clarify this. This will mean the death of some "gig" economies in the state, just as when the IRS created their guidelines in the first place, but will also mean that companies like Lyft and Uber are correctly classifying employees as well.

2. If you pay a BUSINESS (as in you made a check payable to John Thomas Design LLC), you generally don't have to worry about issuing 1099's. There are exceptions to this rule, but a competent accountant will know what they are. The point is when we hire someone to edit, do cover design, format or any other number of tasks, we are hiring them to do one off work. We are not giving them a job even if we hire them multiple times. We do not control when they work, how they work, or where they work. As such, none of the AB5 laws apply to the vast majority of us. If you want to make sure you're covered in case of an audit, keep good notes and records, save receipts, and generally don't be piggish about pulling the wool over the government's eyes. We get you don't like paying taxes, but like an old friend of mine says, "Fines are what you are forced to pay for doing something poorly, taxes are what you're forced to pay for doing something well."

In your reply I noticed you snipped a really important part of my post. "There are plenty of line editors out there that do a decent job of providing some of the services you would have gotten from a more expensive dev edit."

I hadn't thought it was necessary since the discussion was about dev editors, however I agree there are more than a few very outstanding line editors that provide some of the same services as dev editors. There's even some on this board that provide All the services of a dev editor.  That being said, isn't it wiser to hire people who specialize in work? My bookkeeper is an able woman, but she's not my accountant. My house painter is great at corners, but should I ask him to paint the Mona Lisa? They both may be able to do the jobs, but until I see a sample of the work, I'll go with someone else.

0.01 and 0.02 a word are below the typical rates for a true developmental edit. I've seen rates like that before but those are usually line editors like what I described earlier. What developmental editors have you yourself used?

I've worked with both trad and indie dev editors, so you'll have to be more specific. Two of my current works are out with editors now. I say two because Cynthia, my current dev editor, is retiring after Christmas, so I'm trying someone she's suggested. We'll see how it goes. As for the price being below the typical rate, it's the range always quoted to me based on my sample work submitted. If you've had different quotes, please share.

Developmental edits work in trade because you're being edited by someone who knows what they're doing! They're also "free." Trade publishers are paying YOU money, and their job is the make the book as good as possible in-order to sell it so that both of you profit. Developmental editors in trade publishing also usually have a better understanding of the market.

This is reason enough to hire a dev editor if for no other reason, though they aren't doing it "free" in the least. And as independent authors, we are now the publisher of the book. Doesn't it behoove us as business people to make it as marketable as possible?

A lot of trade authors find dev edits annoying, and for good reason, but they deal with it because the publishers are giving THEM money for their book.

True and not true at the same time. Dev edits are annoying, but if I just wanted a pat on the back, I'd have my mom work as my editor (btw, she's had 26 trad books published, so she could probably do it). Publishers are giving the writer money, but it's just a small fraction of what the book is expected to earn. They could save money by not having a dev editor as well, but then who would buy their books?

In self-publishing we don't have to deal with that step of the editing phase, we can write the book we want how we want without someone else trying to convince us to make major changes.

You're right, we don't have to deal with that step of the editing process. Nor do we have to deal with beta's or line editors. We can just hit the publish button and move on to the next book. Of course,  I can also dump rice on a plate and call it gourmet, but that won't change its taste. When eBooks first came out, that's exactly what happened. Now, there's so much competition something like that will quickly get burred in a shallow grave.

For indies how do you know what the developmental editors credentials are?

Look for reviews and recommendations. Get samples of work. If either or none are available, move on to the next candidate. You're running a business after all.

Most of them are hacks.

Good point. Some really are hacks. Others aren't. I've actually had more problems with cover artists than editors.

Paying thousands of dollars for a dev edit and THEN paying hundreds more(maybe even thousands more) for further edits (because you'll still need a copyedit and proofreader afterwards) is a monumental waste of money that you could have spent on advertising.

I agree sufficient funds should always be pumped into marketing. But ask yourself which is better, to spend 5 to make 50 or 30 to make 50? As the negative reviews pile up due to lack of editing, your marketing spend will have to increase to make up for them.

The only time a dev edit is really worth it is if you have no idea how to write a book.

I can't agree with this either (see above).

Basically, if you already know how to write a book, you don't need an expensive dev edit. Just get some beta readers and the best line editor you can afford.

You can go this way, and lots of indies do. Most of them also did this because they couldn't afford a dev edit and beta readers are a fresh pair of eyes. Get enough comments from them (and that's harder than it seems. Check around the board for examples.) and you'll have about the same thing as a dev edit, though much more piece meal. The up side of this is the beta's are reading it from a market perspective, so you don't have to worry about writing to market too much. They'll tell you what they do and don't like (if you ask them correctly, and if they respond).

To answer the OP's question, you'll look for a rate somewhere between 0.01 and 0.02 cents per word. Always look for reviews, testimonials and samples. If they refuse to give any, move on.

I'm still learning how to write, but I would think the scene needs to be as long as it needs to be to advance the story, or even just provide exposition.  I.E there is no such thing as an average length for a scene.  Or maybe I'm wrong 

This. I've had scenes as small as 500 words and longer than 5,000. A scene is as long as it needs to be.

I've tried it. I purchased Dragon, the recommended microphone, everything necessary. My wife loves it and never seems to have any difficulty. She's even converted a few of her friends as well. I try it, and my southern drawl gets turned into something entirely illegible. I know I can spend the time training it, but I just never seen to have the time/inclination.

Actually, I think that works better. Thank you.