Appellants' Reply Brief - Washington State Courts

For example, a bookstore owner who operates a "brick and mortar"
bookstore could claim as wages his gross sales under Malang's hyper-
inflated wage theory, because he earned and owned the money that he
eventually used to operate his store, i.e., in purchasing his retail stock and
making an array of other business expenditures. Malang's theory fails
because in order for the owner to generate those sales he has to incur
expenses for such things as rent or purchase of a building, electricity to
light and heat the store, books to sell, advertising, cash registers, and the
cost of labor to help make the sales. While the business owner has
discretion over many of these expenditures and decides how lavish or
Spartan his business will be run, the amount of money that the owner
actually expends to make his sales is not income or wages to the owner but
instead, for purposes of RCW 5 1.08.178, represent the non-wage element
of the gross receipts of the business.
Board decisions helping to demonstrate the absurdity of Malang's
position include In re Howard Fisher, BIIA Dckt. No. 00 21778 (January
25, 2002) (farmer in self-employment) and In re Jerry Uhri, supra
(convenience store owner). As just explained, common sense dictates the
conclusion that it is absurd to consider gross receipts of a farmer or
convenience store owner as the equivalent of wage for that sole proprietor.
The dollar figures for gross receipts vs. business expenditures in the