Hatch Again Asks for Freedom

Richard Hatch, the Survivor winner who decided he didn’t have to pay taxes on his $1 million of winnings, is again asking a court to free him. He’s filed a motion with the US District Court in Rhode Island that his conviction should be overturned.

Wait a moment, you ask. Didn’t Mr. Hatch already appeal his conviction, and didn’t he lose (badly) in the Court of Appeals? Well, yes.

The Providence Journal, which also published his motion, noted that Mr. Hatch is appealing because prosecutors used “Mr. Hatch’s interesting lifestyle” to sway the jury. Mr. Hatch also is attacking his representation and the judge who tried the case.

Well, I actually agree a little with Mr. Hatch. It’s very unconventional to win $1 million in front of 300 million witnesses and not declare it on your income tax return. On all other grounds, though, I suspect Mr. Hatch’s motions will fail, and by the time an appeal is heard he’ll have served his 51 months at ClubFed.

Posted in Tax Evasion | Tagged | Comments Off on Hatch Again Asks for Freedom

A Good Blog to Visit

Peter Pappas, proprietor of the Tax Lawyer’s Blog, reminded me that I have forgotten to include him on my blogroll. Well, that’s an error I was happy to correct. Mr. Pappas’ blog is excellent, and we share annoyance over an issue.

One of his clients sent him an email last week. I’ll quote from it:

Well he came and went. He told me that I shouldn’t have hired an attorney and wanted to know how much I paid Mr. Pappas.

He then began interrogating me and asking me detailed questions about my intentions, my finances and how I came to own the business.

I repeatedly told him that I was represented by an attorney and he continued to say that I didn’t need one and that I should not have hired one….

Now, Mr. Pappas is an attorney and I’m an Enrolled Agent, but we both represent taxpayers. When I’m representing someone the IRS is supposed to talk to me, not them. I’ve seen some pretty ugly things, but the story Mr. Pappas tells is bad. Unfortunately, I don’t expect anything to change—I guess I’m just too cynical. Read the story, and realize what the IRS agent did was, bluntly, wrong.

Posted in IRS | Comments Off on A Good Blog to Visit

There’s Lots of Waste in California’s Government

That’s the only conclusion I can draw after perusing this morning’s Orange County Register. A headline reads, “State Considers Ban on Big-Screen TVs.” No, it’s not April 1st—the headline is for real.

The California Energy Commission—that’s the same group of bureaucrats who wanted to control California’s thermostats—are behind this. It’s in the name of energy efficiency, they say, to prevent global warming. Well, global warming hasn’t been proven (indeed, there’s beginning to be lots of evidence that the sun has a lot to do with that), but perhaps this will save hundreds or thousands of dollars of electricity per television. Electrical rates have gone up, after all.

Would you believe $18 to $30 per television per year?

When California’s Legislature is forced to make massive budget cuts (and that day is coming, whether they like it or not), a good place to start would be the California Energy Commission. Its elimination probably will only save a fraction of the billions that are needed to be cut, but it will eliminate a source of lunacy in the bureaucratic pantheon of California. Needless to say, this proposed regulations should be dumped with the remote controlled thermostats in the regulatory ash heap of history.

Posted in California | 2 Comments

Where’s the Refund

A good barometer of when others will receive their California tax refunds is when I will receive mine. My return was filed on February 15th. The Franchise Tax Board has a webpage to check on the status of your refund.

My refund was authorized on March 17th, and the FTB notes that I should receive it within ten business days of that date (probably late this week).

The IRS has a similar “Where’s my refund” webpage.

Posted in California, IRS | Tagged | Comments Off on Where’s the Refund

Not Pressed for Time Any More

We’ve got some lowlights from the tax fraud world. A dentist and a doctor from West Virginia are in trouble. And we’ll take a look at what could happen if your 1031 Exchange uses a dishonest Qualified Intermediary.

First, let’s head to Charleston, West Virginia. Dr. Alan Vance is a dentist who also happened to own a dry cleaning business called “Pressed For Time.” Dr. Vance wanted a pool for his home, so he marked off the cash on the deposit slips prepared by his staff, and didn’t declare it on his tax return. He did get his swimming pool, but he also got a charge of tax evasion. He pleaded guilty last week, and he’s likely to not be so pressed for time for over one year when he’s sentenced.

Let’s head to nearby Bluefield, West Virginia. Dr. Randy Brodnick appears to have a successful medical practice. He’s also facing a federal indictment. Dr. Brodnick and Anthony Kritt, an attorney from Crofton, Maryland, are accused of using sham contracts, employee leasing, and shell corporations to defraud the IRS out of $2 million. Allegedly, they set up fictitious entities in Ireland and the Channel Islands. They face a total of seven counts and if convicted could spend up to 35 years at ClubFed. Interestingly, one of the funds that Brodnick and Kritt are alleged to have used to hide the funds is the Ruritania-90 fund. (Ruritania is the fictional country from The Prisoner of Zenda.)

Finally, our last story notes a potential problem with a 1031 Exchange. Section 1031 of the tax code allows taxpayers to do an exchange of investment properties without paying capital gains taxes. There are lots of rules for §1031 exchanges. One of them is that you must use a Qualified Intermediary.

It’s very, very important to use a reputable, honest Qualified Intermediary. Unfortunately, in every industry there are some who aren’t honest. Edward Okun was one of the dishonest ones.

Mr. Okun, of Miami, had a unique way of conducting his business. People would come to him wanting to do a §1031 exchange. He’d obtain the original property, find a replacement property, and take some of the proceeds for himself. It gives a whole new meaning to “boot.”

Everything was fine while the real estate market was going up. Unfortunately, we all know that ended. Mr. Okun, who apparently owned several Qualified Intermediary companies, had a personal jet, a yacht, and a Miami mansion. It appears that after the market tanked his scheme was uncovered.

Mr. Okun was convicted on 23 counts. He apparently bilked over 600 individuals and obtained over $125 million. All told he could be sentenced to 400 years at ClubFed, along with restitution and fines.

Posted in Tax Evasion, Tax Fraud | 1 Comment

Three More Questions from the Mailbag

Three more questions from the mailbag this week. We’ll take a look at pensions, extensions, and putting money aside for 2009 taxes.

First, a Californian asks: If I retire with a government pension (Calpers) from California, will I have to pay California income tax on that pension if I become a resident of Nevada?

Would you think that the Franchise Tax Board would stoop to such a level as taxing retirees’ pensions when they left California? You detected the sarcasm, I hope.

Indeed, the FTB already tried and did attempt to tax out-of-state retirees under the theory that the pensions represent money earned in California and are, thus, taxable to California. However, there was an uproar from retirees who had escaped the Golden State. Congress responded by passing HR394 in 1996 (now Public Law 104-95); this was signed by President Clinton. States are now prohibited from taxing out-of-state retirees’ pensions.

Do be careful, though, and wait until you are domiciled outside of California before taking that distribution or California will tax you.

Next, I’m asked: I’m going to owe a lot in federal taxes next month, but money is going to be tight until June. What can I do to stave off Uncle Sam until then? (Luckily, I’m a resident of Texas and don’t have to deal with state income taxes.)

There are two choices you should discuss with your professional tax advisor. First, you could file your return, pay what you can, and arrange a payment plan for the remaining balance. If you owe $25,000 or less to the IRS a payment plan is generally automatically granted. A second option is to file an extension, pay what you can, and then file your return and pay the balance due in June.

Either way you will owe interest (it’s statutory) and a failure to pay penalty (0.5% of the tax due per month late). However, as long as you file an extension (or your return) you will avoid the failure to file penalty of 5% of the tax due per month.

The choice that’s best for you depends on your situation and the amount you owe. As I said, your professional tax advisor should be able to steer you in the right direction.

The final question for this week: I graduated from college in December, and did not earn any income in 2008. However, I just won $62,000 in a poker tournament this past week. Am I required to pay estimated taxes to the IRS? How much should I put aside for taxes this year? I live in Florida, if that helps you in giving me advice.

Congratulations on your win. And I’m glad you’re considering the tax impact of your victory. In the United States, gambling income is taxable, so you will owe federal income tax on your winnings. A rule of thumb is to put aside at least one-third of your winnings for taxes.

Exactly how much you will need depend on a variety of factors: your other sources of income, whether you’re a professional gambler or an amateur, your net poker winnings for the year, what state you reside in, your marital status and dependents, whether you will invest in a retirement account, etc.

Since your income was $0 in 2008 you do not have to make any estimated tax payments during 2009. (You never have to make estimated payments, but if you don’t and you are supposed to you will pay an estimated tax penalty when you file your return.) You also reside in Florida, a state with no income tax. If you were my client I’d advise you to take about $20,000 of your winnings and put it in a safe investment that can be cashed out early next year.

This week I may have made one, two, or perhaps all three of the questioners happy with my responses. I’ll have to see if I can keep that streak up next week.

Posted in California, Gambling, IRS | Comments Off on Three More Questions from the Mailbag

When a Gambler Loses…

The Tax Code is anything but fair towards gamblers. This is especially true for professional gamblers; they’re in one of the few professions where you can’t lose. Section 165(d) states that losses from wagering (gambling) transactions are only allowable up to the amount of wins.

So let’s look at John Doe, a normally winning professional gambler. He has a bad year, and his $100,000 of wins are offset by $150,000 of losses. To top that off, he has $30,000 of expenses. He just lost $80,000, right?

Well, maybe not. A new IRS position paper notes that the business expenses may be eligible for a net operating loss (NOL) carryforward/carryback in a year that a gambler loses.

As the paper notes, it’s a case of language. Section 165(d) states, “losses from wagering transactions shall be allowed only to the extent of the gains from such transactions.” [emphasis added] Those two words are the key: Does the statute mean the transactions or the activity?

The paper notes that Whitten v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo 1995-508) agrees with this line of reasoning and allows expenses to be deducted. On the other hand, there is a string of cases holding the contrary point of view. These go back to 1951 (Offutt v. Commissioner, 16 T.C. 1214; Estate of Todisco v. Commissioner, 757 F 2d 1 (1st Cir. 1985) affg T.C. Memo 1983-247); one of these cases is Kochevar v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo 1995-607).

So what does this mean for the gambler who has a bad year? First, you can’t deduct losses in excess of wins. However, you may be able to claim expenses, and carry them forward or backward as a NOL carryforward/carryback. The “may” is very necessary. The Estate of Todisco case may bind those gamblers who are in the 1st Circuit (Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Puerto Rico) and they may not be able to try this strategy.

Additionally, a position paper in no way binds the IRS to this view. It’s one attorney’s opinion. The staff at the IRS hasn’t been favorable towards gamblers in the past, and nothing prevents them from taking a contrary view. However, for those gamblers who wish to be aggressive having some expenses carried forward can mollify (to some degree) a bad year.

Anyone taking this position should absolutely discuss this with their own personal tax professional. Taking this position will definitely increase the risk of audit of the gambler’s return; you could win this part of your argument only to have other items on your return thrown in your face. Additionally, this position paper doesn’t bind the IRS or the Tax Court.

Posted in IRS | Comments Off on When a Gambler Loses…

Budgeting 101, Sacramento Democrat Style

You’re facing yet another $4 – $8 billion deficit. You’re in the middle of a recession. So do you cut back on spending, or do you propose billions more in new programs which would have to be funded through even more tax increases?

Well, Russ, no one can be that stupid. The Democrats in the California legislature, having just gone through a months-long bruising budget battle, have to understand some basic economics, right?

Wrong.

We’re seeing proposals to charge shoppers for carry-out bags, to add fees on drivers licenses, pornography, and other targeted markets, and for universal health care.

State Senator George Runner (R-Lancaster) noted on the Flash Blog that the $46 billion proposal for universal health care has been resurrected in Sacramento. Just what California businesses need: more taxation that would drive them into neighboring states.

It appears I may have drastically underestimated the budget deficit as of June. I was thinking it would be on the order of $6 billion. Perhaps $16 billion is closer to the mark.

Posted in California | 1 Comment

Good News from the IRS on Madoff and NOLs

This week the IRS handed some beleaguered taxpayers good news. First, the IRS announced that the new NOL provision (a five-year carryback) can be used for 2008 returns. This new NOL provision applies to certain partnerships and S Corporations. And, as Joe Kristan notes, the only entities that can use this provision average $15 million in gross receipts during the three-year period ending with the NOL. Best of all, the only testing will be done at the entity level.

Next, the victims of Ponzi schemes such as those perpetrated by Bernard Madoff, were given direction by the IRS on how to take their losses on their tax returns. Revenue Ruling 2009-09 and a Safe Harbor Procedure were issued by the IRS. These are about as good (for taxpayers) as one could hope for.

Among the highlights are that the theft loss deduction is available in the year the complaint was filed; that it’s considered a §165(b)(2) deduction and not subject to the 10% AGI restriction on theft losses; and impacted taxpayers may be eligible for the new NOL carryback procedure. Joe Kristan has more.

Posted in IRS | 1 Comment

My New Website

My new website, http://www.claytontax.com/, is finally up. Believe it or not this has been in progress for several months, and everything is now working.

It’s still, to a degree, a work in progress. I’ll be adding some links to articles I’ve written in the coming weeks (after April 15th). Feel free to email me if you have a suggestion, comment, or correction.

Posted in Taxable Talk | Comments Off on My New Website