Money for Nothing

Ah, to live and breathe the fine air of the Golden State. Of course, we’re also known as the state with one of the highest (and probably soon to be the highest) personal income tax rates in the United States. And then I read about proposals to give the entertainment/film industry a nice tax break:

The California Film Commission has released a 25-page study, What Is the Cost of Run-Away Production? Jobs, Wages, Economic Output and State Tax Revenue at Risk When Motion Picture Productions Leave California, in support of proposed legislation to provide a California tax credit of 12% on wages and other production costs for movies and TV shows.

What happens when you give someone a lower tax rate? If you want total tax revenues collected to remain the same, someone’s (or everyone else’s) tax rates must go up.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Unfortunately, the Governator has said that he supports the proposals.

Thanks to the TaxProf Blog for pointing this out.

Posted in California | Comments Off on Money for Nothing

A Box of Nothing (Hugh Hewitt’s “Adopt-A-Box” Project)

Hugh Hewitt asked bloggers if they would be interested in reviewing one of 136 boxes released by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. Having some interest in history, and quite a bit of curiosity as to what might be in a box of old White House Counsel documents, I ended up looking at “Box 30: JGR/Judges (9)”.

The box contains two items. First, Daniel Popeo of the Washington Legal Foundation sent a paper titled “The President’s Power to Appoint Federal Judges: A Popular Check on Court Usurpations” by Bruce E. Fein (Fein was a Deputy Attorney General under President Reagan, and is now a constitutional lawyer and international consultant with Bruce Fein & Associates and the Litchfield Group). A quick Google search disclosed that Fein thinks Iraq will dissolve into a quagmire and that President Bush should appoint judges that are “philosophical clones of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas and defeated nominee Robert H. Bork.” But I digress…

Fein’s paper urges then President Reagan to examine, in depth, the qualifications of his judicial appointments and make sure that they match his philosophy. It appears that this paper was sent to John Roberts, but whether he read it or not there’s nothing here which will serve as fodder against his appointment.

Then there’s actually a memo written by John Roberts. Apparently it’s against either the law or policy for the White House to send “get well” messages to sitting judges. John Roberts responded to a request for a get well message to a Judge Wangelin of Missouri.

And that’s the box. There’s absolutely nothing here in this non-attorney’s view that could be used for or against Judge Roberts in his confirmation hearings.

Posted in Taxable Talk | 2 Comments

Trumpeter Playing the Tax Evasion Blues

A trumpeter who also operates a gospel ministry (MightyHorn Ministry) has been charged with tax evasion. According to a story in the Chatanooga, TN Chatanoogan, Phil Driscoll, his wife and his mother-in-law have been accused of evading taxes by failing to report over $1 million in income by disguising the sale of personal assets. The indictments allege that the evasion has been ongoing for over ten years.

Mr. Driscoll’s website notes that he has been playing the trumpet for over 20 years, won “Musician of the Year” from the CCMA in 1999, and won a Grammy Award in 1984.

Posted in Tax Evasion | 1 Comment

It’s Renewal Time, So Here Comes the Scam

My corporation’s annual renewal fee (mandatory fee of $25 to the Secretary of State of California) is due in September. So what comes in my mail today? A request from “State Corporate Compliance” so that I can pay an additional $100 (if I’m a fool) so that they will type out what the Secretary of State’s office has already printed on my renewal form!

Hopefully, there won’t be too many gullible victims out there. This year’s forms prominently state, “Not a government Document.” Still, we all know that one’s born every minute….

Posted in Scams | 2 Comments

The Bronze State?

California continues to lose some of its luster. As reported by the TaxProf Blog, California athletes leave for brighter, er, cheaper (on a tax basis) pastures. For those who don’t remember, Californians passed Proposition 63 last November. This proposition added a 1% surtax to the state’s income tax (raising the top rate to 10.3%).

So you’re an athlete, making lots of money, and have a choice of living in beautiful Newport Beach or Del Rey Beach, Florida. Both have nice climates (perhaps Florida’s is a bit more tropical), and both are nice places to live. And then you look at the tax rates. California: 10.3%. Florida: 0%.

At least the Democrats have given up (for this year) at increasing the top tax rate to 11.3%….

Thanks to the TaxProf Blog for pointing this article out.

Posted in California | Comments Off on The Bronze State?

Taxes and Online Gambling, Part 2: Repatriation and Income Recognition

I recently read a blog where a very successful online poker player wrote,

There really aren’t IRS regulations on online gambling. It exists in a grey area. As fun160 pointed out “In the financial markets money earned off-shore is not taxable until it is repatriated. A strong case can be made that the same is true for off-shore gambling.”

I have talked to CPAs about whether the taxes should be paid upon earning the money or upon cashing out and the answer I was given is that a strong argument could be made for either. In the end it would be up to a court.

Well, some of the statements this player made are true: there aren’t any IRS regulations on online gambling and I’m sure he spoke with a CPA. As to the rest…

1. The recognition of income is a long-decided principle in the United States based on the concept of Constructive Receipt of Income. As the IRS’s Publication 525 states, “You are generally taxed on income that is available to you, regardless of whether or not it is in your posession.” Let’s say you win $500 at the poker club, but you decide to leave it in the form of chips and put it in your safety deposit box. It’s still income.

2. “But I won the money online, and it’s in [Gibraltar, the Isle of Man, Costa Rica, etc.], and not in my hands….” So what! When there are no specific rules governing the online world, the rules of the real world govern. The rules for gambling income are quite clear. You must keep a log of your sessions, you must report wins and losses by session, with your wins going on Line 21 (Other Income) and losses as an itemizable deduction not subject to the 2% limitation on AGI. Repatriation of income as far as gambling is totally irrelevant. Offshore casinos are considered by the IRS as just another taxpayer avoidance scheme (see here).

3. Repatriation of investment income isn’t relevant, either. Let’s say you have an investment in a hypothetical British company, BritCo Ltd. They declare a dividend of £2 per share today and you own 10 shares. You will owe the dollar equivalent of tax based on £20 on this year’s tax return. You will get a tax credit for any British taxes imposed on your investment, and you may be able to deduct investment expenses on your investment.

4. “In the end it would be up to a court.” Well, anyone can bring a case in Tax Court. Since there has yet to be a case in Tax Court on online gambling, it’s unlikely you’ll end up paying a frivolous penalty. But you’re going to lose. There have been many Tax Court cases dealing with the issue of constructive receipt. The opinion in a recent case, Millard v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2005-192) notes, “Consequently, a cash method taxpayer constructively receives income as of the date that a check is received absent a substantial limitation. Furstenberg v. Commissioner, 83 T.C. 755, 791 n.28 (1984); Kahler v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 31, 34-35 (1952); Roberts v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-281.” Now, I find it hard to believe that the Tax Court would rule that money put in a players’ online casino account wasn’t constructively received.

The tax rules for online gambling are quite clear—the rules are the exact same as in the brick and mortar world of casinos. This may not be what the typical online gambler wants to hear, but it’s the bitter truth.

In Part 3 (coming next week), I’ll examine how to keep records, what a session really is, and whether or not you are (or want to be) a professional gambler.

Posted in Gambling | 4 Comments

IRS Issues Priority Guidance Plan; Targets Include Poker Tournaments

The IRS and the US Department of the Treasury issued their “Priority Guidance Plan”. A total of 254 projects are mentioned. The ones that the IRS has highlighted are:

—Additional legal requirements for tax shelters;
—Guidance on how to report distributions from Roth IRAs;
—Guidance on impact of a 2.5 month grace period for flexible spending accounts on HSAs;
—Regulations under Section 529 regarding qualified tuition programs for higher education;
—How charities should report automobile donations they receive; and
—Legal requirements to withhold on the winner’s prizes at poker tournaments

As part of my ongoing series on online gambling and taxes, I will include a piece on taxes and poker tournaments. That article will appear in a couple of weeks.

Posted in Gambling, IRS | Comments Off on IRS Issues Priority Guidance Plan; Targets Include Poker Tournaments

Deadline Day 2

Today, August 15th, is the deadline for individuals who filed extensions to actually file their 2004 Federal tax returns. A second extension is available (until October 17th), but you need to have a reason (and have the IRS accept the reason); use Form 2688 to file for the second extension. For Californians, your extension to file is for six months; you need not file your State return until October 17th.

Next year, the automatic Federal extension will be for six months.

Posted in IRS | Comments Off on Deadline Day 2

Taxes and Online Gambling, Part I

I’m a poker player. I’ve been playing competitive poker, including tournaments, for several years, quite successfully. And yes, I claim my winnings on my tax return. I’m also co-author of a poker book.

I’ve had a natural fascination with gambling and taxes for several years, and that’s a primary reason why one of my areas of emphasis is gambling taxes. Several individuals have asked me to give an overview on online gambling and taxes. Given the out-and-out lies and falsehoods that I see on the Internet, I’m going to present a short series on online gambling and taxes.

“If I gamble online, it’s overseas, and I don’t have to pay tax on it.” I see this statement all the time, and it’s absolutely false. Under the US Tax Code, all income for US citizens is taxable, whether earned in the US, overseas or on the Internet. Section 61(a) defines gross income as “all income from whatever source derived,” including gambling, unless otherwise provided. McClanahan v. United States, 292 F.2d 630, 631-632 (5th Cir. 1961).

“Internet gambling is illegal, so I don’t have to pay taxes on it.” Ignoring (for the moment) the legality of Internet gambling, this is also false. The US taxes legal and illegal income. Remember Al Capone? He went to prison not for the murders he committed, but for tax evasion.

“The government has no way of tracking how much I win, so I’m not going to report it, and they’ll never find out.” If you’re not audited for some other reason, the government is not likely to find out. However, if for whatever reason you are audited, and you have unreported income that the government finds out about, you will, at a minimum, pay tax, penalties and interest. If the IRS determines that you willfully evaded taxes, you could even be subject to imprisonment.

“I didn’t receive a W-2G, so I don’t have to report the gambling income.” Another falsehood. Whether you receive paperwork or not, all gambling income is taxable.

“I can net my gambling wins and losses.” Some gamblers can net their wins and losses—if they are professional gamblers. Most gamblers, however, must put their gambling income on line 21 (Other Income) and take their losses, up to the amount of their winnings, as an itemized deduction on Schedule A. This deduction is not subject to the 2% AGI limitation.

Finally, “I don’t have to claim my online gambling winnings until the money is repatriated into the United States.” This is yet another falsehood for gambling income. When you win your wager, you have gambling income, no matter if the bet is in the United States, the United Kingdom, or any other country. This falsehood, though, deserves a complete debunking and that will be the subject of the next installment of this series, next week.

Posted in Gambling | 4 Comments

“Doctored Receipts and Implausible Testimony”

It’s not a good thing for you when the Tax Court begins its opinion with “…[the petitioner] seeks to deduct expenses by relying mostly — if not quite entirely — on doctored receipts and implausible testimony.” The opinion includes such gems as a flood that didn’t occur, a receipt dated on the top as 1999 but at the bottom 1996 (and the seller says 1996), “…the next two deductions at least sound valid….” Needless to say, the petitioner didn’t do well.

Case: Obot v. Commissioner

Posted in Tax Court | Comments Off on “Doctored Receipts and Implausible Testimony”