I was thinking of the gaming industry coming up with a scheme to offer customers non-taxable but high jackpots.
Quote: rxwineI'm thinking it's not exactly legal...
There's an understatement!
Quote: DJTeddyBearThere's an understatement!
Someone once purposely came up with $1199 gimmick for jackpots. I figure there might be a market. What the customer actually does afterwards, is completely up to them.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceAre you actually going to be up for the year after hitting the jackpot?
If paid in $1,199 yearly installments, probably not.
The point is, regardless of HOW it's paid, it needs to be reported.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceAre you actually going to be up for the year after hitting the jackpot?
Heh.
Here's the thing. Nothing prevents you from playing a lot and hitting more jackpots of the same kind, but never generating a single W2.
Quote: rxwinepaid out $1199 every year over 20 years would that
I am reasonably confident that:
1) I could get better use out of the $23980 as a lump sum, less taxes
2) I could document offsetting losses, negating the tax liability
3) I'd be annoyed getting $99.91 a month for 20 years.
Anything less than about $700k, I want it as a lump sum. At the $35k/yr mark, it's reasonable to go with annual payments. At about 4 times that, it's reasonable to go with monthly payments, should they feel a pressing need to.
Quote: onenickelmiracleObviously this won't work, so no need to wonder or say why.
That's what they said about the Pet Rock.
Quote: DJTeddyBearIf paid in $1,199 yearly installments, probably not.
The point is, regardless of HOW it's paid, it needs to be reported.
Well yes, but the point is, if you're down for the year anyway, all this cloak and dagger nonsense is a waste of time.
It's the hidden cost of American corruption we must pay so wealth can last millennia.Quote: yy888888As a non-American, I think that taxes on slot machine winnings is totally stupid and doesn't make sense. In the long run, everyone is always a loser at the casino. It's funny that a person would rather win $1199, rather than $1300 (assuming that after tax this will be less than $1199).
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWell yes, but the point is, if you're down for the year anyway, all this cloak and dagger nonsense is a waste of time.
Maybe, maybe not. There's a lot of casual players going to vegas every day of the year, just for a few days and never pay mind to thinking about taxes unless they hit a jackpot.
Let's say they play a VP machine -- let's say 50c denom poker. Instead of getting $2000 jackpot, W2, and notice to the IRS. They get $1199, and a payment of the rest in the next calendar year which is deposited electronically, if they wish. (or they could get sent a check)
Is that appealing to some, I don't know. As I said, what the customer does or doesn't do as far as following the law is left up to them. At any rate, they would eventually have $2000 with no one deducting anything -- and IRS not knowing about either -- or at least not through an automatically generated W2.
Quote: rxwineAt any rate, they would eventually have $2000 with no one deducting anything -- and IRS not knowing about either -- or at least not through an automatically generated W2.
Sounds like structuring to me. It's already a problem if you're structuring to avoid a CTR; I'm sure it's not less of a problem to structure with the intent to avoid taxation.
There's probably even a pesky IRS rule (IRC Section 451(h)) that says you have to receive it over at least 10 years in order to not pay taxes on it all up front.
I still think that $35k/year is the tipping point, for me, anyway.
Quote: rxwineAt any rate, they would eventually have $2000 with no one deducting anything -- and IRS not knowing about either -- or at least not through an automatically generated W2.
I believe the company offering the jackpot would probably purchase an annuity and you would receive a 1099 each year.