bobsims
bobsims
Joined: Apr 8, 2014
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 316
March 6th, 2015 at 5:49:36 PM permalink
Quote: GWAE

I doubt it. the standard for 4 people is like 13k. Our house payment including taxes is only $709. We are only paying about 3k a year in interest.



Be thankful you're not living in Blue Jersey where taxes, not including mortgage, on the average house are $900 a month. The progressive way.
Sabretom2
Sabretom2
Joined: Mar 3, 2013
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 718
March 6th, 2015 at 5:58:16 PM permalink
However they track income is fine with me, provided I can also claim a Capitol loss and carryover losses as necessary.
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 295
  • Posts: 8167
March 6th, 2015 at 6:48:23 PM permalink
Quote: sc15

You're going to lose either way, just consider it as part of the cost of playing a machine.



What kind of argument is that?

You might as well argue "you have to pay taxes, so I see no reason why everybody shouldnt just give all their money to the government"
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
GWAE
GWAE
Joined: Sep 20, 2013
  • Threads: 93
  • Posts: 9851
March 6th, 2015 at 7:52:24 PM permalink
Quote: sc15

Yet it probably wouldn't bother you if the payback was changed so that you'd lose another 600 in EV instead of 600 in taxes.

What difference does it make? You're going to lose either way, just consider it as part of the cost of playing a machine.


that makes no sense. Of course I would care if the payback was changed. I will no longer play .50 vp because of that.
Expect the worst and you will never be disappointed. I AM NOT PART OF GWAE RADIO SHOW
sc15
sc15
Joined: Sep 28, 2014
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 594
March 6th, 2015 at 8:58:27 PM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit

What kind of argument is that?

You might as well argue "you have to pay taxes, so I see no reason why everybody shouldnt just give all their money to the government"



He's already throwing money away by playing a machine. So play a little less, pay the ridiculous tax, and you're still throwing away the same amount of money.
vendman1
vendman1
Joined: Mar 12, 2012
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 1034
March 6th, 2015 at 9:10:16 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Is is possible the IRS would lose money if they tracked all coin in and out since most people who hit jackpots just pay the taxes on that and don't really keep track of daily wins and loses.

Example avrage joe plays all year and normally loses but dosent really add all that up.
now at the end of the year he hits a big jackpot he's happy and just pays the taxes.

A forced tracking system would wize them up.



This is correct. Tracking "net" winnings would result in almost all gamblers being net losers. At least in the long run. Anyone can have a good year or two. Losers owe no taxes. As it is now winnings are reported to the IRS...losses are not. Puts an unfair burden on the player to claim losses via a schedule A (itemized deductions). All W2-G's should reflect NET numbers. Currently they do not. This is an important point most people miss.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 3126
March 6th, 2015 at 9:32:55 PM permalink
Quote: TheBigPaybak

Quote: DRich

IRS suggests dropping casino winnings threshold to $600'''

Link



This would make higher-limit slot playing almost unplayable and would deter such play. It's hard to imagine the casino lobby would somehow allow this to happen...



Excellent point. Can you imagine having a slot attendant with a yellow legal pad assigned to every $5 Bonus Video Poker Player and Double Double Bonus Player because that's what would have to happen... just like they do now with $100 players.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 3126
March 6th, 2015 at 9:46:43 PM permalink
Quote: Romes

That's my point. I can mathematically prove it's not income.



I love this. You are going to mathematically prove that it's not income when the tax laws say it is income? That will be a very nice trick.

So tell me, do you also think that paying income tax is "voluntary"?
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 3126
March 6th, 2015 at 9:49:17 PM permalink
Quote: zoobrew

No the IRS could make big money because the amount of standard deduction would now be taxed. You have $60k in income, and you win $15k in small daily wins and lose $20k in small daily losses. On your taxes your income is now $75k and then minus the $15k in losses on Schedule A and net income for taxes is $60k. Currently it would be $60k income and minus standard deduction of $6.2k or $12.4k or net income for taxes of $53.8k or $47.6k. This is just a very simplified example, but the IRS would come out ahead.

Also if the IRS got real aggressive they could start taxing table game winners, by requiring ID for all cash/chip transactions.



This is correct. Even if you have a net loss gambling, those accumulated W2Gs cause havoc with your taxes.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 3126
March 6th, 2015 at 9:51:29 PM permalink
Don't horse race bettors get a W2G on a payoff of $600 ?? I think the IRS might be trying to level the playing field.

  • Jump to: