The elimination of deductions

[showonly]

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the new tax plans suggestion of the elimination of deductions put an end to all gambling. I believe without the redefining of gambling winnings it would put a tax burden on any winnings as defined by the IRS regulations.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by showonly

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the new tax plans suggestion of the elimination of deductions put an end to all gambling. I believe without the redefining of gambling winnings it would put a tax burden on any winnings as defined by the IRS regulations.

It's a little soon to know exactly what the proposed plan contains or doesn't contain. I don't think the news people would say, and at least you can still deduct gambling losses to the level of gambling winnings, even if it was in there. Eventually we'll get all the details.

Changing the tax code will be a huge fight. But we have a long way to go on this one.

[showonly]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

It's a little soon to know exactly what the proposed plan contains or doesn't contain. I don't think the news people would say, and at least you can still deduct gambling losses to the level of gambling winnings, even if it was in there. Eventually we'll get all the details.

Changing the tax code will be a huge fight. But we have a long way to go on this one.

Pardon my interest in the current administrations initiatives as far as changes in the tax code. Why don't you post when I should begin to focus my consideration. I guess the the trillions of dollars being maneuvered in the financial markets based on what is being said is misdirected. They should just wait for the details.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by showonly

Why don't you post when I should begin to focus my consideration. I guess the the trillions of dollars being maneuvered in the financial markets based on what is being said is misdirected. They should just wait for the details.

When there is a plan on the table and hearings are scheduled you'll have something concrete to comment on. When you know what is being proposed for deductions against gambling winnings, we'll have a great discussion. Meanwhile, why guess? Right now we have a few highlights, but even the congress people are saying they don't know exactly what the bill will look like, and that there are a few versions floating around.

But hey, if you want to go based on what we've seen so far from the news conference and the MSM pundits, you go right ahead.

If you are going to suggest the markets always behave rationally, I'd suggest you have a lot more faith in the markets than I do. What stimulates the markets is the PERCEPTION of stability, and in terms of taxes and regulations that was something they weren't feeling under Obama later in his second term. The markets will go up and down based on some growth projection that came in half a percentage point lower than some guy in a financial firm thought it should. Frankly, I would only trust a market guy who was also a good horseplayer.

[showonly]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

When there is a plan on the table and hearings are scheduled you'll have something concrete to comment on. When you know what is being proposed for deductions against gambling winnings, we'll have a great discussion. Meanwhile, why guess? Right now we have a few highlights, but even the congress people are saying they don't know exactly what the bill will look like, and that there are a few versions floating around.

But hey, if you want to go based on what we've seen so far from the news conference and the MSM pundits, you go right ahead.

If you are going to suggest the markets always behave rationally, I'd suggest you have a lot more faith in the markets than I do. What stimulates the markets is the PERCEPTION of stability, and in terms of taxes and regulations that was something they weren't feeling under Obama later in his second term. The markets will go up and down based on some growth projection that came in half a percentage point lower than some guy in a financial firm thought it should. Frankly, I would only trust a market guy who was also a good horseplayer.

Once again at the press conference given by Gary Cohen Director of the National Economic Council and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin. The Secretary of the Treasury said all personal deductions other than the mortgage interest and charitable deduction would be eliminated under the plan. if effectuated this would create a dramatically increased taxing of gambling winnings as they are currently defined.


"If you are going to suggest the markets always behave rationally"

Maybe you should start a thread "do markets always behave rationally".

Never said it not going to suggest it.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by showonly

Once again at the press conference given by Gary Cohen Director of the National Economic Council and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin. The Secretary of the Treasury said all personal deductions other than the mortgage interest and charitable deduction would be eliminated under the plan. if effectuated this would create a dramatically increased taxing of gambling winnings as they are currently defined.


"If you are going to suggest the markets always behave rationally"

Maybe you should start a thread "do markets always behave rationally".

Never said it not going to suggest it.

I don't think this is right. Gambling losses isn't a personal deduction, is it? It's a business expense, so should be deductible as that?

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I don't think this is right. Gambling losses isn't a personal deduction, is it? It's a business expense, so should be deductible as that?

Gambling losses are a business expense?

You're not right. It's a personal deduction.

[showonly]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I don't think this is right. Gambling losses isn't a personal deduction, is it? It's a business expense, so should be deductible as that?

For the recreational gambler gambling losses are taken on line 28 "other miscellaneous deductions" . The "interest you paid" and "gifts to charity" sections could remain in tact while the "miscellaneous deductions" section were eliminated. This would fit the description of the change in deductions described by Mr. Mnunchin.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by showonly

Once again at the press conference given by Gary Cohen Director of the National Economic Council and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin. The Secretary of the Treasury said all personal deductions other than the mortgage interest and charitable deduction would be eliminated under the plan. if effectuated this would create a dramatically increased taxing of gambling winnings as they are currently defined.

I heard what he said. Gambling winnings are exactly what they sound like. The amount you are ahead after subtracting losses from collections. I'd question if it is technically a personal deduction even if they are taken on Schedule A.

I'd say that if Gary Cohen meant that every source of income (like gambling collections) was taxable but you couldn't deduct the losses or expenses, he'd have one tremendous fight on his hands. Do you think he also meant that you won't get to deduct state taxes? Medical expenses (over the 10% exemption)?

Like I said, whatever he meant will be clear when we get a bill to look at. Then the fun begins.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I don't think this is right. Gambling losses isn't a personal deduction, is it? It's a business expense, so should be deductible as that?

If, and only if, you turn your gambling into a business, by, for instance, incorporating, or forming a sole proprietorship.

If you do this, you can net out your wins and losses (so long as wins exceed losses), but it requires professional tax planning asssistance, and it creates a significant likelihood of an audit and can be extremely costly if you don't dot all the i's and cross all the t's.

A recreational gambler can itemize if gambling losses (up to the amount reported as winnings) and any other deductions exceed the standard deduction, but has to report them in a very specific and cumbersome way.

The tax code was written by people who have no idea how advantage gambling works.

[showonly]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

I heard what he said. Gambling winnings are exactly what they sound like. The amount you are ahead after subtracting losses from collections. I'd question if it is technically a personal deduction even if they are taken on Schedule A.

I'd say that if Gary Cohen meant that every source of income (like gambling collections) was taxable but you couldn't deduct the losses or expenses, he'd have one tremendous fight on his hands. Do you think he also meant that you won't get to deduct state taxes? Medical expenses (over the 10% exemption)?

Like I said, whatever he meant will be clear when we get a bill to look at. Then the fun begins.

Not correct for the recreational gambler "Gambling winnings' as defined by the IRS are reported on line 21 "other income" on your tax return. The reported amount on line 21 in most cases does not reflect an off set from losses. There is a reporting methodology that can reflect offsets on line 21 the "other income line'. This is used mostly for slots, video poker and live poker. It has the effect of lowering you adjusted gross income and avoids the loss of personal exemptions. As i stated previously offsets are taken on line 28 of schedule A "Miscellaneous deductions".

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by showonly

Not correct for the recreational gambler "Gambling winnings' as defined by the IRS are reported on line 21 "other income" on your tax return. The reported amount on line 21 in most cases does not reflect an off set from losses. There is a reporting methodology that can reflect offsets on line 21 the "other income line'. This is used mostly for slots, video poker and live poker. It has the effect of lowering you adjusted gross income and avoids the loss of personal exemptions. As i stated previously offsets are taken on line 28 of schedule A "Miscellaneous deductions".

Considering the dozens of times I've had to include winnings and losses in my tax filing, I know exactly how you report. I've been audited on my gambling winnings a few times. I'm up $34 lifetime with the IRS.

I should have said, regardless of how the IRS defines it, gambling winnings are exactly what they sound like - collections minus losses. If the wants to eliminate the deduction for losses, then they ought to change the term to "Gambling Collections" because that would be accurate.

And I also said that regardless of where you report losses, I'd question calling losses a personal deduction. I understand what the IRS calls it. I'm simply saying it is inaccurate. It is an inseparable part of Gambling Winnings.

[showonly]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Considering the dozens of times I've had to include winnings and losses in my tax filing, I know exactly how you report. I've been audited on my gambling winnings a few times. I'm up $34 lifetime with the IRS.

I should have said, regardless of how the IRS defines it, gambling winnings are exactly what they sound like - collections minus losses. If the wants to eliminate the deduction for losses, then they ought to change the term to "Gambling Collections" because that would be accurate.

And I also said that regardless of where you report losses, I'd question calling losses a personal deduction. I understand what the IRS calls it. I'm simply saying it is inaccurate. It is an inseparable part of Gambling Winnings.

For the last time I will tell you that you are wrong. "Gambling Winnings' are reported on line 21 of the 1040 and in almost all cases do not include any offset
In business parlance you might refer to this as top line revenue. The bottom line figure is derived after line 40 incorporates schedule A. Where gambling losses are entered. My tax returns of the last 40 years have incorporated "certain gambling winnings" that far exceed $50 million. I am quite versed in the process. Audits are not a problem when IRS rules are complied with.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by showonly

For the last time I will tell you that you are wrong. "Gambling Winnings' are reported on line 21 of the 1040 and in almost all cases do not include any offset
In business parlance you might refer to this as top line revenue. The bottom line figure is derived after line 40 incorporates schedule A. Where gambling losses are entered. My tax returns of the last 40 years have incorporated "certain gambling winnings" that far exceed $50 million. I am quite versed in the process. Audits are not a problem when IRS rules are complied with.

If you could read and comprehend, I said the same thing. I'm disagreeing with the way the IRS defines gambling winnings because winnings cannot be defined other than the net difference between collections and losses. That coming through to you yet?

I said, Regardless of how the IRS defines it, gambling winnings are exactly what they sound like - collections minus losses. You see, that means I know how the IRS defines gambling winnings, but I disagree that it is in fact gambling winnings. I really don't give a shit if I disagree with the IRS - that's what I was trying to do.

I just got done telling you I've reported gambling winnings and losses dozens of times. Of course I know where they go. And did I say audits were a problem? Audits often occur when there is a big difference between consecutive year tax returns in a respective category. Yes, we all know that audits are not a problem if you follow the rules, but they happen anyway.

One last time. I understand the rules. I understand how you report collections and losses. I always did. I SIMPLY DISAGREE WITH CALLING COLLECTIONS WINNINGS AND IF THE IRS WANTS TO USE THE TERM WINNINGS THEY SHOULD DEFINE IT CORRECTLY AND CALCULATE IT CORRECTLY. Is that ok with you? Or are you going to continue to insist that disagreement is the equivalent of incorrectness?

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Gambling losses are a business expense?

You're not right. It's a personal deduction.

The infor contained in the lionk below, should straighten out this debate..
I think you have it. Looks like this is filed as a personal income return
http://thismatter.com/money/tax/othe...e-gambling.htm