Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 11-02-2017, 08:20 PM   #46
_______
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ventura County, California
Posts: 2,140
Rep Power: 0 _______ can only hope to improve
The pass through provisions allowing individuals to claim the lower business tax rate seems ripe for abuse. Or just intelligent use of the rules if you prefer.

If _______ pays a 25% rate but _______,inc. 20% who wouldn’t find a way to classify their income as business if at all plausible? Every Doctor and Lawyer in the country will just turn themselves into a LLP if they haven’t already. As will a lot of other individuals.

I understand all the wheels are still in motion and the lobbyists are just getting started but this one stuck out for me. It had been hinted at all year.

I can’t find specifics on the limits for gambling losses which I assume might be of interest to some on this board. Anyone else have better luck?
__________________
The comedy of man starts like this:
Our brains are way too big for our mother's hips.
So nature she devised this alternative:
We emerge half formed and hope whoever greets us on the other end.
Is kind enough.
To fill us in.
And, babies, that's pretty much how it's been.
_______ is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-02-2017, 08:45 PM   #47
therussmeister
superfecta grinder
 
therussmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,903
Rep Power: 10 therussmeister is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
there may be a hell of a lot that pay 35% via Alternative Minimum Tax
AMT would be eliminated.
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.

Mark Twain
therussmeister is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-02-2017, 08:56 PM   #48
thaskalos
"Are you talking to ME?"
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 19,671
Rep Power: 36 thaskalos is just really nicethaskalos is just really nicethaskalos is just really nicethaskalos is just really nicethaskalos is just really nice
Quote:
Originally Posted by _______ View Post

I canít find specifics on the limits for gambling losses which I assume might be of interest to some on this board. Anyone else have better luck?
I would have to guess that the gambling-loss rate for most players is about 100%.
__________________
"If someone gave away your body to the first man he met, you would be indignant. But yet you trust your mind to the chance comer, and allow it to be disturbed and confounded if he reviles you. Are you not ashamed to do so?"
-- Epictetus, Enchiridion 28
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-02-2017, 09:06 PM   #49
Parkview_Pirate
Registered User
 
Parkview_Pirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,287
Rep Power: 5 Parkview_Pirate is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by _______ View Post
I canít find specifics on the limits for gambling losses which I assume might be of interest to some on this board. Anyone else have better luck?
Found this older link on earlier versions of the plan. If accurate, it would be a game changer for horseplayers. Illinois was like this when I was a resident.

https://www.nmcpa.com/blog/deduction...proposal/42502

Quote:
Gambling Losses Ė Currently, gambling losses are only deductible in an amount equal to gambling winnings. Under Trumpís plan, these losses would no longer be deductible, meaning that taxpayers would have to pay taxes on all their winnings Ė even if they have net losses. Senior citizens and others who gamble recreationally could be hit with significant taxes even when they actually lose money.
Parkview_Pirate is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-02-2017, 11:33 PM   #50
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,553
Rep Power: 10 AndyC will become famous soon enoughAndyC will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by _______ View Post
The pass through provisions allowing individuals to claim the lower business tax rate seems ripe for abuse. Or just intelligent use of the rules if you prefer.

If _______ pays a 25% rate but _______,inc. 20% who wouldnít find a way to classify their income as business if at all plausible? Every Doctor and Lawyer in the country will just turn themselves into a LLP if they havenít already. As will a lot of other individuals.

I understand all the wheels are still in motion and the lobbyists are just getting started but this one stuck out for me. It had been hinted at all year.

I canít find specifics on the limits for gambling losses which I assume might be of interest to some on this board. Anyone else have better luck?
Personal service income will not be able to take advantage of lower business rates. Income earned that would typically be equivalent to wages cannot be turned into "business income" at the lower rate.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-02-2017, 11:38 PM   #51
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,553
Rep Power: 10 AndyC will become famous soon enoughAndyC will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate View Post
Found this older link on earlier versions of the plan. If accurate, it would be a game changer for horseplayers. Illinois was like this when I was a resident.

https://www.nmcpa.com/blog/deduction...proposal/42502
If I read the bill correctly the only change for gambling losses would affect professional players. Under current law professional gamblers can create a net operating loss by deducting their costs of gambling. Costs include internet, racing forms, travel, etc. The change would treat all costs as gambling losses subject to the gambling winnings limitation.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-02-2017, 11:42 PM   #52
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,553
Rep Power: 10 AndyC will become famous soon enoughAndyC will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by FantasticDan View Post
This Republican tax plans mostly benefits the wealthy and super-wealthy and will add $$$$$$$$ to the deficit.

Still on board, right?
What provision in the bill makes you believe that the wealthy and super-wealthy will be most benefited?
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-03-2017, 12:07 AM   #53
FantasticDan
gelding
 
FantasticDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,028
Rep Power: 15 FantasticDan will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
What provision in the bill makes you believe that the wealthy and super-wealthy will be most benefited?
Plenty of articles out there detailing how..

https://www.vox.com/2017/11/2/165968...ryan-explained

http://theweek.com/articles/734855/h...extremely-rich
FantasticDan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-03-2017, 12:31 AM   #54
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,553
Rep Power: 10 AndyC will become famous soon enoughAndyC will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by FantasticDan View Post
The articles would have you believe that only rich people own stocks and get dividends. And because the dividends will be increased due to lower corporate taxes only the rich will benefit. Of course this kind of ridiculous thinking doesn't consider all of the public pensions, private pensions, 401-Ks, and IRAs that are invested in stocks that will benefit. Most US cities and state governments are under major economic stress because of underfunding of pension plans. Can more dividends really be a problem?
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-03-2017, 10:27 AM   #55
Tom
Registered User
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 81,768
Rep Power: 103 Tom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of light
If the GOP is solidly behind passing this, them I am worried.
they are never 100% behind the people, only themselves.

Sounds like a rush job for talking points and nothing of any substance for us. Where is the sound, well thought out plan they had 8 freaking years to design?

Do not trust the GOP, especially when they tell you they are doing a good job for you.

Bottom line, the GOP just lack the balls to do anything the dems will not like. They are sniveling cowards and liars.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-03-2017, 10:40 AM   #56
incoming
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 568
Rep Power: 13 incoming is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
If the GOP is solidly behind passing this, them I am worried.
they are never 100% behind the people, only themselves.

Sounds like a rush job for talking points and nothing of any substance for us. Where is the sound, well thought out plan they had 8 freaking years to design?

Do not trust the GOP, especially when they tell you they are doing a good job for you.

Bottom line, the GOP just lack the balls to do anything the dems will not like. They are sniveling cowards and liars.
Agreed....they are the best of a worthless lot.
incoming is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-05-2017, 11:11 PM   #57
FantasticDan
gelding
 
FantasticDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,028
Rep Power: 15 FantasticDan will become famous soon enough
FantasticDan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-05-2017, 11:15 PM   #58
MutuelClerk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,997
Rep Power: 12 MutuelClerk is on a distinguished road
Tax The Churches.
MutuelClerk is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-06-2017, 12:05 PM   #59
Tom
Registered User
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 81,768
Rep Power: 103 Tom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of lightTom is a glorious beacon of light
Tax Churches, yes, absolutely.
Tax cuts for the wealthy - You libs need to get a new schtick.,...that lie has been used for too many years now, and it is a lie.

btw, who is Seth Hanlon and who really cares?
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 11-06-2017, 12:21 PM   #60
Clocker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 13,384
Rep Power: 20 Clocker has a spectacular aura aboutClocker has a spectacular aura aboutClocker has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by FantasticDan View Post
Seth Hanlon and others need to read the linked articles before posting them.

Quote:
Despite the research and President Trump's pleas, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Tex.) said Friday that he is unlikely to add changes to health-care policy to the tax legislation, because doing so would doom its chances in the more closely divided Senate.
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
Clocker is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
Is adding 30 to 60 feet to the run up for the Pegasus a good idea?
Yes, good idea - 66.67%
4 Votes
No, bad idea - 33.33%
2 Votes
Total Votes: 6
Non-members may not vote on this poll.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2017 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.