Money won -- but lost with Neteller: when is it a Tax write -off?

[gringo]

I wonder if any cpa's know when we can write off the money we can not get to in Neteller? I am referring to a person who files as a professional player.

[Fishhead24]

Its a GAMBLING LOSS.......I would report it when you are certain you cannot recieve your money.

[adanthar]

No, it's not. Assuming you still have not seen this money at the end of 2007, there's a special form you fill out - the same one you would fill out if, for example, you have 10K in your wallet and it gets stolen. The IRS will likely want to see proof of this, but that is easy to come by.

[bossplayer]

Maybe we will know by tax time.....

[jaminbird]

If I had a lot of money stuck in Neteller I would proceed under the assumption that constructive receipt has not taken place yet since I have ZERO access to or control over the money. When and if Neteller later paid me I would declare it as income for the year that they paid.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
If I had a lot of money stuck in Neteller I would proceed under the assumption that constructive receipt has not taken place yet since I have ZERO access to or control over the money. When and if Neteller later paid me I would declare it as income for the year that they paid.

[/ QUOTE ]

[sdfsdf]

wooo no constructive receipt WHAT U WITHDRAWL = WHAT YOU'VE MADE

[fnord_too]

I believe this would be the same as writing off a bad debt. I would say if you haven't been paid by the end of the year you can right it off, but if you ever recoup the money or part there of afterwards you would have to declare it.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
If I had a lot of money stuck in Neteller I would proceed under the assumption that constructive receipt has not taken place yet since I have ZERO access to or control over the money. When and if Neteller later paid me I would declare it as income for the year that they paid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, it doesnt work that way. Depends on when did you have the money in Neteller? If it was there before Jan 2007, then it was taxable. Then you would claim a theft loss, if by the end of this year, you dont collect. I need to research whether the rules on claim theft/uncollectible debt losses. I'll report back.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe this would be the same as writing off a bad debt. I would say if you haven't been paid by the end of the year you can right it off, but if you ever recoup the money or part there of afterwards you would have to declare it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, no. It would have to be declared in the year you won the bet.

[MasterLJ]

If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over.

In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over. In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Which is why the IRS will tax you on it in 2006, even if you never receive a red cent.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over.

In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but all this crap in '07 just showed that money in Neteller is not 'constructive receipt'. Read the Neteller T&C - they reserve the right to not pay you your money for a variety of reasons. Look at poker sites like FTP looking up funds at cashout pending 'reviews'.

Money online is not 100% under your control until you get it with sketchy sites like these. All this crap in '07 just proves the point.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over.

In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but all this crap in '07 just showed that money in Neteller is not 'constructive receipt'. Read the Neteller T&C - they reserve the right to not pay you your money for a variety of reasons. Look at poker sites like FTP looking up funds at cashout pending 'reviews'.

Money online is not 100% under your control until you get it with sketchy sites like these. All this crap in '07 just proves the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good argument, but i'm not sure it would hold water. Neteller had a 100% payout rate in 2006.... that would be the IRS's counter-argument. They would want to see that you made a payout request in 2006, and that you were denied.

Your argument does have some merit though. I'm going to research this some more...

[MasterLJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over.

In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but all this crap in '07 just showed that money in Neteller is not 'constructive receipt'. Read the Neteller T&C - they reserve the right to not pay you your money for a variety of reasons. Look at poker sites like FTP looking up funds at cashout pending 'reviews'.

Money online is not 100% under your control until you get it with sketchy sites like these. All this crap in '07 just proves the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just posting my 2 cents. Just remember, you can argue against what I said until you are blue in the face, but it isn't me you have to convince, it would be some IRS agent during an audit. That being said, I would use caution or at the very least make a best-effort to report all winnings so that an audit would result in penalties and not prison time.

[rwesty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over.

In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but all this crap in '07 just showed that money in Neteller is not 'constructive receipt'. Read the Neteller T&C - they reserve the right to not pay you your money for a variety of reasons. Look at poker sites like FTP looking up funds at cashout pending 'reviews'.

Money online is not 100% under your control until you get it with sketchy sites like these. All this crap in '07 just proves the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is the case would it mean that you could legally only pay taxes on what you have withdrawn from the poker sites and into your bank account? As I currently understand it, you are supposed to pay the second you earn it on the site.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
If this is the case would it mean that you could legally only pay taxes on what you have withdrawn from the poker sites and into your bank account? As I currently understand it, you are supposed to pay the second you earn it on the site.


[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct, those stating otherwise are wrong and just using wishful thinking in a futile attempt to convince themselves (and others) that it is a gambling loss.

[jaminbird]

Hypothetical: Jack gives Tom 10 Million dollars on December 31st 2006. On January 1st 2007 Jack sneaks into Tom's house and steals the money back.

You people are honestly taking the position that Tom would go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if he fails to pay 3.5 million dollars in taxes? That is so outrageous I don't even know where to begin.

The moment I request a withdrawal from neteller and they tell me no, I no longer have control over the money and it is either a loss or it was never income in the first place. If/when it gets recovered I would gladly pay my tax.

[Uglyowl]

You will only have to argue if you get audited.

I think it is a reasonable enough argument to pursue this route without knowingly and fraudulently filing your taxes.

NOTE: Just my opinion (I guess I have to say that for some reason /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Very fascinating discussion BTW

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetical: Jack gives Tom 10 Million dollars on December 31st 2006. On January 1st 2007 Jack sneaks into Tom's house and steals the money back.

You people are honestly taking the position that Tom would go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if he fails to pay 3.5 million dollars in taxes? That is so outrageous I don't even know where to begin.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's exactly what would happen (so long as it was income rather than a gift). There's really no argument that it would be any other way. Likewise, there's no argument that Neteller losses in January 2007 can affect your '06 taxes.

[jaminbird]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetical: Jack gives Tom 10 Million dollars on December 31st 2006. On January 1st 2007 Jack sneaks into Tom's house and steals the money back.

You people are honestly taking the position that Tom would go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if he fails to pay 3.5 million dollars in taxes? That is so outrageous I don't even know where to begin.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's exactly what would happen (so long as it was income rather than a gift). There's really no argument that it would be any other way. Likewise, there's no argument that Neteller losses in January 2007 can affect your '06 taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sir are full of crap. Tax evasion is not a strict liability crime; therefore, a conviction requires that the requisite mens rea be satisfied. Assuming Tom didn't have 3.5 mil laying around then there is no way he could pay and since his inability to pay is not a result of his actions, there is no mens rea.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
You people are honestly taking the position that Tom would go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if he fails to pay 3.5 million dollars in taxes? That is so outrageous I don't even know where to begin.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not me, I am taking the only reasonable position (which has nothing to do with your drama queen addition about going to prison), which is that if Jack paid Tom the money as any sort of income then Tom owes the tax due period. No exception, how can you think otherwise? Suppose Tom's house burns down do you think he had income or not? If so why is that any different? Suppose a different person stole Tom's money? Why would that be any different? Use that head for something other than a hatstand my child.

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over. In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Which is why the IRS will tax you on it in 2006, even if you never receive a red cent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup - you owe taxes AND get no money.

I guess that's about the best outcome you can expect when you participate in a criminal conspiracy.

[cardcounter0]

Bad example.

A better example would be Jack tells Tom he has 10 million dollars in his pocket. Jack tells Tom he can have it whenever he gets around to asking for it.

Tom asks Jack for the money the next day. Tom says Uhhhh... I think it is in my other pants. I don't know when I will get back with ya, but don't worry, it is safe in my pants.

Did Tom every have 'constructive reciept' of that 10 million, so that he has to pay taxes on it? Did he ever have 100% control over the money?

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetical: Jack gives Tom 10 Million dollars on December 31st 2006. On January 1st 2007 Jack sneaks into Tom's house and steals the money back.

You people are honestly taking the position that Tom would go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if he fails to pay 3.5 million dollars in taxes? That is so outrageous I don't even know where to begin.

The moment I request a withdrawal from neteller and they tell me no, I no longer have control over the money and it is either a loss or it was never income in the first place. If/when it gets recovered I would gladly pay my tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesnt matter at all that you "no longer have control" over the Neteller money. What matters is that you did at one point have control....your choice not to exercise it does not make it a non-taxable event.

In fact, this whole Neteller argument is moot. It was actually taxable when you won your bet at the online casino.

"Outrageous"?.... yes, but tax law isnt written to conform to common sense. And to answer your first question, it's not even a gray area. Tom absolutely owes 3.5m in taxes (assuming the "gift" was taxable income).

[adanthar]

The argument I would use is this:

Tom earns some money from Bob in 2006. Bob is out of town, so he gives the money to Jack to give to Tom. Tom knows Jack is trustworthy, so he forgets about it until he needs it on April 15'th. In the meantime, Jack gets arrested and spends all the money for bail. Tom is pissed at Jack but never gets his cash in 2007.

Tom clearly never had constructive possession and does not owe taxes. The fact that he could have asked for the money is irrelevant since he never actually did so.

edit: Every precedent you will be able to find about this matter undoubtedly deals with B&M and not Internet investments. However, if we treat Neteller as a bank and treat our assets as frozen, in a B&M situation, the IRS and the audited party would likely jointly go to a judge and would ask him to order the assets unfrozen to pay the taxes. I suspect that the end result, if any, would be similar.

[Russ Fox]

The doctrine of constructive receipt determines the answer. But it's not just Neteller you have to look at; you have to consider the poker site(s), too.

Let's look at a hypothetical example. A gambles on a pokersite, and wins some money. He continues to win, earning $200 on the site in 2006. In late January he cashes out to Neteller, and his funds are frozen. Does he owe tax on his $200 in gambling winnings in 2006?

Clearly he does. He had constructive receipt on the site in 2006. He continued to gamble with the funds in 2006. He could have cashed out in 2006. The fact that his funds were frozen in the Neteller fiasco in 2007 has no relevance to his 2006 taxes.

A would also have a casualty loss in 2007 (assuming he never gets his funds from Neteller). You can deduct a casualty loss in either the year of occurance or the prior year (you must make that by the due date of the current year's tax return--in this case, April 15, 2008). Right now, we don't know if there's a casualty loss. We could all read tomorrow that Neteller has unfrozen the funds.

The casualty loss deduction has some unpleasant features. You must deduct $100 from the loss if the casualty loss concerned "personal-use" property. Then you must subtract 10% of your adjusted gross income from this. Thus, most people won't be able to take a casualty loss if the Neteller funds are truly absconded with.

There's a much stronger case that gambling winnings that were cashed out to Neteller on (say) January 17th, right before the Neteller fiasco broke, were never constructively received.

Of course, you could exclude the gambling winnings on your 2006 tax return. As long as you're not audited, you won't have any problems. But if you are, you will likely owe tax on those winnings.

As an aside, I wrote an article last month on my tax blog discussing the ZeeJustin funds siezure and whether or not he'll have to pay tax on those funds. The article is available here. (http://www.taxabletalk.com/posts/1141074338.shtml)

-- Russ Fox
co-author, "Why You Lose at Poker"

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming Tom didn't have 3.5 mil laying around ....

[/ QUOTE ]

But in your example, he *did* have 3.5 million laying around..... therefore, tax due.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetical: Jack gives Tom 10 Million dollars on December 31st 2006. On January 1st 2007 Jack sneaks into Tom's house and steals the money back.

You people are honestly taking the position that Tom would go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison if he fails to pay 3.5 million dollars in taxes? That is so outrageous I don't even know where to begin.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's exactly what would happen (so long as it was income rather than a gift). There's really no argument that it would be any other way. Likewise, there's no argument that Neteller losses in January 2007 can affect your '06 taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sir are full of crap. Tax evasion is not a strict liability crime; therefore, a conviction requires that the requisite mens rea be satisfied. Assuming Tom didn't have 3.5 mil laying around then there is no way he could pay and since his inability to pay is not a result of his actions, there is no mens rea.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess he could report $3.5 million of income and just not pay the tax. I assume failure to pay is just a civil offense.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
The argument I would use is this:

Tom earns some money from Bob in 2006. Bob is out of town, so he gives the money to Jack to give to Tom. Tom knows Jack is trustworthy, so he forgets about it until he needs it on April 15'th. In the meantime, Jack gets arrested and spends all the money for bail. Tom is pissed at Jack but never gets his cash in 2007.

Tom clearly never had constructive possession and does not owe taxes. The fact that he could have asked for the money is irrelevant since he never actually did so.

edit: Every precedent you will be able to find about this matter undoubtedly deals with B&M and not Internet investments. However, if we treat Neteller as a bank and treat our assets as frozen, in a B&M situation, the IRS and the audited party would likely jointly go to a judge and would ask him to order the assets unfrozen to pay the taxes. I suspect that the end result, if any, would be similar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, you are incorrect. Actual possession is not a factor in contstructive receipt. Doesnt matter that he didnt ask for the money, it's whether he could have or not.

In your example, if the judge turned down the IRS's request to unfreeze the assets, you would still owe the tax.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
The doctrine of constructive receipt determines the answer. But it's not just Neteller you have to look at; you have to consider the poker site(s), too.

Let's look at a hypothetical example. A gambles on a pokersite, and wins some money. He continues to win, earning $200 on the site in 2006. In late January he cashes out to Neteller, and his funds are frozen. Does he owe tax on his $200 in gambling winnings in 2006?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is extremely cautious advice, once again bordering on the absurd. If I deposited $1,000 into Pokerspot, won a tournament the next day, cashed out 1 hour later and never got paid because the site went belly up immediately following, I clearly never had constructive receipt of the money, just as if I'd won a hand in a B&M game in NYC thirty seconds before the police raided the joint. If you waited three months to cash out, yes, it's a gray area. However, it's clearly not as black and white as you are saying in your post.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
Bad example.

A better example would be Jack tells Tom he has 10 million dollars in his pocket. Jack tells Tom he can have it whenever he gets around to asking for it.

Tom asks Jack for the money the next day. Tom says Uhhhh... I think it is in my other pants. I don't know when I will get back with ya, but don't worry, it is safe in my pants.

Did Tom every have 'constructive reciept' of that 10 million, so that he has to pay taxes on it? Did he ever have 100% control over the money?

[/ QUOTE ]

No! This is different because Jack did not give Tom the money when he asked. Therefore, no tax.

Is the Neteller situation analogous? No, since the test is when was the first time you could have asked for the money (from the offshore casino actually, not Neteller).

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The doctrine of constructive receipt determines the answer. But it's not just Neteller you have to look at; you have to consider the poker site(s), too.

Let's look at a hypothetical example. A gambles on a pokersite, and wins some money. He continues to win, earning $200 on the site in 2006. In late January he cashes out to Neteller, and his funds are frozen. Does he owe tax on his $200 in gambling winnings in 2006?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is extremely cautious advice, once again bordering on the absurd. If I deposited $1,000 into Pokerspot, won a tournament the next day, cashed out 1 hour later and never got paid because the site went belly up immediately following, I clearly never had constructive receipt of the money, just as if I'd won a hand in a B&M game in NYC thirty seconds before the police raided the joint. If you waited three months to cash out, yes, it's a gray area. However, it's clearly not as black and white as you are saying in your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Non-taxable, because your example is different. You cashed out 1 hr after your victory, and never get paid? Not taxable, because you asked for your money as soon as available.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bad example.

A better example would be Jack tells Tom he has 10 million dollars in his pocket. Jack tells Tom he can have it whenever he gets around to asking for it.

Tom asks Jack for the money the next day. Tom says Uhhhh... I think it is in my other pants. I don't know when I will get back with ya, but don't worry, it is safe in my pants.

Did Tom every have 'constructive reciept' of that 10 million, so that he has to pay taxes on it? Did he ever have 100% control over the money?

[/ QUOTE ]

No! This is different because Jack did not give Tom the money when he asked. Therefore, no tax.

Is the Neteller situation analogous? No, since the test is when was the first time you could have asked for the money (from the offshore casino actually, not Neteller).

[/ QUOTE ]

You do not have constructive reciept of money in an offshore casino account either. You 'request' a cash out, the cash out 'request' is subject to review of the site. The site could claim chip dumping, or credit card fraud, etc. The money is not under your control, it is subject to terms and conditions of the site. The fact that they transfer the money to another site, which also does not give you control over the money, did not give you constructive receipt.

I notice in Russ's article on Zee Justin he shows that constructive receipt occured on the money that the site allowed to be cashed out and was actually received. The money kept by the site he claims was not under his control because the site took it back, although technically Zee Justin could have cashed the winnings immediately after the tourney. Of course, he might not have got it, Stars would have 'reviewed' the cash out request, and caught the cheating. This 'review' process shows you do not have complete control of money on a poker site.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
You do not have constructive reciept of money in an offshore casino account either. You 'request' a cash out, the cash out 'request' is subject to review of the site. The site could claim chip dumping, or credit card fraud, etc. The money is not under your control, it is subject to terms and conditions of the site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming your payout request happens immediately after winning, it is very simple:
1. If they reject your request, no constructive receipt, and no tax
2. If they accept it, it is taxable

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that they transfer the money to another site, which also does not give you control over the money, did not give you constructive receipt.

[/ QUOTE ]

False. Assuming we're talking in the year 2006 here, it does give you control over the money.

[ QUOTE ]
I notice in Russ's article on Zee Justin he shows that constructive receipt occured on the money that the site allowed to be cashed out and was actually received. The money kept by the site he claims was not under his control because the site took it back, although technically Zee Justin could have cashed the winnings immediately after the tourney. Of course, he might not have got it, Stars would have 'reviewed' the cash out request, and caught the cheating. This 'review' process shows you do not have complete control of money on a poker site.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's right. That's why you need to show that to the IRS, by immediately requesting a cashout. If you dont, and let's say for example that the site goes bankrupt a year later, the IRS can still tax you on the winnings.

[SamG]

i'm curious what changes here for those of us with money stuck on pokes. i have 5 figures there (all winnings) which i tried to withdraw in sept/oct 06 and never recived. how do i declare that?

two differences from the neteller situation:

1) it's a poker site (with a spotty history) and not a publicly-traded co.
2) i tried to withdraw in 06 and couldn't

help?

[cardcounter0]

Sounds like you didn't really make any money, so nothing to declare.

[sdfsdf]

[ QUOTE ]
If I recall, the definition of "winning," is any funds you have reasonable control over.

In this case you have no control over it, HOWEVER, all this crap started happening in '07, not in '06, so it's sort of a weird situation. You could have gotten your money out in '06 but chose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]
how would they ever even be able to prove you won money in the first place if you never withdrew it in 06 and aren't able to now?

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like you didn't really make any money, so nothing to declare.

[/ QUOTE ]

cardcounter... you demonstrate that clear constructive receipt had already occurred, the moment you move money off a poker site... By moving from one financial account to another, that you had control over the funds is clearly established.

That you later lose control, does not change the fact that you had control at some point in time, since the money was earned at the tables.

It might even be argued, that constructive receipt is demonstrated, as soon as money you've won on one table, is put onto another table...

In the Neteller situation... Neteller hasn't reclaimed your funds... you stil have a Neteller account IN YOUR POSESSION...

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
you stil have a Neteller account IN YOUR POSESSION...


[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to call neteller they won't answer the phone, I tried to get in online chat and it won't work, they do not respond to emails, I tried to access the account but I can't log on ....

Where is this account I have in my POSESSION...? I have searched all over the house for it.

Money moved from a poker account I do not have constructive receipt over into a neteller account I do not have constructive receipt over ... at what point did I have constructive receipt? The nanoseconds while it was traveling from one to the other via an EFT? Is there a way to intercept this EFT and send it to my pocket instead?

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a way to intercept this EFT and send it to my pocket instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

Paper check?

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you stil have a Neteller account IN YOUR POSESSION...


[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to call neteller they won't answer the phone, I tried to get in online chat and it won't work, they do not respond to emails, I tried to access the account but I can't log on ....

Where is this account I have in my POSESSION...? I have searched all over the house for it.

Money moved from a poker account I do not have constructive receipt over into a neteller account I do not have constructive receipt over ... at what point did I have constructive receipt? The nanoseconds while it was traveling from one to the other via an EFT? Is there a way to intercept this EFT and send it to my pocket instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

All moot. Constructive receipt existed in 2006, because you could have cashed out immediately after winning.
Taxable.

It's irrelevant that:
1. you chose not to cash out
2. later, Neteller froze your funds

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm curious what changes here for those of us with money stuck on pokes. i have 5 figures there (all winnings) which i tried to withdraw in sept/oct 06 and never recived. how do i declare that?

two differences from the neteller situation:

1) it's a poker site (with a spotty history) and not a publicly-traded co.
2) i tried to withdraw in 06 and couldn't

help?

[/ QUOTE ]

No income to declare for you. The key is that you attempted to withdraw in '06 and they didnt let you. Keep a record of that email correspondence.

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you stil have a Neteller account IN YOUR POSESSION...


[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to call neteller they won't answer the phone, I tried to get in online chat and it won't work, they do not respond to emails, I tried to access the account but I can't log on ....

Where is this account I have in my POSESSION...? I have searched all over the house for it.

Money moved from a poker account I do not have constructive receipt over into a neteller account I do not have constructive receipt over ... at what point did I have constructive receipt? The nanoseconds while it was traveling from one to the other via an EFT? Is there a way to intercept this EFT and send it to my pocket instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

All moot. Constructive receipt existed in 2006, because you could have cashed out immediately after winning.
Taxable.

It's irrelevant that:
1. you chose not to cash out
2. later, Neteller froze your funds

[/ QUOTE ]

All so wrong. So wrong. Wrong.

[sports_quant99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you stil have a Neteller account IN YOUR POSESSION...


[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to call neteller they won't answer the phone, I tried to get in online chat and it won't work, they do not respond to emails, I tried to access the account but I can't log on ....

Where is this account I have in my POSESSION...? I have searched all over the house for it.

Money moved from a poker account I do not have constructive receipt over into a neteller account I do not have constructive receipt over ... at what point did I have constructive receipt? The nanoseconds while it was traveling from one to the other via an EFT? Is there a way to intercept this EFT and send it to my pocket instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

All moot. Constructive receipt existed in 2006, because you could have cashed out immediately after winning.
Taxable.

It's irrelevant that:
1. you chose not to cash out
2. later, Neteller froze your funds

[/ QUOTE ]

All so wrong. So wrong. Wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope....get a clue. And call an accountant. While you're at it, google on "constructive receipt".