View Single Post
  #76  
Old 11-10-2005, 12:22 AM
danderso8 danderso8 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: It smells like sulfur still
Posts: 168
Default Re: Ed Miller\'s Tax Article

hi Russ,

It looks like you've drummed up quite a bit of business for yourself with this thread! I read your poker & taxes articles, and found them very informative.

I do have one thing to point out that many seem to have missed in the Groetzinger case...

The court used "full-time" as one of its reasons that Groetzinger did indeed qualify as a professional gambler. However, that does not mean that being full time is an absolute requirement...that is, the court said, in effect, "Meeting conditions w, x, y, & z qualify a person as a pro gambler." That does not imply that only meeting conditions x, y, & z (while failing to meet w) necessarily disqualifies a person from that status. It would likely raise the bar for them on the other conditions, but I don't see anything in that decision that makes "full-time" a rigid requirement.

--Dan
Reply With Quote