Kicking Things Off - Page 3

jhall23 · #21 01-09-2006, 03:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In many states amateurs are taxed for every session they win, but they aren't allowed to deduct losing sessions from their taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't entirely true is it? I thought I read frequently that you may deduct your loses, but the problem is that you have to itemize them and can no longer take the standard deduction. Am I off here?

This is my first year of serious poker and I haven't done this before so I would like to know.

Chimichonga · #22 01-09-2006, 03:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I thought I read frequently that you may deduct your loses, but the problem is that you have to itemize them and can no longer take the standard deduction.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. The relevant IRS tax topic is here.

Moneyline · #23 01-09-2006, 07:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In many states amateurs are taxed for every session they win, but they aren't allowed to deduct losing sessions from their taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't entirely true is it? I thought I read frequently that you may deduct your loses, but the problem is that you have to itemize them and can no longer take the standard deduction. Am I off here?

This is my first year of serious poker and I haven't done this before so I would like to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately it's true in Massachusetts, and I believe many other states as well. You must report all gambling winnings, but you aren't allowed to claim any gambling losses. This law is one of the main reasons I moved from Massachusetts, because at the time I was an amateur and the taxes would have come close to outgrossing my overall winnings.

Chimichonga · #24 01-10-2006, 07:27 AM

I missed the state part of that whole thing. My post only applies to the federal level. My bad. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

TexasJWP · #25 01-10-2006, 11:16 AM

To *TT*'s point about Texas state laws governing poker (to which I have a vested interest), here's some info I ran across recently:

Texas Poker Laws Frustrate, Infuriate Many

I find it kind of ironic that Texas has some of the strictest laws against "Texas Hold 'Em". That aside, there are a number of establishments in my local area that offer free "for fun" NL tourneys with cash prizes of less than $25. However, value is placed on the chips -- not a dollar value, but a number. Would this still be considered a violation?

SheetWise · #26 01-10-2006, 05:51 PM

The law is ambiguous. There is no distinction between gambling and insurance, except in the mind of the beholder. According to the law, gambling is illegal because it's a vice that serves no purpose -- but insurance is legal because it promotes commerce. It is ok to run a golf tournament and purchase "hole in one insurance" for a million dollar prize (that's not gambling), but illegal to provide shelter for an independent card game if you might incidentally profit from a sale under the same roof. It would be fun to question one of the actuaries who set the premium for hole-in-one-insurance to find out what variables they considered when setting the price, and if profit was considered.

Here's a recent situation I'm aware of. A friend of mine had an exclusive contract to sell T-shirts at a recent Bowl game. Completely honest activity -- all above board. This game allowed both parties to make a significant sum selling "National Champion" T-shirts immediately after the game, but they didn't know who was going to win. The opportunity to sell 4-5M shirts at $20 (with a cost of $2.50) was irresistable, so my friend simply printed shirts for both sides. There was a clear favorite in the game, so the cost of printing if the probable loser won (in lost sales and unsold inventory) was offset by a wager through an offshore bookie. Sounds a lot like insurance to me.

TruePoker CEO · #27 01-11-2006, 08:09 PM

"the number one need in poker legislation today is ..."

Bob, I have tremendous respect for your poker writings.

However, are you kidding ..... THAT is the "number one need in poker legislation" ?

How many players are affected by this #1 issue you picked; "unfair prosecution of innocent players in charity tournaments which get busted" ?

How many players like playing online poker from the US and face a federal legislative threat to that past-time ?

Which need is greater in your view in terms of numbers of affected players and urgency ?

bigballz · #28 01-13-2006, 01:45 AM

Hey bob, remember when I beat you in the 1K garunteed on CNR?

On a serious note, how is that site doing?

LuvDemNutz · #29 03-09-2006, 09:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Bob:

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
To raid a poker tournament and charge every entrant with a crime is as ridiculous as finding every Enron employee guilty because the company did something wrong in its accounting practices.

[/ QUOTE ]

But there are many activities where all participants in addition to the organizer should be arrested. An example might be a crack house.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Even this assertion is a subject for debate.

Hock_ · #30 03-10-2006, 11:49 AM

As a matter of law, ignorance of the law is never an excuse, and there are lots of good reasons for that. In the situation you describe, at most what will happen is that players will have to be more careful about the tournaments they enter -- hardly that severe a burden. There are obviously much more pressing legal/legislative issues facing the poker community.