Printable View
Again: I filed only an A for 2009, and I did not deduct business expenses for that year. Why are you confused about this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
All that stuff you theorized about what arci may have done is clearly contradicted by his posts I showed you, so he did not do them.
I'm having fun watching all of arci's panicky posturing now that he's been caught lying.
Regnis is absolutely right about what the IRS requires, and in their manual it states without question that the contemporaneous gambling log is a must if you expect to properly deduct losses. Contemporaneous = DAILY. Period. Not session, not every winning and losing hand, not some made up rationale because you get caught with your pants down on a forum where you're stupid enough to get Alan to post such pathetic & embarrassing numbers.
I've been through 2 audits, and none of the nonsense the collection of goober gamblers on vpFree claim holds any water at all. The people who claim the IRS only wants W2G wins never had an audit and they never read an IRS manual. The word "contemporaneous" appears over & over again and every auditor has been trained for at least the last ten years on what that means.
Arci, was Deb also blind while you were doing this to her at the same time she was soiling sheets?
I'm not confused at all, but I am wondering why YOU didn't file a Schedule C when you were entitled to file a Schedule C?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
After all -- you clearly used the tax law to your full advantage before, why not in 2009?
Maybe the guy who claims everyone else is a fraud or a phony....is a fraud or a phony himself!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Well at least you finally got the part down where you understand I didnt deduct business expenses in 2009.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Now to your wondering why I didn't file a C for '09. It's simple: due to our income stream that year, it was more advantageous for us not to file showing a 1/3 yr. business. Like I said multiple times Alan, not everyone has a run-of-the-mill/textbook gambler life that has to fall into a zone that you understand. Have a glass of milk and think about it.
As usual Singer tries to assert reality is something he made up in his delusional fantasies. Everything I've said has been 100% supported. Singer is still trying to bluff his way back into believing he has not been completely outed as a long time loser and complete fake.
Now, remember when Singer lied and tried to claim he couldn't file as a business when it wasn't the full year. I called him on it at the time as pure nonsense. Now, he is claiming it was a "decision". LOL. When you lie constantly, they always come back to haunt you. Chalk another "gotcha" for Singer.
Another example of Singer having no clue what is actually happening. I haven't heard of a single audit in the last 5 years where the IRS has not accepted the casino win/loss statement as evidence. It makes sense. The IRS has almost no way to verifying a log except by checking it against the casino data. So, why even bother. Sure they could subpoena bank transfers but that is no guarantee. And, it costs the IRS time (which is money). At most they are talking a few hundred dollars difference and that isn't worth their time. Is the IRS going to spends thousands on a court case to go after some hundred dollar difference? Doubtful. In addition, lawyers go after the IRS for not fairly enforcing the law. When the IRS sets precedence as they have recently, it means they cannot single out an individual and apply different standards. A judge will throw out the case if this can be proven and I think even the IRS internal records will show they accept casino win/loss statements almost all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I think this realism by the IRS is good. Now, if they are dealing with someone winning millions, that would likely be different, but they don't really care about the little guys.
That said, I'm the type that keeps detailed records (I can tell you exactly what my hourly winning were). Not that I ever expect to use them in an audit, simply because it is good business to know as much as you can. This is true in any business.
I have a question. What does the length of time earning in a year have to do with paying taxes on the earnings? Is there a break if you claim seasonal employment or something? I'm trying to fathom Rob's 1/3 year comments. I didn't know the length of time earning something in a year had any real effect on taxes. If you teach for one term or one semester and take the rest of the year off, can you get some kind of break? As a sports writer covering one sport, say college football, can you claim seasonality or something and file differently?
Rob has me confused on this. What is the significance of 1/3 year as opposed to 2/3 or a full year?
One reason not to file a Schedule C is if you didn't want to show employment including self employment.
There aren't many reasons for gamblers to file Schedule C unless they are making a lot of money. The problem with gambling is the deductions just aren't there. There's no "product" you are producing with real costs that could be deducted. And, expenses are minimal. It is almost all travel because casino comps end up paying for almost everything else (and even travel sometimes).Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
But I would think that an "advantage player" would want to take every advantage they could. I wouldn't fault a professional gambler from using a Schedule C. The only question would be what legal deductions did they use? Certainly travel, meals, tips, are all legitimate as are computer time, cell phones, and even advertising if they are promoting themselves to backers/investors.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
What I can't understand is why someone all of a sudden would stop calling themselves a professional after four months? There is no requirement that you have to be full time in order to have a Schedule C business. And even if a business stops after four months, you can still file a Schedule C until the day the business closes.
In fact, I don't see anything on the Schedule C that asks if the business has been terminated or how long the business operated during the year. See: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040sc.pdf
I'm sure you know, Alan, but a business use of a phone or car is prorated. Unless you are using it for business purposes you can't deduct for it. How many business phone calls does a gambler get regarding their business? I know for me the answer is very few. The car mileage was the only major expense for me. Like I said, all my meals and room costs are comped. Now, I'm sure other folks have different situations, but when I looked into it I would pay more taxes as a professional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Isn't the mileage deduction enough for a guy driving from Phoenix? It's about 292 miles each way.
We all have different circumstances and we all try to do what's best for our situations. In our case in 2009 we looked at what type of filing would be our best deal and it was not with a Schedule C....and it was mainly because I had ended my "business" at the end of April. Not everyone does what you do--have a full time business, gambles thousands of dollars each month with whatever money's available and won't retire because of it, and sees the world with eyeglasses that simply don't reach past a little circle in the middle of the page.
I think I just wrote a poem.
Rob I won't retire because of all the beautiful babes who tell me that I'm the last face they see at night or the first face they see in the morning.
You didn't retire, Rob. Your gambling business went belly up. Thank God for the wife who had to work her ass off to support you, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Come to think of it, that's a reason for not filing a Schedule C: there were no profits to offset with expenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by slobdinger
'Nuff said.
Is being a peeping Tom considered a business? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
That was pretty funny, arci.