Originally Posted by
AxelWolf
Originally Posted by
mickeycrimm
How do you know he won $1,000,000?
I think that his proclaimed tax origin story is far less likely to be true than his one million dollar story. If you go back and read his tax myth origin tale, he said he was suddenly able to switch from his losing years as an AP, wherein he wrote off all W2G wins with losses, to being able to file as a "professional." He was somehow able to do this without convincing the IRS he had a profitability model or plan, and without creating a gambling entity, and without entering into a partnership with anyone who had a historically demonstrable profit model.
Then after pulling the switcheroo from amateur to professional without a model or plan or gambling entity or partner-with-demonstrable-clearance, he then wrote off 100K a year in profits by deducting lodging and food and travel expenses -- for 10 years. He did this because where he played in Nevada was not where he lived. There are a few problems with this. First, he claims to have been away from home only a day or two a week while in his professional mode. This really limits one's opportunity to deduct travel expenses. One does have to explain to the IRS that one has a home, after all. Second, the allowed per diem deductions at the time were very modest. I know, because I USED THEM.
Basically, Argentino would have had to be triplets traveling every day to rack up 100K in those kinds of deductions. He isn't triplets, unless one counts Jerry Logan and AcesHi. His mythology also claims he traveled to play video poker just a day or two a week. So the entire 100K in deduction story for 10 years, all without establishing a profitability model or even a profitability direction, is all garbage if you believe he actually won the money.
But it gets better. Argentino says he made it through audits with flying colors.
So what prompted Argentino to make up the 100K-in-deductions-for-10-years-while-maintaining-professional-status stories? The most likely explanation is that he was involved in the whole arci tax comparison argument, and it seemed likely he was gonna have to explain his tax returns at some point. He was going to have to explain his zeroed out gambling income some way.
Sometimes you have to read between the lines. Argentino goes out of his way to NOT say he filed as a "professional gambler." Instead, he simply says he filed as a "professional." Well, as a professional what? A professional in general? A professional video poker player, which could just be someone who "gives lessons" and "writes books?" I suppose he could have filed as a "professional" while making nothing net from playing video poker. Therefore, he was not a "professional gambler" in any sense. That would explain the zero net income, and getting through audits. It would explain the IRS never calling him on it. It would also make the 100K a year in video poker winnings for 10 years not very likely, according to his own tax returns.