Affects Of The New Gambling Tax Law

[Garnabby]

Dancer is retiring at the end of the year unless the tax laws change. And he's made it very clear, if you read his blog, it's specifically because of the tax laws changing. So either mickey has some insights Dancer does not, or Dancer has some judgement mickey does not. Pick your slot and tax expert.

if you read his blog you would know that Dancer is pretty frail these days. He’s recently written about times he used both power chairs and walkers. He’s also mentioned that it takes a lot of walking to work the advantage slots. Thats something I know a lot about.

The exploitable machines are spread out in the casinos. And just because you make it to a machine doesn’t mean you will get a play. There is a lot of zig zagging around involved, and trips to the restrooms. A young healthy slot hustler making a few laps a day around the advantage machines mid-strip will probably walk 15 miles a day. So how well can a 78 year old man do it?

I just returned from 8 days spent mid strip, 4 days south strip, 4 days downtown, 2 days Laughlin so I’ve seen the territory he works. And I seen the competition he faces from younger slot hustlers. I enjoyed the trip, and I will return. But not for the money. There are better spots for me in this country than the strip. If Bob quits video poker its because his edge is to thin to overcome the new tax law. If he quits advantage slots its because its to much work for him/he’s out competed.

I know you can't read this but you're single ...

MickeyCrimm 101 in a nutshell to a T. Driving forever along some country road taking pictures for others to watch. Never even a girlfriend, but, still shutting out the world. Can't bear to read a few contrary internet gambling message board posts from a few strangers. A tighter grip on the plow handle of life than even MrV's ass on a piece of shit. Ha.

[Dan Druff]

Go to 2:23:34 to hear my long segment on this whole thing. Recorded in July but still applies today.

[Rob.Singer]

if you read his blog you would know that Dancer is pretty frail these days. He’s recently written about times he used both power chairs and walkers. He’s also mentioned that it takes a lot of walking to work the advantage slots. Thats something I know a lot about.

The exploitable machines are spread out in the casinos. And just because you make it to a machine doesn’t mean you will get a play. There is a lot of zig zagging around involved, and trips to the restrooms. A young healthy slot hustler making a few laps a day around the advantage machines mid-strip will probably walk 15 miles a day. So how well can a 78 year old man do it?

I just returned from 8 days spent mid strip, 4 days south strip, 4 days downtown, 2 days Laughlin so I’ve seen the territory he works. And I seen the competition he faces from younger slot hustlers. I enjoyed the trip, and I will return. But not for the money. There are better spots for me in this country than the strip. If Bob quits video poker its because his edge is to thin to overcome the new tax law. If he quits advantage slots its because its to much work for him/he’s out competed.

Well, as of a year ago, he was definitely not "frail," whatever that means. He was actually pounding the strip pavement. Now granted, doing that when it's 105 is probably too taxing in the long run for someone his (and your and my) age, but I would not describe him as "frail." If he's "frail," you and I are decrepit.

You must not have read about him and Bonnie sharing a power chair at Cherokee. He also has written about using a walker. So do you really think he can speed walk the casinos like the young hustlers do? With a walker?

Wasn't aware of their need for assisted walking. Everyone's body eventually wears down. How soon that comes depends on how much the person cares. More proof professional gambling is mainly a younger man's game.

Two actions that are the key to staying in shape as we age which most, for some reason, cannot or will not do: move more and eat less.

[redietz]

Well, as of a year ago, he was definitely not "frail," whatever that means. He was actually pounding the strip pavement. Now granted, doing that when it's 105 is probably too taxing in the long run for someone his (and your and my) age, but I would not describe him as "frail." If he's "frail," you and I are decrepit.

You must not have read about him and Bonnie sharing a power chair at Cherokee. He also has written about using a walker. So do you really think he can speed walk the casinos like the young hustlers do? With a walker?

Wasn't aware of their need for assisted walking. Everyone's body eventually wears down. How soon that comes depends on how much the person cares. More proof professional gambling is mainly a younger man's game.

Two actions that are the key to staying in shape as we age which most, for some reason, cannot or will not do: move more and eat less.

I read everything about the chair and all that. And as of a year ago, he was up-and-down the strip without one.

I find it fascinating that mickey is going to argue with me, instead of Dancer, about why Dancer says he'll retire at the end of the year. Dancer has stated it clearly and unequivocally a dozen times on his blog, and pretty much in every other post. He is retiring because of the tax laws. Not because he's limited in mobility. Not because he's worn out.

Because of the tax laws.

But mickey is going to sit here and type something different because mickey, being omniscient, knows better than Dancer why Dancer is retiring.

Everyone -- just go to LVA and read the damned Dancer blogs yourselves.

[mickeycrimm]

You must not have read about him and Bonnie sharing a power chair at Cherokee. He also has written about using a walker. So do you really think he can speed walk the casinos like the young hustlers do? With a walker?

Wasn't aware of their need for assisted walking. Everyone's body eventually wears down. How soon that comes depends on how much the person cares. More proof professional gambling is mainly a younger man's game.

Two actions that are the key to staying in shape as we age which most, for some reason, cannot or will not do: move more and eat less.

I read everything about the chair and all that. And as of a year ago, he was up-and-down the strip without one.

I find it fascinating that mickey is going to argue with me, instead of Dancer, about why Dancer says he'll retire at the end of the year. Dancer has stated it clearly and unequivocally a dozen times on his blog, and pretty much in every other post. He is retiring because of the tax laws. Not because he's limited in mobility. Not because he's worn out.

Because of the tax laws.

But mickey is going to sit here and type something different because mickey, being omniscient, knows better than Dancer why Dancer is retiring.

Everyone -- just go to LVA and read the damned Dancer blogs yourselves.

I know the logistics of working advantage slots. You don’t know jackshit about it. With video poker you get to sit on your ass in one spot. Not so with slot AP and there is a ton of competition from other slot AP’s for the plays. Other much younger and faster AP’s.

“Up and down the strip” is not to bright on your part. Guess what you are doing when you are out there walking. You are doing everything but playing a machine. You dont make money by walking up and down the strip. You work the strip in sections. Mid strip is pretty easy compared to south strip. And all those properties are owned by CZR so my guess is thats the area Bob worked slot AP.

But I can tell you this much. Slot AP’s are pretty much middle to upper middle class. I know the slot AP average income math. It looks something like winning days total 150K, losing days total 20K. So instead of writing off 20K you will only be able to write off 18K. That’s not going to stop slot AP’s, ditz. The tax bill just ain’t that much higher.

I should qualify the above math. Its for slot AP’s that dont work thin edge.

Another thing I know from experience. If you think a 78 year old man can go from wheelchair/walker to “pounding the strip” you’re an idiot.

PS I’ve read every Dancer blog for the past 30 years.

[mickeycrimm]

It was Dancer’s July 29 blog where he announced he would retire. Redietz, I guess you didn’t see the not so correct information Dancer gave in that blog on how the new law worked. Did it go over your head? I can’t believe a person of your knowledge, experience and intelligence missed it. Its just sitting there big as day. It jumped right out at me. But not you?

I’ll give you some time to go back over it and report back here what you find. Rub a few neurons together.

[Rob.Singer]

Red, there's no way Dancer retires because of a new/different tax law. His having been a successful professional gambler for many years automatically says he knows how to do workarounds where necessary, manipulate certain aspects of his IRS filings, and how to take maximum advantage wherever required in order to maximize net profit. Having had 10 years of doing these things myself, I consider myself an expert at doing them. I strongly suspect he is on a level above that.

[jdaewoo]

This retard has never had a winning year.

[mickeycrimm]

Red, there's no way Dancer retires because of a new/different tax law. His having been a successful professional gambler for many years automatically says he knows how to do workarounds where necessary, manipulate certain aspects of his IRS filings, and how to take maximum advantage wherever required in order to maximize net profit. Having had 10 years of doing these things myself, I consider myself an expert at doing them. I strongly suspect he is on a level above that.

I remember your writing about fully maximizing write offs. I suspect you are better at it than Dancer.

[mickeycrimm]

Funny, I hadn't seen this thread started by Mickey at 6:30am yesterday, and I started my own thread on X about 3 hours ago:

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/#!/x/status/1977258379686076913



Anyway, I completely disagree with Mickey. The pro gambling/poker/sportsbetting world as we know it isn't going to end on 1/1/26.

There are many reasons for this:

1) APs are actually the least susceptible to this, as their wins/losses are self-reported. Casino records on APs are meaningless, since APs often use multiple cards or no card at all. Even when they do use their own cards, they will often pull shenanigans to falsely generate losses. None of this is illegal, either (though some Indian tribes may treat it that way!) Anyway, I can guarantee you that almost every AP fudges their wins for tax reasons, knowing that no records exist to counter them. When I suggested this a few months ago on X, some APs got very mad at me, clutching their pearls and insisting they are honest as Abe Lincoln when it comes to taxes. All I can say is bullshit. People who deceive casinos for a living are not likely to be salt-of-the-earth honest when it comes to their taxes. Therefore, they just need to fudge an additional 11% (which is easy) in order to negate this new law.

2) Poker cash game players also self-report their numbers, and similar to what I stated about APs above, they can just fudge an additional 11% to negate this. I personally know a ton of poker cash players who have admitted to me that they do not accurately report their wins to the IRS. (Obviously I'm not naming them!)

3) Poker tournament players could have an issue, as all of their live tournaments create a paper trail regarding their results. However, if these tournament players play cash games or gamble on other things, they can do that same 11% fudging. My guess is that some will do this fudging, and some won't. However, note that this only affects poker tournament players who itemize their taxes and either lose less than 11% for the year, or win.

4) Sportsbettors could have an issue, but only ones who bet exclusively at books which keep records and submit them to the IRS. Most pro sportsbettors have offshore books which they can use to fudge numbers if they want.


Note that I am not referring to myself here. I'm talking about what gamblers in each community have done and will do, based upon extensive private conversations I've had with people about the subject over the years.

The bottom line is that most people either won't be affected, or will fudge numbers in order to negate the tax increase. The few who are affected and either can't or won't fudge numbers will just end up paying higher taxes. However, this will not decimate any of the gambling communities.

You'll see... a year from now, everything will be similar to today, despite this new law.

What you wrote here is not in disagreement with me. Its pretty much the same as I wrote. The new law is pretty much a nothing burger for those whose wins/losses aren’t being recorded. But there are some individuals around that think its a conspiracy by casino execs to get rid of pros.

Dancer just wrote in his Oct 7 blog that he thinks action in high limit slot rooms will dry up. But I think he wrote some inaccurate things about the tax law. I’ll run it by you guys and see what you think.

[Rob.Singer]

Starting 1/1/26 the new $2000 min for slot w2g's begins (oddly, adjusted for inflation each year after). That will help many recreational gamblers -- and pros who play low to mid level denominations. I know I accumulated about $40k in these type of signers ($1200-$1999) this summer and those won't continue to be issued when I start up again next summer.

Still, with the new "90% law" it won't be very difficult to mitigate any tax increase because of it. If anyone thinks it is....you don't belong in a gambling environment.

[Dan Druff]

Red, there's no way Dancer retires because of a new/different tax law. His having been a successful professional gambler for many years automatically says he knows how to do workarounds where necessary, manipulate certain aspects of his IRS filings, and how to take maximum advantage wherever required in order to maximize net profit. Having had 10 years of doing these things myself, I consider myself an expert at doing them. I strongly suspect he is on a level above that.

Correct.

If Dancer is retiring, it's just because he's old. He's 78 now.

[Dan Druff]

Funny, I hadn't seen this thread started by Mickey at 6:30am yesterday, and I started my own thread on X about 3 hours ago:

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/#!/x/status/1977258379686076913



Anyway, I completely disagree with Mickey. The pro gambling/poker/sportsbetting world as we know it isn't going to end on 1/1/26.

There are many reasons for this:

1) APs are actually the least susceptible to this, as their wins/losses are self-reported. Casino records on APs are meaningless, since APs often use multiple cards or no card at all. Even when they do use their own cards, they will often pull shenanigans to falsely generate losses. None of this is illegal, either (though some Indian tribes may treat it that way!) Anyway, I can guarantee you that almost every AP fudges their wins for tax reasons, knowing that no records exist to counter them. When I suggested this a few months ago on X, some APs got very mad at me, clutching their pearls and insisting they are honest as Abe Lincoln when it comes to taxes. All I can say is bullshit. People who deceive casinos for a living are not likely to be salt-of-the-earth honest when it comes to their taxes. Therefore, they just need to fudge an additional 11% (which is easy) in order to negate this new law.

2) Poker cash game players also self-report their numbers, and similar to what I stated about APs above, they can just fudge an additional 11% to negate this. I personally know a ton of poker cash players who have admitted to me that they do not accurately report their wins to the IRS. (Obviously I'm not naming them!)

3) Poker tournament players could have an issue, as all of their live tournaments create a paper trail regarding their results. However, if these tournament players play cash games or gamble on other things, they can do that same 11% fudging. My guess is that some will do this fudging, and some won't. However, note that this only affects poker tournament players who itemize their taxes and either lose less than 11% for the year, or win.

4) Sportsbettors could have an issue, but only ones who bet exclusively at books which keep records and submit them to the IRS. Most pro sportsbettors have offshore books which they can use to fudge numbers if they want.


Note that I am not referring to myself here. I'm talking about what gamblers in each community have done and will do, based upon extensive private conversations I've had with people about the subject over the years.

The bottom line is that most people either won't be affected, or will fudge numbers in order to negate the tax increase. The few who are affected and either can't or won't fudge numbers will just end up paying higher taxes. However, this will not decimate any of the gambling communities.

You'll see... a year from now, everything will be similar to today, despite this new law.

What you wrote here is not in disagreement with me. Its pretty much the same as I wrote. The new law is pretty much a nothing burger for those whose wins/losses aren’t being recorded. But there are some individuals around that think its a conspiracy by casino execs to get rid of pros.

Dancer just wrote in his Oct 7 blog that he thinks action in high limit slot rooms will dry up. But I think he wrote some inaccurate things about the tax law. I’ll run it by you guys and see what you think.

High limit slot rooms are not going to dry up. Most people there aren't APs. The vast majority in there lose far more than 11% total when you add up their session wins and losses, which means they don't pay any tax under the new law.

I can't read Dancer's column because he wants $3 for it, and there ain't no way I'm paying that.

[redietz]

A couple of views. First from a professional poker player:




Next, the inestimable Fezzik chimes in:





I don't claim to be a tax expert, so I defer to them on this. However, me personally, I have very little exposure to any of these issues.


And finally, I would pay $30 a crack to read Dancer's column. Would not hesitate.

[mickeycrimm]

Here's an excerpt from Dancer's blog dated July 29, 2025:

"For those unaware of how punitive this new law is for professional gamblers, consider two recent years of mine. In both years my W-2Gs added up to about $6 million. I’m playing high denominations games with a small edge. In one year, my gambling score was -$150,000 and in the other, +$200,000. I have non-gambling income as well. I also record my gambling expenses, which I’m entitled to do as I file as a professional gambler.

In the first year, since I lost money gambling, I paid no taxes on the gambling part of my income. In the second year, I paid quite a bit. Nobody likes to pay taxes, certainly including me, but it’s the price we pay to live in this country.

Under the new law, I would only be able to deduce $5.4 million in gambling losses in each year. (W-2Gs are considered proven gambling wins by the IRS and you can deduct up to 90% of them as losses.) That means in both years (one I lost $150,000 and the other I won $200,000), I would owe taxes on $600,000 of phantom income, in addition to the taxes on my other income. Minus 90% of my gambling expenses, of course, but those came nowhere near $600,000.)"
________________________________________

I think Bob has made a wrong assumption here. What do you guys think? The new law states you can write off 90% of your losses against your win. It does not say you should write off 90% of your losses against the total of your W2G's.

Ones net win and the total of their W2G's are two different numbers. For instance, in a session you are stuck 1K then hit a 4K royal and quit the session. You have a W2G in your hand and also your logbook. It's a winning session so you will make an entry in the "winning sessions" column. What number do you write in? You won 3K, not 4K. So 3K is the number that should go in the log book.

[smurgerburger]

People who have higher total w2g amounts than total winning sessions learn to treat w2g results as sessions results because it avoids the hassle of the IRS mistakenly challenging you for underreporting income.

So if your total winning sessions were 200k and your w2gs add up to 250k, and your losing sessions add up to 100k, by IRS rules the correct thing is to report 200k winnings and 100k losses.

But if you do this IME the IRS will send you a letter for underreporting. But if you explain your position you will ultimately win (IME and from what I've heard of others).

So most people will just declare 250k winnings and 150k losses, even if this actually contradicts their session log (assuming they even have one).

But this is actually not relevant to Dancer's argument. His mistake seems to be the statement that he can only deduct up to 90% of winnings.

If you had to treat all w2g income as winning sessions (which you don't under the rules but probably should), and you could only deduct losses up to 90% of winnings (which is incorrect), the you would indeed have the phantom income problem he mentions.

He still has a phantom income problem for both years for a different reason than the one he stated, because he can only deduct 90% of his losses, which in his losing year was not enough to wipe out his winning sessions, and in his winning year makes his notional win a lot bigger than it actually was.

But he could just inflate his losses to offset this (which he couldn't do if he were limited to deducting 90% of wins as he thought he was).

My guess is he just wants to retire. He had already moved away from VP.

[redietz]

People who have higher total w2g amounts than total winning sessions learn to treat w2g results as sessions results because it avoids the hassle of the IRS mistakenly challenging you for underreporting income.

So if your total winning sessions were 200k and your w2gs add up to 250k, and your losing sessions add up to 100k, by IRS rules the correct thing is to report 200k winnings and 100k losses.

But if you do this IME the IRS will send you a letter for underreporting. But if you explain your position you will ultimately win (IME and from what I've heard of others).

So most people will just declare 250k winnings and 150k losses, even if this actually contradicts their session log (assuming they even have one).

But this is actually not relevant to Dancer's argument. His mistake seems to be the statement that he can only deduct up to 90% of winnings.

If you had to treat all w2g income as winning sessions (which you don't under the rules but probably should), and you could only deduct losses up to 90% of winnings (which is incorrect), the you would indeed have the phantom income problem he mentions.

He still has a phantom income problem for both years for a different reason than the one he stated, because he can only deduct 90% of his losses, which in his losing year was not enough to wipe out his winning sessions, and in his winning year makes his notional win a lot bigger than it actually was.

But he could just inflate his losses to offset this (which he couldn't do if he were limited to deducting 90% of wins as he thought he was).

My guess is he just wants to retire. He had already moved away from VP.

He moved away from vp because he could no longer win as in the past. This was likely the result of a number of things: (1) vp has tightened to the point it is impossible, (2) the subtraction of vp machines and replacement of them with slots makes it a tougher grind to even get on the occasional profitable opportunity in vp, and (3) the covert advantages he had with idiosyncratic relationships with casinos (such as the possibility of rebates, which is a topic noticeable by its absence in his columns) have been canceled.

From what Munchkin said to me, Dancer's energy and commitment had not really waned with his aging. Munchkin was somewhat in awe of the energy and hours Dancer brought to the endeavor even though he has more money than God (or something to that effect).

So guessing is often just wrong, but if you don't have information, then I can see coming to those conclusions.

[smurgerburger]

Come to think of it, has anyone else actually read the blog where Dancer claims he will retire because of the tax law or are we all just relying on redietz here?

[mickeycrimm]

Come to think of it, has anyone else actually read the blog where Dancer claims he will retire because of the tax law or are we all just relying on redietz here?

Yes, He announced his retirement in the same July 29 blog that I excerpted here.

[mickeycrimm]

People who have higher total w2g amounts than total winning sessions learn to treat w2g results as sessions results because it avoids the hassle of the IRS mistakenly challenging you for underreporting income.

So if your total winning sessions were 200k and your w2gs add up to 250k, and your losing sessions add up to 100k, by IRS rules the correct thing is to report 200k winnings and 100k losses.

But if you do this IME the IRS will send you a letter for underreporting. But if you explain your position you will ultimately win (IME and from what I've heard of others).

So most people will just declare 250k winnings and 150k losses, even if this actually contradicts their session log (assuming they even have one).

But this is actually not relevant to Dancer's argument. His mistake seems to be the statement that he can only deduct up to 90% of winnings.

If you had to treat all w2g income as winning sessions (which you don't under the rules but probably should), and you could only deduct losses up to 90% of winnings (which is incorrect), the you would indeed have the phantom income problem he mentions.

He still has a phantom income problem for both years for a different reason than the one he stated, because he can only deduct 90% of his losses, which in his losing year was not enough to wipe out his winning sessions, and in his winning year makes his notional win a lot bigger than it actually was.

But he could just inflate his losses to offset this (which he couldn't do if he were limited to deducting 90% of wins as he thought he was).

My guess is he just wants to retire. He had already moved away from VP.

He moved away from vp because he could no longer win as in the past. This was likely the result of a number of things: (1) vp has tightened to the point it is impossible, (2) the subtraction of vp machines and replacement of them with slots makes it a tougher grind to even get on the occasional profitable opportunity in vp, and (3) the covert advantages he had with idiosyncratic relationships with casinos (such as the possibility of rebates, which is a topic noticeable by its absence in his columns) have been canceled.

From what Munchkin said to me, Dancer's energy and commitment had not really waned with his aging. Munchkin was somewhat in awe of the energy and hours Dancer brought to the endeavor even though he has more money than God (or something to that effect).

So guessing is often just wrong, but if you don't have information, then I can see coming to those conclusions.

Freeplay is a rebate. We all get it.