Documenting History

[arcimede$]

Arci, sorry but you got caught in YET another lie....and they get more stupid by the lie. Yes GT published some of my big jackpot pictures, you know, like I do here. But whenever they did that or I wrote about big jackpots that they either did not have room to put up the picture or I didn't take one, I ALWAYS was required to show them my W2G's.

And we know this because .... you said so? Bwah haha haha haha haha. The fact you are a pathological liar just might make one tend to doubt your silly assertions. You have claimed to have sent in for tax returns weeks ago and Alan still hasn't seen them. Yet another example of your unending lies.

[arcimede$]

do you not recall that I said the IRS sent me mail saying they need to know if you're an atty., trustee, mortgage co., or whatever, because my filings involve schedule C's....and that I wasn't responding because arci failed to bother filing his? What am I supposed to tell them, that I'm having 7 years worth of tax returns sent to the media?

Another lie. Why would the IRS care? As long as the person requesting the tax forms is the taxpayer then there is absolutely no reason the IRS would ever care where it was going. This is clearly Singer's backup lie to try and avoid the FACT he never sent in for any tax forms. Alan will NEVER see Singer's tax forms because they do not support his claims of winning. This is identical to the claims of having information supporting his system that we were supposed to have gotten by last October.

All lies, lie after lie after lie. It never ends with Singer.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, why don't you take a photo of the letter from the IRS asking for confirmation about who is getting your tax returns -- and post it here. Black out your address and other personal data. Let's see the letter. Shouldn't be a problem since you have mastered posting photos of royals. :-)

[redietz]

This whole argument is odd. Arci knows that whether Rob won or lost is irrelevant in evaluating Rob's "systems." Alan is more interested in seeing someone's angles to provide off the wall deductions than anything else. It is bizarre stuff.

By the way, back when I took deductions for food in LV as a business expense, you were allowed to deduct groceries up to the per diem limit for the particular city in which you were staying, which varied. Las Vegas went from a cheap per diem city to an expensive one over the last two decades. There was no real delineation made between deducting for actual restaurant tabs and money spent on groceries if you had a kitchenette. Why is this so surprising?

[Alan Mendelson]

There was no real delineation made between deducting for actual restaurant tabs and money spent on groceries if you had a kitchenette. Why is this so surprising?

That's a good explanation. I've only asked for Rob's. And I am sure there are more deductions. Here is the issue, as it appears to me: Rob has claimed annual video poker PROFITS averaging about $100,000 a year over ten years, yet claims that he paid NO federal taxes on those profits because of other business expenses. Well, there must be more than groceries for a kitchenette in a hotel room in a city away from home, don't you think? And again, what interests me is the IRS reasoning that allowed the deductions.

Heck, Rob's tax history might be helpful to the rest of us.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, I am sure that a note to the IRS to confirm that you want your returns sent to me will be sufficient. If you need a title for me, call me a "business consultant."

I still don't understand why it makes a difference to you if your returns are sent to me first?

Now, for the record: I don't want your returns. But I don't want you putting an article on GT saying that Arc backed out of the challenge because that isn't true.

Frankly, I think this whole "challenge" is stupid. So I have another idea: use your space in GT to write about something more interesting and more important. I am absolutely positive that you have other, better uses, for the space in that paper.

Yes the challenge is a stupid one. Glad you agree on that. But what other kind of "creativity" could you possibly expect when it comes to arci--ESPECIALLY when it comes to his obsession & frustration over me!?

Me sending my returns to you first has never been an issue. That's partly why I got my form mailed ASAP, and why without thinking I believed arci would be getting his mailed promptly as well. But as we have all seen and as I should have realized trom the start, arci never had any intention of sending his in, ever. His endless dithering, stalling with suddenly requiring an NDA after claiming he had nothing to hide, and his hilarious assertion about "fake forms" actually sealed his fate on this rather nicely--esp. for my article.

The exception is in how you decided, apparently out of the blue, that he need not even begin the process of sending his form in until after you receive my returns. So again I ask you, what do you think he'd do if it were the other way around? You've already seen him cry "fake forms!". Take the hint from the neurotic phoney, will you?

The IRS already has your name/address. How did you miss that? The request, again, was for a business identification. "Business Consultant" does seem OK, and now I'll do as you've done and not send it in--and remember I sent that cancellation request in just before receiving the designation request--until you & arci can confirm that he has FINALLY sent in his form. So move fast.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, re: this fascination you have about my grocery deductions---think about what I've told you MULTIPLE TIMES. There are very few of them each year, AND THE IRS HAS NEVER TAKEN EXCEPTION TO THEM OR COMMENTED ON THEM, in audits or elsewhere. So what is it that will scratch your itch over this? If you really want to get your own personal read, DEDUCT THEM YOURSELF FOR YOUR OWN BUSINESS EXPENSES THIS YEAR, then see what happens!

So now you want me to post a pic of the letter I received. OK, let me make one up with an IRS Ogden address and the IRS logo, then I'll post it How silly--as soon as it appears arci will claim it was just that: fake! Have you not figured him out yet?

[Rob.Singer]

That's a good explanation. I've only asked for Rob's. And I am sure there are more deductions. Here is the issue, as it appears to me: Rob has claimed annual video poker PROFITS averaging about $100,000 a year over ten years, yet claims that he paid NO federal taxes on those profits because of other business expenses. Well, there must be more than groceries for a kitchenette in a hotel room in a city away from home, don't you think? And again, what interests me is the IRS reasoning that allowed the deductions.

Heck, Rob's tax history might be helpful to the rest of us.

Alan, I've already explained how I mitigated about $100k/year in net vp profits. I deducted just about every possible expense I experienced, even if it was a few words over dinner out with my wife. I had full-time rental cars, home business use deductions and back yard bbq business meetings, I deducted ALL of my gasoline....everything you can and cannot think of, because, once again, I had help. And I know why you are so interested--it's because you yourself are looking for the same loopholes. Just think of how GE, with their hundreds of former IRS agent employees as their loophole-finders, would do it. That was the model I followed. Plus those groceries....just think of how an auditor might react when told how the deduction would have been 10 times as much if I had to travel for the discussion.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, I've already explained how I mitigated about $100k/year in net vp profits. I deducted just about every possible expense I experienced, even if it was a few words over dinner out with my wife. I had full-time rental cars, home business use deductions and back yard bbq business meetings, I deducted ALL of my gasoline....everything you can and cannot think of, because, once again, I had help. And I know why you are so interested--it's because you yourself are looking for the same loopholes. Just think of how GE, with their hundreds of former IRS agent employees as their loophole-finders, would do it. That was the model I followed. Plus those groceries....just think of how an auditor might react when told how the deduction would have been 10 times as much if I had to travel for the discussion.

Yes Rob, this would be an amazing piece of tax preparation work. And if you had documentation of such tax preparation genius it would be a story I would be proud to tell the world. So, is there IRS documentation supporting that you offset $100K per year of real video poker profits (over and above offsetting gambling losses)? If you have it, you really are DA MAN !!

[quahaug]

Rob is really losing it this time, but He's so self absorbed it's going right over his head. He just doesn't get it. Amazing.

[Vegas_lover]

I think it was a useless next round to the never ending match to begin with. But now I see why. Those two now have a reason to beat eachother up over this for the next couple of months. And we're all feeding the dragons. @qauhaug, I tend to agree with you on this one.

[quahaug]

I think it was a useless next round to the never ending match to begin with. But now I see why. Those two now have a reason to beat eachother up over this for the next couple of months. And we're all feeding the dragons. @qauhaug, I tend to agree with you on this one.

Amen Brotha! If Arci was smart He'd keep his big mouth shut this time.

[Rob.Singer]

Yes Rob, this would be an amazing piece of tax preparation work. And if you had documentation of such tax preparation genius it would be a story I would be proud to tell the world. So, is there IRS documentation supporting that you offset $100K per year of real video poker profits (over and above offsetting gambling losses)? If you have it, you really are DA MAN !!

I can see how this would be "amazing" to someone who has never filed as a pro gambler, and who has no help from an IRS employee.

What do you mean "is there IRS documentation supporting my deductions"? I always kept a boatload of receipts, and as I've said numerous times, my 3 sit down audits had to do with their disbelief that anyone from Az. could travel so much to & from Nv. as a professional gambler, and actually net a profit from the vp machines. It never made sense to them, and they were bedazzled by the hundreds of thousands of dollars in W2G's I amassed each year. Deep discussions about all THAT is what these audits were all about. There was very little back & forth about deductions. The losses alone, while far less than the wins, were equally baffling to these people every audit.

Is this clear now?

[Rob.Singer]

Amen Brotha! If Arci was smart He'd keep his big mouth shut this time.

I think you need another peek at my $5 royal from last week. That's all it takes to keep ARCI quiet....

[Alan Mendelson]

Sure it's clear what you say, Rob. I would just like to know if you have anything in writing from the IRS about deducting things such as groceries, barbecues at home and anything else that appears to be "unusual" for a business deduction? Yes or no. If you don't have it, just say so.

[a2a3dseddie]

The IRS already has your name/address. How did you miss that? The request, again, was for a business identification. "Business Consultant" does seem OK, and now I'll do as you've done and not send it in--and remember I sent that cancellation request in just before receiving the designation request--until you & arci can confirm that he has FINALLY sent in his form. So move fast.

So, this is still on?

[slingshot]

So, this is still on?

Not really. I just glance at the post occasionly for a laugh. I'm surprised Rob even tries to work with them.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob doesn't have to work with anybody. If Rob wants to prove what he has claimed he simply has to have the IRS send me his tax returns so that I can verify his claims. That is the real issue here. The complication is that somehow Arc got involved in this and made it some sort of challenge.

Again I will say it: if Rob wants to prove his claims there is a way to do it. He simply has to have the IRS send me his tax returns. I will accept the years Rob has selected. If they show huge wins and no tax liability because of non-gambling deductions (in other words, offsets for losses don't count) I will be very impressed with Rob's "tax work."

Again, I do not doubt that Rob had big wins playing his methods on $5, $10 and $25 machines. In fact, I would expect to see annual profits in the range of $100,000 per year.

The only question in my mind is how did he avoid paying income taxes on it?

So, again, if Rob wants to prove to all that he did have these big yearly profits (he can choose the years) and he did avoid paying the taxes, here's his chance. The "Arc complication" should be removed.

[Vegas_lover]

Not really. I just glance at the post occasionly for a laugh. I'm surprised Rob even tries to work with them.

I'm not surprised you're surprised. To everything Rob says your respons is Amen. No offense but if you don't see how Rob is at least partially responsible for all arguments on this forum (until now) I don't give you a high score on objectivity.

Some of Rob's claims are so outlandish he should expect to get some flak. He should also be willing to back his claims with proof. That's the point where all discussions seem to go down hill really fast. IMHO

[Rob.Singer]

Rob doesn't have to work with anybody. If Rob wants to prove what he has claimed he simply has to have the IRS send me his tax returns so that I can verify his claims. That is the real issue here. The complication is that somehow Arc got involved in this and made it some sort of challenge.

Again I will say it: if Rob wants to prove his claims there is a way to do it. He simply has to have the IRS send me his tax returns. I will accept the years Rob has selected. If they show huge wins and no tax liability because of non-gambling deductions (in other words, offsets for losses don't count) I will be very impressed with Rob's "tax work."

Again, I do not doubt that Rob had big wins playing his methods on $5, $10 and $25 machines. In fact, I would expect to see annual profits in the range of $100,000 per year.

The only question in my mind is how did he avoid paying income taxes on it?

So, again, if Rob wants to prove to all that he did have these big yearly profits (he can choose the years) and he did avoid paying the taxes, here's his chance. The "Arc complication" should be removed.

So this has gone from arci challenging me about whether either of us won as we claim to have, then running for the hills as soon as I accepted (which the details will prove without question in my article)....to Alan's sole interest being how I mitigated every dollar I won as a professional gambler with deductible expenses.

I submit to Alan, if you did see my deduction amounts, you still wouldn't ever use them yourself because you do not think they are "moral"--are I believe like most, you're too intimidated by the IRS anyway to ever use them yourself. So what would you get out of it--more confused and bad feelings? Yes, a good portion of my deductions are on the outside edge of "valid", but just as GE has used, I maximized my IRS "connection" and formulated rationale beyond reproach. You would never do anything close to it because you want to pay your "fair share" and you do not want the freeloaders to have to just get by with less of our tax dollars.

High risk = high reward. Just as with my SPS. And here's another flash: No professional gambler pays taxes on their winnings. If we did, they WHY BOTHER?