Will they adjust pay tables in 2026?

[Dan Druff]

Good news -- sort of.

A court has interpreted a second part of the new law to trigger a change in session reporting.

Starting in 2026, sessions will be defined as the entire year in one gambling venue. So you can now subtract losses from wins up to 100% in each venue, and this also reduces the ridiculous numbers gamblers used to have to face, where acting gamblers would have millions in wins and millions in losses, despite not being high stakes players, and being afraid to report it that way and trigger an audit.

So basically this is how it will be, provided this ruling holds up:

1) Add up the total amount of money from all venues where you lost for the year. Multiply by 0.9.

2) Add up the total amount of money from all venues where you won for the year.

3) Subtract #1 from #2. That's your taxable wins.


So if you only stick to one casino all year, this law won't affect you.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/#!/x/status/2006781309088313466

[mickeycrimm]

Good news -- sort of.

A court has interpreted a second part of the new law to trigger a change in session reporting.

Starting in 2026, sessions will be defined as the entire year in one gambling venue. So you can now subtract losses from wins up to 100% in each venue, and this also reduces the ridiculous numbers gamblers used to have to face, where acting gamblers would have millions in wins and millions in losses, despite not being high stakes players, and being afraid to report it that way and trigger an audit.

So basically this is how it will be, provided this ruling holds up:

1) Add up the total amount of money from all venues where you lost for the year. Multiply by 0.9.

2) Add up the total amount of money from all venues where you won for the year.

3) Subtract #1 from #2. That's your taxable wins.


So if you only stick to one casino all year, this law won't affect you.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/#!/x/status/2006781309088313466

Drifg, how did you come across this? The tax court cases are precedents that should have been known about years ago.

[SLaPiNFuNK]

I asked chatgpt "if I get jackpot of $2000, then lose that $2000 what is my tax obligation."

Here’s how the **new 2026 U.S. federal gambling tax rules** would likely apply to your situation (winning $2,000 and then losing those same $2,000):

### �� Key Points of the 2026 Gambling Tax Rules

1. **Gambling winnings are taxable income** on your federal tax return regardless of amount. Even if you don’t get a Form W-2G, you still must report them. ([The Economic Times][1])
2. **Losses can only be deducted up to the amount of your winnings and only if you itemize deductions.** ([GovFacts][2])
3. **Starting with the 2026 tax year, gambling loss deductions are capped at 90% of your gambling winnings.** This is a change from prior years (100% deductible). ([Kiplinger][3])

### �� What Happens If You Win $2,000 and Then Lose $2,000

Under the new 2026 rules:

* You **report $2,000 in gambling winnings** as taxable income. ([The Economic Times][1])
* You have $2,000 in gambling losses, **but you can only deduct up to 90% of your $2,000 winnings** → that’s **$1,800**. ([Kiplinger][3])
* That leaves **$200 of “phantom income”** (because you lost the actual money but cannot fully deduct the losses). ([Gaming.net][4])

### �� How Much Tax You Owe

To estimate the tax:

1. **$200 becomes taxable income** from gambling.
2. Your tax on that $200 depends on your **federal income tax bracket** (e.g., 12%, 22%, etc.) and any state income tax where you live.

* Example: If you’re in the 22% federal bracket: 0.22 × $200 = **$44 federal tax**.
* If your state has a 5% income tax: 0.05 × $200 = **$10 state tax**.
* **Total tax ≈ $54** (this is just an example; your exact rate could be different).

> **Important:** If you *don’t itemize* (i.e., you take the standard deduction), you **cannot deduct gambling losses at all**, so you would owe tax on the full $2,000 of winnings (reporting $2,000 taxable income). ([GovFacts][2])

### �� Summary of Your Situation

| Situation | Taxable Income | Expected Tax (approx.) |
| ---------------------------------------------------- | --------------------- | ------------------------------------------------ |
| **Itemize deductions (losses partially deductible)** | $200 taxable income | Depends on bracket (~$44 federal in 22% bracket) |
| **Take standard deduction (no losses deductible)** | $2,000 taxable income | Significantly higher tax |

### �� Takeaways

* Even though you lost all the $2,000 you won, the new law means you **may still owe tax on up to 10% of the winnings**. ([Kiplinger][3])
* This only applies if you itemize deductions. If not, you may owe tax on the **full winnings**. ([GovFacts][2])
* Your **exact tax amount depends on your total income and tax bracket**.

If you want, I can calculate a more precise estimate based on your filing status and tax bracket.

[1]: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ce=chatgpt.com "IRS Slot Machine Winnings Threshold Jumps $800 in 2026: Quiet IRS rule shift means an extra $800 for some Americans in 2026 — here’s who wins - The Economic Times"
[2]: https://govfacts.org/government/fede...ce=chatgpt.com "The Tax Consequences of Big Lottery Wins | GovFacts"
[3]: https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/new-...ce=chatgpt.com "New Cap on Gambling Loss Deductions Begins Soon: What to Know Now"
[4]: https://www.gaming.net/irs-raises-ja...ce=chatgpt.com "IRS Raises Jackpot Threshold, But Players Still Face Higher Taxes in 2026 – Gaming.net"

[SLaPiNFuNK]

The edge in video poker is not existent. You're not supposed to win in the long run
.. playing $0.25 level you aren't going to have this issue... But playing $5 level and up where multiple w2g are common in a night without showing any "profit" the results will be heavily taxed...

Myself and my late father have had sessions where we may have won or loss very little out of pocket and came home with 10-20-30K in w2g... The result now would mean we are obligated to pay hundreds if not thousands in taxes on that "phantom income" we never actually had...

Imagine a 5 play $100 machine where it will be $2500 per hand. If you played 1 x $2500 and got dealt a paying pair and got paid $2500 (break even) according to this tax law you owe $250 for that taxable win, even though you broke even...

The weekend that was disputed here where I had multiple royals in a weekend, I came home with over 30k in w2g and had a loss to show for that weekend... That year I didn't owe anything on those wins.. if that happened in 2026 I would owe $3.XK on those wins even though I won nothing.

[SLaPiNFuNK]

Poker tournament players... 5K plus wins get paperwork... So if you have a $5k win, and more than that or even that same amount in losses... You have to pay 10% of those taxable wins.

[Rob.Singer]

Good news -- sort of.

A court has interpreted a second part of the new law to trigger a change in session reporting.

Starting in 2026, sessions will be defined as the entire year in one gambling venue. So you can now subtract losses from wins up to 100% in each venue, and this also reduces the ridiculous numbers gamblers used to have to face, where acting gamblers would have millions in wins and millions in losses, despite not being high stakes players, and being afraid to report it that way and trigger an audit.

So basically this is how it will be, provided this ruling holds up:

1) Add up the total amount of money from all venues where you lost for the year. Multiply by 0.9.

2) Add up the total amount of money from all venues where you won for the year.

3) Subtract #1 from #2. That's your taxable wins.


So if you only stick to one casino all year, this law won't affect you.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/#!/x/status/2006781309088313466

This is a very loose interpretation and one that actual IRS auditors would not embrace. They tend to only go with the simple side of the equation (as reported in the news and reiterated by involved politicians: was 100%/is now 90%) and trying to baffle them with something like this can't be expected to turn out well.

[smurgerburger]

The edge in video poker is not existent. You're not supposed to win in the long run
.. playing $0.25 level you aren't going to have this issue... But playing $5 level and up where multiple w2g are common in a night without showing any "profit" the results will be heavily taxed...

Myself and my late father have had sessions where we may have won or loss very little out of pocket and came home with 10-20-30K in w2g... The result now would mean we are obligated to pay hundreds if not thousands in taxes on that "phantom income" we never actually had...

Imagine a 5 play $100 machine where it will be $2500 per hand. If you played 1 x $2500 and got dealt a paying pair and got paid $2500 (break even) according to this tax law you owe $250 for that taxable win, even though you broke even...

The weekend that was disputed here where I had multiple royals in a weekend, I came home with over 30k in w2g and had a loss to show for that weekend... That year I didn't owe anything on those wins.. if that happened in 2026 I would owe $3.XK on those wins even though I won nothing.

The 90% rule applies to the aggregate of your losses and wins for the year. It does not apply at the session level.

Unless your annual losses exceed your wins by only 11.11% or less it won't make a difference.

[DGenBen]

The edge in video poker is not existent. You're not supposed to win in the long run
.. playing $0.25 level you aren't going to have this issue... But playing $5 level and up where multiple w2g are common in a night without showing any "profit" the results will be heavily taxed...

Myself and my late father have had sessions where we may have won or loss very little out of pocket and came home with 10-20-30K in w2g... The result now would mean we are obligated to pay hundreds if not thousands in taxes on that "phantom income" we never actually had...

Imagine a 5 play $100 machine where it will be $2500 per hand. If you played 1 x $2500 and got dealt a paying pair and got paid $2500 (break even) according to this tax law you owe $250 for that taxable win, even though you broke even...

The weekend that was disputed here where I had multiple royals in a weekend, I came home with over 30k in w2g and had a loss to show for that weekend... That year I didn't owe anything on those wins.. if that happened in 2026 I would owe $3.XK on those wins even though I won nothing.

The 90% rule applies to the aggregate of your losses and wins for the year. It does not apply at the session level.

Unless your annual losses exceed your wins by only 11.11% or less it won't make a difference.

Not just referring to SLaPINFuNK here, but we can repeat this until we are blue in the face and people are still going to think with the new tax law they are going to owe taxes on 10% of their W2G wins.

Even have several friends & acquaintances that I carefully explain this to and they seem to get it, then the next time I talk to them they are back to thinking that whenever they get a W2G they are going to owe taxes on 10% of it if they lost.

[mickeycrimm]

The edge in video poker is not existent. You're not supposed to win in the long run
.. playing $0.25 level you aren't going to have this issue... But playing $5 level and up where multiple w2g are common in a night without showing any "profit" the results will be heavily taxed...

Myself and my late father have had sessions where we may have won or loss very little out of pocket and came home with 10-20-30K in w2g... The result now would mean we are obligated to pay hundreds if not thousands in taxes on that "phantom income" we never actually had...

Imagine a 5 play $100 machine where it will be $2500 per hand. If you played 1 x $2500 and got dealt a paying pair and got paid $2500 (break even) according to this tax law you owe $250 for that taxable win, even though you broke even...

The weekend that was disputed here where I had multiple royals in a weekend, I came home with over 30k in w2g and had a loss to show for that weekend... That year I didn't owe anything on those wins.. if that happened in 2026 I would owe $3.XK on those wins even though I won nothing.

The 90% rule applies to the aggregate of your losses and wins for the year. It does not apply at the session level.

Unless your annual losses exceed your wins by only 11.11% or less it won't make a difference.

Not just referring to SLaPINFuNK here, but we can repeat this until we are blue in the face and people are still going to think with the new tax law they are going to owe taxes on 10% of their W2G wins.

Even have several friends & acquaintances that I carefully explain this to and they seem to get it, then the next time I talk to them they are back to thinking that whenever they get a W2G they are going to owe taxes on 10% of it if they lost.

A lot of people just don't get it. Hell, even Bob Dancer thought he would have to pay 10% on the W2G's. The W2G is not proof of income. It's proof that you received money.

If one plays a session of video poker today, proceeds to lose $2000, then hits a $4,000 royal, then quits the session....how much did they win? They won only $2,000 and thats the number that goes in the log book, along with the date of play and the casino.

In his GWAE interview 5 months ago, Russel Fox, CPA, stated that in this situation you attach IRS form 8275, a disclosure statement, to the W2G showing the $2,000 loss in the same session. The IRS can then easily match the W2G's date to the date in the log book showing the $2,000 win.

[SLaPiNFuNK]

The 90% rule applies to the aggregate of your losses and wins for the year. It does not apply at the session level.

Unless your annual losses exceed your wins by only 11.11% or less it won't make a difference.

Not just referring to SLaPINFuNK here, but we can repeat this until we are blue in the face and people are still going to think with the new tax law they are going to owe taxes on 10% of their W2G wins.

Even have several friends & acquaintances that I carefully explain this to and they seem to get it, then the next time I talk to them they are back to thinking that whenever they get a W2G they are going to owe taxes on 10% of it if they lost.

A lot of people just don't get it. Hell, even Bob Dancer thought he would have to pay 10% on the W2G's. The W2G is not proof of income. It's proof that you received money.

If one plays a session of video poker today, proceeds to lose $2000, then hits a $4,000 royal, then quits the session....how much did they win? They won only $2,000 and thats the number that goes in the log book, along with the date of play and the casino.

In his GWAE interview 5 months ago, Russel Fox, CPA, stated that in this situation you attach IRS form 8275, a disclosure statement, to the W2G showing the $2,000 loss in the same session. The IRS can then easily match the W2G's date to the date in the log book showing the $2,000 win.

If you had a 10% edge ina game now, it is now 0 because that 10% is going to taxes now...

You can have $1,000,000 in W2Gs and be ahead $50K for the year, but now you owe $100,000 so you're really negative $50K after paying the tax man....

Unless you have had multiple W2Gs in a year you wouldn't understand.

I'm the past... $1,000,000 in W2G, no problem... You write off the loss and pay nothing... Now you owe 10% on each W2G regardless of winning or losing.

No casino game gives the player enough advantage you win more than 10% over time...

[mickeycrimm]

Not just referring to SLaPINFuNK here, but we can repeat this until we are blue in the face and people are still going to think with the new tax law they are going to owe taxes on 10% of their W2G wins.

Even have several friends & acquaintances that I carefully explain this to and they seem to get it, then the next time I talk to them they are back to thinking that whenever they get a W2G they are going to owe taxes on 10% of it if they lost.

A lot of people just don't get it. Hell, even Bob Dancer thought he would have to pay 10% on the W2G's. The W2G is not proof of income. It's proof that you received money.

If one plays a session of video poker today, proceeds to lose $2000, then hits a $4,000 royal, then quits the session....how much did they win? They won only $2,000 and thats the number that goes in the log book, along with the date of play and the casino.

In his GWAE interview 5 months ago, Russel Fox, CPA, stated that in this situation you attach IRS form 8275, a disclosure statement, to the W2G showing the $2,000 loss in the same session. The IRS can then easily match the W2G's date to the date in the log book showing the $2,000 win.

If you had a 10% edge ina game now, it is now 0 because that 10% is going to taxes now...

You can have $1,000,000 in W2Gs and be ahead $50K for the year, but now you owe $100,000 so you're really negative $50K after paying the tax man....

Unless you have had multiple W2Gs in a year you wouldn't understand.

I'm the past... $1,000,000 in W2G, no problem... You write off the loss and pay nothing... Now you owe 10% on each W2G regardless of winning or losing.

No casino game gives the player enough advantage you win more than 10% over time...

I have 30 W2G's just for last year which is about average for me. From what you've just written I don't think you have a clue how gambling taxes are done. Can you cite a CPA that says you pay 10% tax on the total of W2G's? I'll save you the time. No, you can't because it's not the correct way to do gambling taxes.

[SLaPiNFuNK]

A lot of people just don't get it. Hell, even Bob Dancer thought he would have to pay 10% on the W2G's. The W2G is not proof of income. It's proof that you received money.

If one plays a session of video poker today, proceeds to lose $2000, then hits a $4,000 royal, then quits the session....how much did they win? They won only $2,000 and thats the number that goes in the log book, along with the date of play and the casino.

In his GWAE interview 5 months ago, Russel Fox, CPA, stated that in this situation you attach IRS form 8275, a disclosure statement, to the W2G showing the $2,000 loss in the same session. The IRS can then easily match the W2G's date to the date in the log book showing the $2,000 win.

If you had a 10% edge ina game now, it is now 0 because that 10% is going to taxes now...

You can have $1,000,000 in W2Gs and be ahead $50K for the year, but now you owe $100,000 so you're really negative $50K after paying the tax man....

Unless you have had multiple W2Gs in a year you wouldn't understand.

I'm the past... $1,000,000 in W2G, no problem... You write off the loss and pay nothing... Now you owe 10% on each W2G regardless of winning or losing.

No casino game gives the player enough advantage you win more than 10% over time...

I have 30 W2G's just for last year which is about average for me. From what you've just written I don't think you have a clue how gambling taxes are done. Can you cite a CPA that says you pay 10% of the total of W2G's? I'll save you the time. No, you can't.

What is the sum of those W2Gs?
How much profit did you actually show? Was it greater than 10% of the w2g total?

Based on the new tax law, you can only deduct 90% of your losses... Which also means basically paying at least 10% on your winnings... This is for w2g earned in 2026...

So if you have 1 w2g or 30 w2g, and you show ZERO profit or even $1 dollar of profit, you need to pay taxes on 10% of those w2g....

Now... If you have 1 w2g for say $2,000. But you have overall profit of $3000, you have to pay taxes on the winnings overall since you don't have losses... But most people have more w2g with greater amounts than they have won...

Vegas Matt has millions in w2g from 2025... He had 50K profit. If this was 2026 he would need to pay 10% of the sum of those w2g...

Gambling is fucked... You're in for a big surprise in 2027 when you do your 2026 taxes if the law stays the same.

[kewlJ]

It is fascinating to me to see this play out and the various arguments. It is not going to affect me either way. Might have a few years ago when my partner was alive and we were doing our VP mailer play, but not now that I am back to mostly blackjack.

One way it could effect me, is if all the APs that started out with card counting 20-30 years ago, and moved into other areas of AP, suddenly come back to card counting flooding the market. Welcome 'home" boys.

I did the laugh emoji because that really isn't a concern. Nobody is going to go from the much larger advantages they have played back to 1% card counting grinding.


But here is one thing I keep coming back to. If this new law were to stand the way it is written and enforced the way it is written, it would be not just the end of machine advantage play, but casino machine gambling altogether. Even recreational, non-AP players would not continue to gamble under an extra 10% "penalty". It would essentially be the end of casinos.

I don't know who orchestrated this law, and I don't mean which politician (we know that), but who is/was really behind it, but there is a pretty strong casino lobby and some very wealthy casino owner and corporations, that I think have yet to be heard from.

[SLaPiNFuNK]

It is fascinating to me to see this play out and the various arguments. It is not going to affect me either way. Might have a few years ago when my partner was alive and we were doing our VP mailer play, but not now that I am back to mostly blackjack.

One way it could effect me, is if all the APs that started out with card counting 20-30 years ago, and moved into other areas of AP, suddenly come back to card counting flooding the market. Welcome 'home" boys.

I did the laugh emoji because that really isn't a concern. Nobody is going to go from the much larger advantages they have played back to 1% card counting grinding.


But here is one thing I keep coming back to. If this new law were to stand the way it is written and enforced the way it is written, it would be not just the end of machine advantage play, but casino machine gambling altogether. Even recreational, non-AP players would not continue to gamble under an extra 10% "penalty". It would essentially be the end of casinos.

I don't know who orchestrated this law, and I don't mean which politician (we know that), but who is/was really behind it, but there is a pretty strong casino lobby and some very wealthy casino owner and corporations, that I think have yet to be heard from.

Correct. Black jack players are not going to really be troubled by this as you aren't exactly reporting wins and losses...

If you get a taxable win, that is when it is an issue.

Poker cash game players... Doesn't bother...

Poker tournament players, fucked... Have 100K in buyins and 100k in taxable winnings (over 5k) you broke even but now owe $10k.

[MisterV]

I don't know who orchestrated this law, and I don't mean which politician (we know that), but who is/was really behind it...

The Christian right has had their opportunity to legislate morality, now MAGA is allowing the mormons their shot at imposing their views on the rest of us.

per google AI:

"The Idaho politician behind the recent federal gambling tax provision, enacted as part of the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" in July 2025, is Republican Senator ike Crapo. Senator Crapo, a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon), which opposes gambling in any form, has been a long-standing critic of gambling...This change has generated significant backlash within the gaming industry, with critics arguing it will push professional gamblers to unregulated, offshore markets."

Ah, but there's hope.

"Legislation, known as the FAIR BET Act, has since been introduced by other lawmakers in an attempt to repeal the provision and restore the 100% deduction."

[SLaPiNFuNK]

I don't know who orchestrated this law, and I don't mean which politician (we know that), but who is/was really behind it...

The Christian right has had their opportunity to legislate morality, now MAGA is allowing the mormons their shot at imposing their views on the rest of us.

per google AI:

"The Idaho politician behind the recent federal gambling tax provision, enacted as part of the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" in July 2025, is Republican Senator ike Crapo. Senator Crapo, a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon), which opposes gambling in any form, has been a long-standing critic of gambling...This change has generated significant backlash within the gaming industry, with critics arguing it will push professional gamblers to unregulated, offshore markets."

Ah, but there's hope.

"Legislation, known as the FAIR BET Act, has since been introduced by other lawmakers in an attempt to repeal the provision and restore the 100% deduction."

Still no luck with that fair bet act passing... Until then, I'm out...

[mickeycrimm]

It is fascinating to me to see this play out and the various arguments. It is not going to affect me either way. Might have a few years ago when my partner was alive and we were doing our VP mailer play, but not now that I am back to mostly blackjack.

One way it could effect me, is if all the APs that started out with card counting 20-30 years ago, and moved into other areas of AP, suddenly come back to card counting flooding the market. Welcome 'home" boys.

I did the laugh emoji because that really isn't a concern. Nobody is going to go from the much larger advantages they have played back to 1% card counting grinding.


But here is one thing I keep coming back to. If this new law were to stand the way it is written and enforced the way it is written, it would be not just the end of machine advantage play, but casino machine gambling altogether. Even recreational, non-AP players would not continue to gamble under an extra 10% "penalty". It would essentially be the end of casinos.

I don't know who orchestrated this law, and I don't mean which politician (we know that), but who is/was really behind it, but there is a pretty strong casino lobby and some very wealthy casino owner and corporations, that I think have yet to be heard from.

KJ, only machine pros that play thin edges like 1% or 1.5% are affected. In other words they run a high volume wager with a small win, percentagewise. Here's a dirty little secret. I just told that I had 30 W2G's in 2025. My net win for the year was 153% of the total of my W2G's. In other words, my W2G's were just 65% of my net win for the year. It's ran that way for years.

I just explained this in a post, I think it was yesterday. What? Do people not read and absorb what is in the posts?

Now ask yourself these questions.

Would you rather just pay taxes on the amount of W2Gs?

Or pay taxes on the amount of the net win?

The net win is 53% higher than the total of the W2G's.

It would be a lot cheaper to just pay taxes on the amount of W2G's. But the IRS will not let people get away with that. They know that if someone like that has that many signers they are bound to have had more winning sessions that just didn't get signers. They correctly think someone filing their win as the total of their W2Gs is dishonest.

They want a contemporaneous logbook. Slappy don't talk about logbooks. I don't think he knows what they they are. Ask Rob, he knows.

A contemporaneous logbook. It's recommended by every gambling tax CPA in the country. The amount of tax you owe or don't owe comes out of the logbook entries. W2Gs are irrelevant.

[MisterV]

I've kept a logbook of my gambling wins and losses for decades.

Pretty simple, really.

Date(s) in the casino, name of casino, total won or lost at that casino for that foray, i.e. net win or net loss for the trip.

I keep a running total using that info.

Never been audited but I suspect I'd do just fine if I were.

[Rob.Singer]

I've kept a logbook of my gambling wins and losses for decades.

Pretty simple, really.

Date(s) in the casino, name of casino, total won or lost at that casino for that foray, i.e. net win or net loss for the trip.

I keep a running total using that info.

Never been audited but I suspect I'd do just fine if I were.

If you keep an accurate contemporaneous log of your casino wins/losses/dates of play and any notes you feel are helpful, THAT is what the IRS auditors like to see. You're essentially doing their work for them. You can present all the casino win/loss statements, verbal explanations, and W2G's you want--they are only partial support for that log they want you to provide them. Their reasoning? BECAUSE IT IS COMING DIRECTLY FROM YOU, AND IN AN AUDIT NOTHING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN A SIGNED AND DATED LOG.

This law isnt going to change the way I'll do anything. Adjust and adapt....and use your head.

[mickeycrimm]

I've kept a logbook of my gambling wins and losses for decades.

Pretty simple, really.

Date(s) in the casino, name of casino, total won or lost at that casino for that foray, i.e. net win or net loss for the trip.

I keep a running total using that info.

Never been audited but I suspect I'd do just fine if I were.

If you keep an accurate contemporaneous log of your casino wins/losses/dates of play and any notes you feel are helpful, THAT is what the IRS auditors like to see. You're essentially doing their work for them. You can present all the casino win/loss statements, verbal explanations, and W2G's you want--they are only partial support for that log they want you to provide them. Their reasoning? BECAUSE IT IS COMING DIRECTLY FROM YOU, AND IN AN AUDIT NOTHING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN A SIGNED AND DATED LOG.

This law isnt going to change the way I'll do anything. Adjust and adapt....and use your head.

There have been some new tax court precedents which I will try to explain later. Why these tax court rulings are just now coming to light is beyond me.