The Swamp

Posted: **Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:29 am**

degenerasian wrote:it is like capital gains and losses?

we don't have a gaming tax here.

It should be like capital gains and losses, but I'm not aware of an official form that would show your losses.

Posted: **Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:30 am**

govmentchedda wrote:
brian wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
brian wrote:I still haven't seen the specifics but I've read the gambling losses deduction is either capped or repealed. I've been Googling furiously but curiously can't find anything. If it were completely repealed for the 2017 tax year (which I don't think is possible -- I'm assuming even if passed this would apply to the 2018 tax year?) it would cost me something like $80,000. Which obviously I don't have.

What??? How much do you have to gamble to get an $80,000 deduction??? If you can't afford to lose the tax deduction for your gambling losses, you may need to look at your gambling as less of a hobby and more as a problem. Not trying to be preachy or joke, but that is an astounding sum. OTOH, why the hell should the tax code encourage gambling by offering a deduction on gambling losses? I realize people can't claim a gambling loss deduction without claiming winnings, but this is just bizarre to me. But, I imagine the gaming industry has some lobbying power in Washington, so of course we have a gambling losses deduction.

As with anything in tax law/code there are myriad issues here. The biggest one is that the IRS forces casinos to report any jackpot of more than $1200 as "income". At a lot of machines, $1200 is frankly not that much (the law began in 1977 and has never been raised for inflation).

So in a given year like last year and probably this year, I had about $250K in "income" from hand-paid jackpots that generated forms for the IRS. If I can't deduct my losses the IRS thinks I "won" $250K which of course didn't happen. So that's why the gambling losses deduction exists in the first place. If the IRS thinks I won $250K then my taxes on that amount would be about $80K. As it is my "income" costs me a couple thousand extra on taxes even with being able to deduct because the original income boosts my tax bracket on all my income.

Yeah, think about how people were talking about the Vegas shooter and how he was a high roller because of how much he won. Nobody mentioned all of the losses that he may have had. Brian, I'm curious how you (anyone) substantiates your gambling losses? It's not like you get a 1099-G, that would counter your W-2G.

I keep an Excel spreadsheet with wins and loss totals from all sessions. It's kind of a pain, but necessary. Any kind of a "diary" or spreadsheet of wins and losses is allowable by the IRS.

Posted: **Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:32 am**

brian wrote:
govmentchedda wrote:
brian wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
brian wrote:I still haven't seen the specifics but I've read the gambling losses deduction is either capped or repealed. I've been Googling furiously but curiously can't find anything. If it were completely repealed for the 2017 tax year (which I don't think is possible -- I'm assuming even if passed this would apply to the 2018 tax year?) it would cost me something like $80,000. Which obviously I don't have.

What??? How much do you have to gamble to get an $80,000 deduction??? If you can't afford to lose the tax deduction for your gambling losses, you may need to look at your gambling as less of a hobby and more as a problem. Not trying to be preachy or joke, but that is an astounding sum. OTOH, why the hell should the tax code encourage gambling by offering a deduction on gambling losses? I realize people can't claim a gambling loss deduction without claiming winnings, but this is just bizarre to me. But, I imagine the gaming industry has some lobbying power in Washington, so of course we have a gambling losses deduction.

As with anything in tax law/code there are myriad issues here. The biggest one is that the IRS forces casinos to report any jackpot of more than $1200 as "income". At a lot of machines, $1200 is frankly not that much (the law began in 1977 and has never been raised for inflation).

So in a given year like last year and probably this year, I had about $250K in "income" from hand-paid jackpots that generated forms for the IRS. If I can't deduct my losses the IRS thinks I "won" $250K which of course didn't happen. So that's why the gambling losses deduction exists in the first place. If the IRS thinks I won $250K then my taxes on that amount would be about $80K. As it is my "income" costs me a couple thousand extra on taxes even with being able to deduct because the original income boosts my tax bracket on all my income.

Yeah, think about how people were talking about the Vegas shooter and how he was a high roller because of how much he won. Nobody mentioned all of the losses that he may have had. Brian, I'm curious how you (anyone) substantiates your gambling losses? It's not like you get a 1099-G, that would counter your W-2G.

I keep an Excel spreadsheet with wins and loss totals from all sessions. It's kind of a pain, but necessary. Any kind of a "diary" or spreadsheet of wins and losses is allowable by the IRS.

People at the horse track pick up loose losing slips all the time. One of my friend's dad would have thousands of those things in a box at his house.

Posted: **Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:22 pm**

My taxes and especially the gf's taxes are going up. Poor people are getting a slight deduction - someone who makes $25K will save about $800 or so. (This is just in a vacuum and not accounting for other things). Which is just fine, and I would be perfectly ok with it, if it wasn't coming with a huge cut to corporate taxes.

So the coal miners, et al who voted for Trump will get a slight cut in their taxes so they'll continue their rabid support ("Trump delivered!"), all the while people in Bentleys are gonna be saving gajillions.

It's actually pretty smart from a political perspective.

Posted: **Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:43 pm**

Gunpowder wrote:My taxes and especially the gf's taxes are going up. Poor people are getting a slight deduction - someone who makes $25K will save about $800 or so. (This is just in a vacuum and not accounting for other things). Which is just fine, and I would be perfectly ok with it, if it wasn't coming with a huge cut to corporate taxes.

So the coal miners, et al who voted for Trump will get a slight cut in their taxes so they'll continue their rabid support ("Trump delivered!"), all the while people in Bentleys are gonna be saving gajillions.

It's actually pretty smart from a political perspective.

Mine are probably going up a chunk. Which would also be fine with me if that money were being used to feed poor people. But I'm not thrilled about my taxes going up to feed rich people.

Unless they were going to feed the rich people *to* the poor people.

Posted: **Fri Nov 03, 2017 5:58 pm**

Steve of phpBB wrote:
Gunpowder wrote:My taxes and especially the gf's taxes are going up. Poor people are getting a slight deduction - someone who makes $25K will save about $800 or so. (This is just in a vacuum and not accounting for other things). Which is just fine, and I would be perfectly ok with it, if it wasn't coming with a huge cut to corporate taxes.

So the coal miners, et al who voted for Trump will get a slight cut in their taxes so they'll continue their rabid support ("Trump delivered!"), all the while people in Bentleys are gonna be saving gajillions.

It's actually pretty smart from a political perspective.

Mine are probably going up a chunk. Which would also be fine with me if that money were being used to feed poor people. But I'm not thrilled about my taxes going up to feed rich people.

Unless they were going to feed the rich people *to* the poor people.

I'm interested to see what the difference would be for me with this tax plan in going from freelance (100% of income through LLC) to employee (~10%)

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:57 am**

Should mention one other way I forgot that wins and losses are validated by the IRS (if need be - i.e. if there was an audit) is if you're playing slots or VP and using your player's card all of your action is tracked and you can generate a statement of your coin in and coin out at the end of the year. So if the IRS shows I have $15K in "income" or jackpots from Casino A, I can generate a statement that shows I actually lost $1,000 for the year there (or whatever the case might actually be).

Most casinos allow you to just generate those win-loss statements from their website.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 12:46 pm**

Gunpowder wrote:My taxes and especially the gf's taxes are going up. Poor people are getting a slight deduction - someone who makes $25K will save about $800 or so. (This is just in a vacuum and not accounting for other things). Which is just fine, and I would be perfectly ok with it, if it wasn't coming with a huge cut to corporate taxes.

So the coal miners, et al who voted for Trump will get a slight cut in their taxes so they'll continue their rabid support ("Trump delivered!"), all the while people in Bentleys are gonna be saving gajillions.

It's actually pretty smart from a political perspective.

Coal miners make a lot more than 25k. You may have just been going for the generality of trumps base, but generally you hire in inexperienced at 40k or so.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 1:28 pm**

A_B wrote:
Gunpowder wrote:My taxes and especially the gf's taxes are going up. Poor people are getting a slight deduction - someone who makes $25K will save about $800 or so. (This is just in a vacuum and not accounting for other things). Which is just fine, and I would be perfectly ok with it, if it wasn't coming with a huge cut to corporate taxes.

So the coal miners, et al who voted for Trump will get a slight cut in their taxes so they'll continue their rabid support ("Trump delivered!"), all the while people in Bentleys are gonna be saving gajillions.

It's actually pretty smart from a political perspective.

Coal miners make a lot more than 25k. You may have just been going for the generality of trumps base, but generally you hire in inexperienced at 40k or so.

Trump's base must love that oil and gas providers are clear winners in he new tax proposal, while credits for electric cars, wind and solar energy get fucked.

I'm guessing that in 20 years, historians will shake their heads about this prioritization.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 1:50 pm**

For decades the US has been protecting car and oil interests.

Or else they would have had Japanese-style high speed trains by now.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 2:20 pm**

sancarlos wrote:Trump's base must love that oil and gas providers are clear winners in he new tax proposal, while credits for electric cars, wind and solar energy get fucked.

I'm guessing that in 20 years, historians will shake their heads about this prioritization.

The USA has just surrendered the 21st century to China and other nations that understand that change is inevitable.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 2:49 pm**

Trump's base is a bunch of fucking morons who can't understand the big picture, do math, or prevent themselves from being easily triggered by social issues. Exploit all three to the max extent possible, plus gerrymander and voter suppress the fuck out of everything else and there you have it. Unmitigated, unchecked power.

According to Google, America's GDP for 2016 was $18.57 trillion. Sure that might not be a complete indicator of collective wealth, but that's a unfathomable fuckton of money that, if you try to imagine materially is impossible. Literally fucking impossible.

What have you ever seen 18.57 trillion of? Sand at the beach? That's probably it. I've personally only ever seen a million dollars in because casinos proudly display it. My yearly salary plus my meager retirement investments seem like I'm richer than 75% of people I met, but can be pissed away in a nanosecond by anyone who's upper middle class. And by someone in the .1%, even faster.

That top .1 btw controls as much as the bottom 90%. Absolutely abhorrently disgusting that purple who make unfathomable amounts of money cannot be taxed appropriately. It's inexcusable on every conceivable level.

Not only that, the idea that we have other more important things to spend what we do have taxed is also bullshit. We have spent $250 per day in the war on terror.

You mean to tell me that we can't afford healthcare, a living wage, free education, and conceivably anything else? BULLSHIT. FUCKING BULLSHIT.

Numbers like this are why humanity is fucked. Numbers like this are why I drive myself crazy. And numbers like this are why I openly root for people to drop dead like Scalia.

Math is not hard. Predicting the economy is, but when you rig it in your favor, it isn't. And that is only marginally more difficult than using the emotional capital of C- students who can't calculate compound interest via socially charged issues to distract from the fact that the middle and lower class (of which they are a part) are being relegated to indeterminate indentured servitude.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 3:39 pm**

Johnnie wrote:Not only that, the idea that we have other more important things to spend what we do have taxed is also bullshit. We have spent $250M per day in the war on terror.

You mean to tell me that we can't afford healthcare, a living wage, free education, and conceivably anything else? BULLSHIT. FUCKING BULLSHIT.

That is a righteous rant. And the point you made that I quoted above is the #1 thing that I wish more politically-savvy Americans understood. Conservative politicians and billionaires like Pete Peterson, the Kochs, etc. have masterfully convinced people that we "can't afford" things like universal health care, increases in the working wage, and a robust social safety net. Even Democrats have bought into that fallacy. When in fact, these so-called concerns about spending or the deficit are always used to justify right-wing political goals, and especially policies that continue the shift of wealth upward. It's funny how the deficit is a big deal whenever anyone suggests progressive economic redistribution, but hasn't been a problem when it comes to tax cuts, heavy handed law enforcement tactics, or the trillions of dollars that our Middle Eastern wars will cost.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 5:32 pm**

Rand Paul Assaulted

By a middle aged Doctor who is - yep - a Democrat.

Fox News just came in its pants.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:14 pm**

Pruitt wrote:
sancarlos wrote:Trump's base must love that oil and gas providers are clear winners in he new tax proposal, while credits for electric cars, wind and solar energy get fucked.

I'm guessing that in 20 years, historians will shake their heads about this prioritization.

The USA has just surrendered the 21st century to China and other nations that understand that change is inevitable.

I don't think the transit issue is a partisan one. Both sides want to protect lobbyists which includes oil and cars. Plans for high-speed rail has been discussed in the States ince the 60s, and since then how many have been built? So people continue to commute to work 90 minutes each way.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:36 pm**

Pruitt wrote:Rand Paul Assaulted

I was in NYC all day, and I have witnesses. (yeah, like I'm gonna be described as a democrat). (or as middle aged)

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:46 pm**

I'm confused, why would a democrat assault him?

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 7:26 pm**

Pruitt wrote:Rand Paul Assaulted

By a middle aged Doctor who is - yep - a Democrat.

Fox News just came in its pants.

In Bowling Green.

#neverforget

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:18 pm**

Johnnie wrote:
Pruitt wrote:Rand Paul Assaulted

By a middle aged Doctor who is - yep - a Democrat.

Fox News just came in its pants.

In Bowling Green.

#neverforget

The guy is a pissed off neighbour. Probably some simmering dispute...

HOWEVER (from Fox)...

A Facebook account that is alleged to be maintained by Boucher was found to contain multiple anti-Trump postings.

Posted: **Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:25 pm**

Do libertarians believe in calling the cops?

Posted: **Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:24 pm**

Shout out to Rand Paul’s doctor neighbor. Also, note to self, never get Howard pissed at me IRL.

Posted: **Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:28 pm**

mister d wrote:Do libertarians believe in calling the cops?

Hilarious!

Any Libertarian over the age of 25 is probably still financially beholden to his parents.

Posted: **Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:53 pm**

tennbengal wrote:Shout out to Rand Paul’s doctor neighbor. Also, note to self, never get Howard pissed at me IRL.

You're givin a shout out to the guy who assaulted someone? Am I missing something?

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:38 am**

A_B wrote:
tennbengal wrote:Shout out to Rand Paul’s doctor neighbor. Also, note to self, never get Howard pissed at me IRL.

You're givin a shout out to the guy who assaulted someone? Am I missing something?

No. I don’t shed a tear for Rand Paul getting his ass kicked. His policies harm and kill millions, I am supposed to feel bad because his doctor neighbor hit him? I don’t. At least he’s got kickass health insurance, so he’s got that going for him, something he actively tries to keep from others. Won’t have to be a gofundme campaign to cover his bills, like with LV shooting victims, so he’s got that going for him too...

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:14 am**

There are plenty of good assaulters and this guy is definitely on that list.

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:25 am**

Joe K wrote:
Johnnie wrote:Not only that, the idea that we have other more important things to spend what we do have taxed is also bullshit. We have spent $250M per day in the war on terror.

You mean to tell me that we can't afford healthcare, a living wage, free education, and conceivably anything else? BULLSHIT. FUCKING BULLSHIT.

That is a righteous rant. And the point you made that I quoted above is the #1 thing that I wish more politically-savvy Americans understood. Conservative politicians and billionaires like Pete Peterson, the Kochs, etc. have masterfully convinced people that we "can't afford" things like universal health care, increases in the working wage, and a robust social safety net. Even Democrats have bought into that fallacy. When in fact, these so-called concerns about spending or the deficit are always used to justify right-wing political goals, and especially policies that continue the shift of wealth upward. It's funny how the deficit is a big deal whenever anyone suggests progressive economic redistribution, but hasn't been a problem when it comes to tax cuts, heavy handed law enforcement tactics, or the trillions of dollars that our Middle Eastern wars will cost.

Many people trying to "save the middle class" fail to realize that the middle class as we know it is largely a government creation and a large reason it appears to be disappearing is deregulation.

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:27 pm**

howard wrote: (or as middle aged)

Eh, if someone with a $450,000 income can be described as middle class, we can be described as middle aged.

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:23 pm**

https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:25 pm**

tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Yeah, it happens. My wife is ready to nuke the neighbors behind us over a similar issue. (But, they aren't politicians.)

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:26 pm**

sancarlos wrote:
tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Yeah, it happens. My wife is ready to nuke the neighbors behind us over a similar issue. (But, they aren't politicians.)

Yeah, was thinking the same thing. Without knowing the particulars hardly surprising.

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:31 pm**

tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

https://twitter.com/LizMair/status/927632282285899778

Posted: **Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:55 pm**

tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Ok, so the story is now awesome...

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:23 am**

Rex wrote:
tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Ok, so the story is now awesome...

Did he break the ribs without the use of a weapon - say a heavy-duty gardening implement or a lawn gnome?

That'd be really badass.

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:20 am**

tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Is it still OK to assault him when he's potentially just an asshole neighbor?

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:11 am**

Since it was over gardening and Rand Paul is a libertarian, was the neighbor upset that Rand Paul had a marijuana patch in his back yard?

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:44 am**

A_B wrote:Is it still OK to assault him when he's potentially just an asshole neighbor?

Not to answer for TB, but yes. Absolutely. It is absolutely ok to assault Rand Paul.

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:13 am**

A_B wrote:
tennbengal wrote:https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/927641651044024320

Is it still OK to assault him when he's potentially just an asshole neighbor?

Would I have laughed if it was two random neighbors fighting over who is blowing leaves onto who's lawn?

Hint: I would have.

So, yes. I still find this funny that Rand Paul caught a beating. Even more so that it's over shrubbery. Karmically amusing.

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:48 am**

I guess you guys are just real, honest to goodness badasses.

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:53 am**

A_B wrote:I guess you guys are just real, honest to goodness badasses.

No, I'd be the one getting my ribs broken, I am sure. But still, since it's Rand Paul, and it is a neighbor dispute over leaves and shrubs, I am gonna laugh. Some people deserve to get their ass kicked, some don't. It's better for anyone getting their ass kicked that they have health insurance. At least Paul has that going for him...not that he would let everyone enjoy benefits of same.

Posted: **Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:54 am**

How about Mitch? Can I laugh if TB assaults McConnell or are you closing ranks there, too?

The Swamp

Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics

Re: Random Politics