vpFREE2 Forums

Bob Dancer's CasinoGaming Column - 30 OCT 2007

#1

Hidden Benefits to Palms "Presents for Points" Promotion

http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/dancer/2007/1030.html

<a href="http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/dancer/2007/1030.html">
http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/dancer/2007/1030.html</a>

···

************************************************

This link is posted for informational purposes and doesn't
constitute an endorsement or approval of the linked article's
content by vpFREE. Any discussion of the article must be done
in accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.

************************************************

#2

Bob writes in this column:

The $3,000 I'll receive in Visa cards in not taxable.

I'd be willing to make a decent sized wager that this is not true.

While one can probably leave it off their return without repercussion,
I really doubt one could convince the IRS that this was not taxable.

Any CPS/EAs out there want to weigh in?

#3

Bob writes in this column:

> The $3,000 I'll receive in Visa cards in not taxable.

I'd be willing to make a decent sized wager that this is not true.

While one can probably leave it off their return without

repercussion,

I really doubt one could convince the IRS that this was not taxable.

Any CPS/EAs out there want to weigh in?

I am not a CPA but have an MBA and work as a fee-based financial
planner. Part of my work is to deal with accountants and attorneys on
a daily basis.

In theory, you report ALL your gambling winnings. This includes not
only your W-2G stated winnings but EVERYTHING. You are then allowed
as an itemized deduction to offset but not exceed that amount with
your losses.

In reality, it would be impossible for the IRS to monitor all of
that. So, the current "outdated" figure of $1200 per jackpot is set
as a threshhold for slot/VP machine play.

If you had 100 jackpots of $1199 you might not choose to report any
of those winnings. That doesn't imply the IRS would not be interested.

As to your question of comps, the value and taxation is a cloudy
issue. So, you should approach it in terms of what would be
considered "reasonable" if you ever were audited.

If you accepted a room worth $100 for one night, I don't think the
IRS would consider your case a high priority. However, if casinos
routinely gave you gift cards with a value of $3000 I strongly advise
you to seek professional counsel WITH A BACKGROUND IN GAMBLING
ISSUES. I would assume Bob has already retained trained professionals
whose judgment was reflected in his statement. If your situation is
similar to his you might consider doing the same.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "King Fish" <vpkingfish@...> wrote:

#4

>
> Bob writes in this column:
>
> > The $3,000 I'll receive in Visa cards in not taxable.
>
> I'd be willing to make a decent sized wager that this is not true.
>
> While one can probably leave it off their return without
repercussion,
> I really doubt one could convince the IRS that this was not taxable.
>
> Any CPS/EAs out there want to weigh in?

I am not a CPA but have an MBA and work as a fee-based financial
planner. Part of my work is to deal with accountants and attorneys on
a daily basis.

In theory, you report ALL your gambling winnings. This includes not
only your W-2G stated winnings but EVERYTHING. You are then allowed
as an itemized deduction to offset but not exceed that amount with
your losses.

I have the utmost respect for Bob Dancer. However, this goes 180
degrees counter to a CPA here in Las Vegas who recently wrote an
article about the taxable effect of casino comps including free play.
She's says it is all taxable. In the volume of VISA cards you are
talking about, I would want to have a letter from a C.P.A. who has a
long history of gaming taxation experience, carries malpractice
insurance and is willing to give you an opinion letter for your files.
This could be "discovered" years down the road and the penalties and
interest could be substantial. This same C.P.A. made it very clear
that the local IRS agent's manual does NOT square with current tax
law. Local agents are disallowing documented losing video poker losses
applied against W-G2 earnings. Therefore, audits which generate
disputed results have to be referred to the tax court, a lengthy
expensive, time consuming, and emotionally draining experience. I
would want a second opinion and one that is backed by credibility and
insurance. Best be right on this the first time. Assuming nothing!

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "npf15251" <npf15251@...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "King Fish" <vpkingfish@> wrote:

In reality, it would be impossible for the IRS to monitor all of
that. So, the current "outdated" figure of $1200 per jackpot is set
as a threshhold for slot/VP machine play.

If you had 100 jackpots of $1199 you might not choose to report any
of those winnings. That doesn't imply the IRS would not be interested.

As to your question of comps, the value and taxation is a cloudy
issue. So, you should approach it in terms of what would be
considered "reasonable" if you ever were audited.

If you accepted a room worth $100 for one night, I don't think the
IRS would consider your case a high priority. However, if casinos
routinely gave you gift cards with a value of $3000 I strongly advise
you to seek professional counsel WITH A BACKGROUND IN GAMBLING
ISSUES. I would assume Bob has already retained trained professionals
whose judgment was reflected in his statement. If your situation is
similar to his you might consider doing the same.

#5

Exactly. You got an opinion from a trained professional and are trying
to make an informed decision.

vpFREE is a valuable tool in terms of exchanging information about
strategy, offers, etc. but not legal advice. In financial planning
each person's situation is specific. Part of that is your willingness
to accept risk.

So, if you want to take a chance not reporting $3000 VISA cards as
taxable that is your privilege. Just be sure to have the ability
to "back up" your choice. I'm not sure that saying you may have read
somewhere that "Bob Dancer does it" would qualify as a valid excuse.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "metroman2020" <lane512@...> wrote:

I have the utmost respect for Bob Dancer. However, this goes 180
degrees counter to a CPA here in Las Vegas who recently wrote an
article about the taxable effect of casino comps including free
play.

#6

Casinos are now subject to the same laws that banks are, as a result
the complete computer records are routinely handed over. The old W2G
paperwork is now largely meaningless, though it continues nonetheless.
Casinos are required to look for "structuring", meaning transactions
below $1200 with the intention to defraud the government. Details are
secret.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "npf15251" <npf15251@...> wrote:

In reality, it would be impossible for the IRS to monitor all of
that. So, the current "outdated" figure of $1200 per jackpot is set
as a threshhold for slot/VP machine play.

#7

Some of those same casinos see no problem in having signs that say
things like "$1199 Royal! Non-taxable!"

···

On 10/31/07, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

Casinos are required to look for "structuring", meaning transactions
below $1200 with the intention to defraud the government. Details are
secret.

#8

I've the seen the $1199 signs which are basically
bragging that you aren't going to get a W2G but I've
never seen one that says non-taxable.

···

--- King Fish <vpkingfish@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/31/07, nightoftheiguana2000 > <nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Casinos are required to look for "structuring",
meaning transactions
> below $1200 with the intention to defraud the
government. Details are
> secret.

Some of those same casinos see no problem in having
signs that say
things like "$1199 Royal! Non-taxable!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

#9

The casinos know better than to do that.

They also "lure" you with a max 5-coin payoff of 239 on a $5 machine
where all other coin-ins are multiples of 50. They know you know what
that means - just less than $1200.

The casinos play into your tolerance for risk that you'll take a
chance in not reporting those winnings. It has no correlation as to
what you are actually obligated to report.

People assume tax risk in many careers. Some waiters report all their
tips, some only report those that are documented on credit card
receipts and "lowball" the rest. They figure cash isn't "traceable".

But your player's card keeps track of all coin in and out when the
card is inserted. So, there is a documented record of your play. Some
systems internally list jackpots during play that are under $1200.

I can't advise anyone which risks to take. It's your personal
decision. Clearly, extreme risk-takers will push tax evasion to the
max.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Wild Bill <wcimo@...> wrote:

I've the seen the $1199 signs which are basically
bragging that you aren't going to get a W2G but I've
never seen one that says non-taxable.

#10

I have. They're not common, but they're out there.

Maybe one I'll snap a picture of one.

···

On 10/31/07, Wild Bill <wcimo@yahoo.com> wrote:

I've the seen the $1199 signs which are basically
bragging that you aren't going to get a W2G but I've
never seen one that says non-taxable.

#11

I find it very hard to believe that any casino would post a sign stating
"non-taxable" on any gaming device. I'd like to know at which casinos
you have seen this and where the signs were placed.

···

On 10/31/07, King Fish <vpkingfish@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/31/07, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Casinos are required to look for "structuring", meaning transactions
> below $1200 with the intention to defraud the government. Details are
> secret.

Some of those same casinos see no problem in having signs that say
things like "$1199 Royal! Non-taxable!"

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#12

I've clearly seen some that said "no tax form" (the Reno Hilton used
to have some, I don't know whether they survived the transformation
into Grand Sierra Resort).

JBQ

···

On 10/31/07, King Fish <vpkingfish@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/31/07, Wild Bill <wcimo@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I've the seen the $1199 signs which are basically
> bragging that you aren't going to get a W2G but I've
> never seen one that says non-taxable.

I have. They're not common, but they're out there.

Maybe one I'll snap a picture of one.

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#13

I've seen them but they are becoming rare for some reason, lol.
Someone should get a pic and upload it here. Another would be the
"over 100% return" signs which usually include an asterix disclaimer
in small print: "with computer perfect play on select games". These
things will be collectables soon. "What happens in Vegas stays in
Vegas" small print: (federal and state laws still apply)

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Jean-Baptiste Queru" <jbqueru@...> wrote:

I've clearly seen some that said "no tax form" (the Reno Hilton used
to have some, I don't know whether they survived the transformation
into Grand Sierra Resort).

JBQ

On 10/31/07, King Fish <vpkingfish@...> wrote:
> On 10/31/07, Wild Bill <wcimo@...> wrote:
>
> > I've the seen the $1199 signs which are basically
> > bragging that you aren't going to get a W2G but I've
> > never seen one that says non-taxable.
>
> I have. They're not common, but they're out there.
>
> Maybe one I'll snap a picture of one.
>
>
> vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

#14

Recent Activity
    
      30
  New Members

Visit Your Group
      Y! Sports for TV
  Game Day Companion
  Live fantasy league
  & game stats on TV.

    Yahoo! Finance
  It's Now Personal
  Guides, news,
  advice & more.

    Dog Zone
  on Yahoo! Groups
  Join a Group
  all about dogs.

  .

Well you could always go play in Windsor Ontario, Old saying in these parts " what happens in Canada stays in Canada". Actually I just made that up, but obviously they don't report anything to our IRS.

···

King Fish <vpkingfish@gmail.com> wrote: On 10/31/07, Wild Bill <wcimo@yahoo.com> wrote:

I've the seen the $1199 signs which are basically
bragging that you aren't going to get a W2G but I've..................................................

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#15

I find it very hard to believe that any casino would post a sign stating
"non-taxable" on any gaming device. I'd like to know at which casinos
you have seen this and where the signs were placed.

>
> > Casinos are required to look for "structuring", meaning

transactions

> > below $1200 with the intention to defraud the government.

Details are

> > secret.
>
> Some of those same casinos see no problem in having signs that say
> things like "$1199 Royal! Non-taxable!"

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ditto, I'd be willing make a large wager that the sign does not say
"non taxable". Gambling wins are taxable whether it's 1099 level or not.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

On 10/31/07, King Fish <vpkingfish@...> wrote:
> On 10/31/07, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:

#16

How much?

Make it worth my while, and I'll get a picture.

···

On 10/31/07, caribou_123 <caribou123@gmail.com> wrote:

Ditto, I'd be willing make a large wager that the sign does not say
"non taxable".

#17

King Fish,

Would the respect from vpFREE members make it worth your while?

You said, "Some of those same casinos see no problem in having
signs that say things like '$1199 Royal! Non-taxable!'"

"Some of those same casinos" implies that you've seen these signs
in more than just one casino.

Hey, KF, I am with the others. I don't believe your statement is accurate.

In fact, it's highly inaccurate. Highly.

Luke

···

On 11/1/07, King Fish <vpkingfish@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/31/07, caribou_123 <caribou123@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ditto, I'd be willing make a large wager that the sign does not say
> "non taxable".

How much?

Make it worth my while, and I'll get a picture.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#18

This is from the upcoming newly-expanded and newly-titled tax book, "Tax Help for Gamblers." (Out in early December) Note: The casino specifically referred to is the Stratosphere.

"JEAN: Both players and casinos harbor some widespread misconceptions about W-2Gs. First, most players believe (or want to believe) that if you don't get a W-2G, you don't have to report that particular gambling win. And this viewpoint is supported by information in print, even from otherwise accurate gambling writers, seeming to encourage players to look for a machine with a top jackpot under $1,200.

"Surprisingly, even the casinos seem to encourage this kind of thinking. I've seen many slot machines with a $1,199 top jackpot that seems to give the appearance of circumventing tax law. Some casinos have reduced the payoffs slightly on some winning video poker hands, so the jackpot is just under the W-2G-issuing amount of $1,200, such as a $5 machine that drops the regular payoff of 250 credits ($1,250) for the straight flush to 239 ($1,195). Or they create a high-limit slot machine that replaces W-2G-generating jackpots on a primary game with lots of bonus wins on a secondary one, keeping each one under that paperwork $1,200 figure.

"One casino went so far as to rename some of its VP machines where management had fiddled with the schedules so there were fewer W-2G jackpots. They even sent out press releases, touting the new "duty-free" machines: Duty-Free Double Bonus and Duty-Free Double Double Bonus. I'm not sure whether the short tenure of these games was due to a lack of play or the casinos' realization that it might not be wise to promote so obviously the erroneous idea that they could eliminate your tax liability. It's one thing to try to cut out cumbersome paperwork and irritatingly long delays for your customer; it's another to encourage them to break the law.

      "No matter how shrewdly gambling writers and casinos may seem to be steering you down a different and dangerous path, you're responsible for reporting all gambling wins, and whether you get a W-2G or not has no bearing on that. The fact that many people don't report gambling wins when there's no W-2G evidence won't help you in an IRS audit."

···

________________
Jean $�ott
The new " FRUGAL VIDEO POKER
SCOUTING GUIDE" and other frugal
products are available at my Web site,
http://queenofcomps.com/.

#19

Would the respect from vpFREE members make it worth your while?

Thanks, but no. I have enough of that.

   I don't believe your statement is accurate.

Believe what you want to believe.

In fact, it's highly inaccurate. Highly.

Solopsism. It's not what you think it is.

···

On 11/1/07, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@gmail.com> wrote:

#20

Solopsism. It's not what you think it is.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "King Fish" <vpkingfish@...> wrote:

----------------------------------------------
Since there are not very many posts that send me to the dictionary, I
am curious about this word. It is new to me. It is not listed in my
new 300,000 word Webster's Unabridged Dictionary or my ancient, two
volume New Century Dictionary which contains many archaic words;
the "century" being the one which began in 1900. ((O:

Would you be kind enough to enlighten me, and any other students of
etymology who might be interested, as to the meaning of the word
solopsism?

Thanks!

~Babe~