Ashcans posted:

I have to admit, I admire the broker who takes a look at this and says 'yea, I can sell that to someone':



BWM: Spending money on a collapsing cliff face that you can't actually access or even build on.

Nocheez posted:

Everyone hated muslims for a while and wanted to be a minister?

Ashcans posted:

I have to admit, I admire the broker who takes a look at this and says 'yea, I can sell that to someone':



BWM: Spending money on a collapsing cliff face that you can't actually access or even build on.

Ashcans posted:

I have to admit, I admire the broker who takes a look at this and says 'yea, I can sell that to someone':



BWM: Spending money on a collapsing cliff face that you can't actually access or even build on.

19 o'clock posted:

"What do you mean substance over form?"

This poo poo is so loving dumb. I had a teammate who used to explain to me that he can deduct every and all costs of his day to day life (going to the bar, gassing up, paying rent, eating out) on account of the fact that "If I don't eat, or don't pay my bills, I can't work - ergo: business deduction!" I politely admonished him not to flagrantly violate the law, however he insisted that I didn't know what I was talking about.

At the moment my CPA licensure is underway pending review with NASBA. Maybe one day I'll see through all of the bullshit I've been fed...

totalnewbie posted:

CellBlock posted:

It's just like that streamer/YouTuber who was like "I shot a video walking around my apartment, that means the whole thing is my workplace." and "I vlogged about my divorce, so my divorce attorney is a business expense."

Not long after that, naturally, he made some videos about how it's not fair that the IRS is coming after him. I'm guessing it was because he 1) committed incredible tax fraud and 2) made YouTube videos about how he was totally committing tax fraud.

CellBlock posted:

It's just like that streamer/YouTuber who was like "I shot a video walking around my apartment, that means the whole thing is my workplace." and "I vlogged about my divorce, so my divorce attorney is a business expense."

Not long after that, naturally, he made some videos about how it's not fair that the IRS is coming after him. I'm guessing it was because he 1) committed incredible tax fraud and 2) made YouTube videos about how he was totally committing tax fraud.

19 o'clock posted:

That was such a juicy read/watch. I wish Onision would post more whinging about the big bad IRS for doing...their very real and anticipated duty to collect tax on income.

Krispy Wafer posted:

Whoa whoa...he said in his Youtube video that he was taking those things as deductions?

Do these people not realize there are finder's fees for tax snitches?

CellBlock posted:

It's just like that streamer/YouTuber who was like "I shot a video walking around my apartment, that means the whole thing is my workplace." and "I vlogged about my divorce, so my divorce attorney is a business expense."

Not long after that, naturally, he made some videos about how it's not fair that the IRS is coming after him. I'm guessing it was because he 1) committed incredible tax fraud and 2) made YouTube videos about how he was totally committing tax fraud.

Elysium posted:

So that San Fran hillside got me looking at the most expensive houses in San Fran (a paltry 29 million) and then near me, and then in NYC (80 million) until finally I found the ultimate BWM real estate.

quote:

The only certain thing may be that nothing in this story is what it seems. The cast of characters associated with the property down the years has included the shah of Iran, Brad Pitt, a Cuban American philanthropist convicted and jailed for running a property scam, and the feuding heirs and trustees of the founder of Herbalife, the global wellness promotion behemoth that has itself been accused of perpetrating scams on its customers.

On top of that, the Mountain has been at the center of a never-ending lawsuit whose stultifying complexities and ever-wandering trajectory from party to party and from court to court rival the infamous Jarndyce v Jarndyce case from Dickens’s Bleak House. A major character in the story is in fact called Charles Dickens, or Chip Dickens, as he prefers to be known, an Atlanta businessman who came to Los Angeles more than a decade ago to pull off the ultimate real estate deal, only to pile up enough regrets for a jukebox’s worth of hard-luck country songs.

Research by the Guardian suggests the property may not be eligible for sale at all. At a federal court hearing in April, lawyers on opposite sides acknowledged a “cloud of title” – legalese meaning it’s not clear who owns it, never mind who owes whom for the tens of millions dollars spent to date on grading the hillside and other expenses associated with preparing the land for sale. An exasperated federal bankruptcy judge, Barry Russell, washed his hands of the case at the hearing, saying that after 10 years of litigation “this has to come to an end”, at least in his courtroom.

Krispy Wafer posted:

Back when I traveled locally for work, the team I was on would get reimbursed by whatever was the standard was for every mile we drove. One of my co-workers was so excited to tell me how I could get reimbursed AND claim the miles on my taxes. I have no idea if that ever came back to bite her on the rear end.

Also, looking that up just now I noticed you don't get that deduction as of 2017. Was that a Trump tax gotcha? I'm going to go out on a limb and make a bold claim that a lot of people who claim mileage are not rich and will not be happy next year even with their larger standard deduction.

22 Eargesplitten posted:

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/standard-mileage-rates-for-2018-up-from-rates-for-2017

Or is that out of date and they never bothered putting some sort of note in there after that happened?

I feel like most people claiming more than they should in self-employment deductions never get hit, especially when they're only claiming an extra $1-2k or so. You know, the sort of amount that the difference between your whole phone bill vs a proportionate amount of your phone bill is. Especially since if they were to take it to court they would have to try to disprove you saying how much you're using that for business versus personal use. Unless it's similar to civil asset forfeiture where you have to prove that you aren't doing something wrong? I guess that wouldn't surprise me.

Someone claiming their whole rent/mortgage like Onision or the person mentioned in a post above will probably get hit before long, but with how underfunded the IRS is I bet most of these people fall under pigs in terms of pigs getting fat and hogs getting slaughtered.

I'm not endorsing cheating on your taxes at all, BTW.

quote:

For tax years prior to 2018, if you work for an employer who requires you do some traveling using your own car, federal tax law allows you to claim a deduction for the business mileage if you’re not reimbursed for the expense. Even when you do receive a reimbursement or allowance, it’s still possible to take a deduction depending on the type of reimbursement policy used by your employer.

After 2017, these and other unreimbursed employee expenses are no longer deductible.

Ashcans posted:

if you stretch your budget to $200k you can get this beautiful 1500sqft lot on a 35-degree slope with no street access. Just imagine the potential!

greazeball posted:

not bad not bad but how about ONE BILLION DOLLARS for 157 acres that may not even be eligible for sale at all?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/10/la-worlds-most-valuable-real-estate-billion-dollar-lot

greazeball posted:

not bad not bad but how about ONE BILLION DOLLARS for 157 acres that may not even be eligible for sale at all?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/10/la-worlds-most-valuable-real-estate-billion-dollar-lot

TraderStav posted:

My wife busts my chops when I pick up two $20 polos at Costco.

I just looked at the past few years of my spending history, my family of 5 has spent an average of 2% of our single-income household on Clothing.

We aren't shopping at Mervyn's or anything either.

19 o'clock posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwD6SCAENx4

Hey, at least he's insufferable, too!

EDIT: Ha! I forgot he has a Tesla. Several layers of BWM.

Subjunctive posted:

Excellent drainage

CmdrRiker posted:

can someone explain how he thinks

Krispy Wafer posted:

Turbo Tax seems to think it's nixed:

https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/jobs-and-career/federal-tax-laws-on-mileage-reimbursement/L6b5ImHo0


Our stupid tax code.

CmdrRiker posted:

I get that he is deducting a lot of capital expenses for his business which seems legal, but can someone explain how he thinks he can deduct his divorce fees and mortgage?

He stated in his video that he deducted his divorce because his divorce settlement involved sharing business assets with his ex-wife? WHAT?

And since he films in his house, he can deduct the whole mortgage? WHAT? I guess you can deduct some of your mortgage if you have a space dedicated to your work, but.. WHAT?

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Keep an eye out for new castle construction in Southern California soon.

19 o'clock posted:

He also stated that "nobody ever told me about this" or "TurboTax never explained it to me". He's a damaged idiot.

If you're too busy living in your house to invite the IRS in and validate its business purpose, it's not for business.

MisterOblivious posted:

He didn't just say "TurboTax never explained it to me," he asked reddit if he could sue TurboTax.

MisterOblivious posted:

He didn't just say "TurboTax never explained it to me," he asked reddit if he could sue TurboTax.
https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/726g5m/turbo_tax_screwed_me_over_wa/

"I tried to claim my divorce as a business expense since she was trying to take my business from me, common sense. " "She was trying to take my business from me. That's a legitimate Business expense."
https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/726g5m/turbo_tax_screwed_me_over_wa/dng82rb/



https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/6yox5p/irs_auditing_me_for_the_past_three_years/
https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/726g5m/turbo_tax_screwed_me_over_wa/

Nocheez posted:

Ignorance of a crime is not a valid defense.

Nocheez posted:

Ignorance of a crime is not a valid defense.

quote:

1. Contention: The filing of a tax return is voluntary.
Some taxpayers assert that they are not required to file federal tax returns because the filing of a tax return is voluntary. Proponents of this contention point to the fact that the IRS tells taxpayers in the Form 1040 instruction book that the tax system is voluntary. Additionally, these taxpayers frequently quote Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 176 (1960), for the proposition that "[o]ur system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint."

The Law: The word “voluntary,” as used in Flora and in IRS publications, refers to our system of allowing taxpayers initially to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate returns, rather than have the government determine tax for them from the outset. The requirement to file an income tax return is not voluntary and is clearly set forth in sections 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. See also Treas. Reg. § 1.6011-1(a).

quote:

3. Contention: Taxpayers can reduce their federal income tax liability by filing a “zero return”.
Some taxpayers attempt to reduce their federal income tax liability by filing a tax return that reports no income and no tax liability (a “zero return”) even though they have taxable income. Many of these taxpayers also request a refund of any taxes withheld by an employer. These individuals typically attach to the zero return a “corrected” Form W-2 or another information return that reports income and income tax withholding, reling on one or more of the frivolous arguments discussed throughout this outline to support their position.

The Law: A taxpayer that has taxable income cannot legally avoid income tax by filing a zero return.

CmdrRiker posted:

I get that he is deducting a lot of capital expenses for his business which seems legal, but can someone explain how he thinks he can deduct his divorce fees and mortgage?

He stated in his video that he deducted his divorce because his divorce settlement involved sharing business assets with his ex-wife? WHAT?

And since he films in his house, he can deduct the whole mortgage? WHAT? I guess you can deduct some of your mortgage if you have a space dedicated to your work, but.. WHAT?

Tomfoolery posted:

The IRS gets so many frivolous arguments against paying taxes that they put together a super long document listing specific laws and court cases showing for example that paying taxes is not, in fact, voluntary. Some of them are pretty stupid.

https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/the-truth-about-frivolous-tax-arguments-section-i-a-to-c

I've put a couple examples below but don't want to gunk up the thread too much so I'd recommend skimming the document. There are some really good ones in there I haven't seen before ("The IRS is LEGALLY OBLIGATED to file a return for me if I don't file one!")

Hoodwinker posted:

I was at a concert at Ravinia last night, the Chicagoland area's fancy open-air concert venue, and found something amusing inside of their massive program booklet. First, I'll add that it contained no less than three ads for wealth management groups (know your audience I guess) but one of them had a line that stuck out to me. I don't have a picture but here's a transcription:

Emphasis mine. I love that anybody with half a brain will look at those two lines and go, "Huh? Why the gently caress should I give a poo poo that they're ranked first in making themselves money?"

SlapActionJackson posted:

Mens rea is still an element of many crimes.