Lawyer and High Stakes Poker Player Tom Goldstein Indicted for Tax Fraud
Tom Goldstein, a high profile attorney, is also a long time high-stakes poker player. On January 16th, he was indicted f
Sounds like he was getting coaching from Chino Rheem, win all that money and stiff everyone by being a degen. Sure way to get people to snitch on you is to stiff them. He better not be taking this to trial as there will be people around the corner to testify.
Case is not correlating anything. Don’t need to to convict. If they can prove the claimed wins, and seems likely they can, then they can show he hid income. Since was not filing as a professional gambler, wins are entered as “other income” while losses are entered as misc deductions. You don’t net them. The bank fraud indictments are even easier. There a
Even if you dont file as a professional gambler you can deduct losses up to the sum of winnings. I think thats what the defense is going to be. He wouldnt be in debt and taking absurd loans if he was net up millions. Clearly he lost it. Now did he lose it within the same tax year as his big wins?? Maybe not, pretty ridiculous you cant carry over losses tho. But I think hes going to try saying he lost it same year he won it, or at least a significant portion of it. He definitely has been paying some income tax. It doesnt say what he claimed he reported
I can't help but think if my name was, Tom Goldstein, and I played on stream undercover with masks and fake tattoos... I've go by a name other than "Thomas"
And if I owed millions in taxes and was using my business as a slush fund, I certainly wouldn't be playing for millions on a poker livestream.
Even if you dont file as a professional gambler you can deduct losses up to the sum of winnings. I think thats what the defense is going to be. He wouldnt be in debt and taking absurd loans if he was net up millions. Clearly he lost it. Now did he lose it within the same tax year as his big wins?? Maybe not, pretty ridiculous you cant carry over losses tho. But I think hes goin
I clearly said losses go in as misc deductions. The tax fraud is that gambling income must be reported. In this indictment the claim is that that income was not reported.
Does not matter if losses exceeded these wins because they still must be reported and evidently were not. You do not get to report net winnings. In accountant jargon ALL winnings are reported above the line while losses are reported below the line. Nonprofessionals do not report the net of wins/losses
I clearly said losses go in as misc deductions. The tax fraud is that gambling income must be reported. In this indictment the claim is that that income was not reported. Does not matter if losses exceeded these wins because they still must be reported and evidently were not. You do not get to report net winnings. In accountant jargon ALL winnings are reported above the line wh
I think that you, as well as the government officials, are way too certain about the nuances involved.
What exactly is the definition of a professional? That is not clear at all in the tax code.
Saying "I think" before such pronouncements will make you appear more judicious and nuanced.
One could use a real estate professional as an analogy, in which 750 hours would qualify him. Or they could use other definitions and analogies?
What exactly is tax fraud, too? Again, undefined and subject to interpretation.
Never fails that the attorney and tax professionals come out in hoards in threads like these
I think that you, as well as the government officials, are way too certain about the nuances involved. What exactly is the definition of a professional? That is not clear at all in the tax code. Saying "I think" before such pronouncements will make you appear more judicious and nuanced. One could use a real estate professional as an analogy, in which 750 hours would qualify him
You can debate pro or not pro and there are different filing requirements for each.
But it's not like he filed as a pro and they said no you're not a pro you need to it the other way.
He won a ton of money and didn't file taxes on it. That's absolutely tax fraud.
I think that you, as well as the government officials, are way too certain about the nuances involved. What exactly is the definition of a professional? That is not clear at all in the tax code. Saying "I think" before such pronouncements will make you appear more judicious and nuanced. One could use a real estate professional as an analogy, in which 750 hours would qualify him
If he filed as a pro and the IRS said no, you might have a point. Then we would have to look at the definition of professional gambler and see if he meets the criteria. But the forms filed indicate he did not claim he was professional. So by his own actions he filed as a recreational gambler.
As to what is tax fraud, in this case that is quite clear. You must report all gambling income. Does not say net income; very clear it is ALL income. That is well defined and I don't see much room for interpretation in this case.
If he filed as a pro and the IRS said no, you might have a point. Then we would have to look at the definition of professional gambler and see if he meets the criteria. But the forms filed indicate he did not claim he was professional. So by his own actions he filed as a recreational gambler.As to what is tax fraud, in this case that is quite clear. You must report all gambling
The gov sees the messages where he confirms he won 50m usd. But next weekend he loses 40m of it. I could see him not including the massive swings since it nets anyways
how can he have both poker debts and be indicted for "poker winnings"
isn't he essentially stuck?
What exactly is the definition of a professional? That is not clear at all in the tax code.
Actually, it is very clear. If you file Schedule C and claim you are a self-employed gambler, then you are a pro. If you do not file Schedule C, then you are saying you are an amateur. Whether you knew this or not.
However, if you file Schedule C, the IRS might audit you, deny you are a pro, and require you to refile without using Schedule C. You could fight this determination, but if you lose, you would then need to refile without using Schedule C for gambling.
The gov sees the messages where he confirms he won 50m usd. But next weekend he loses 40m of it. I could see him not including the massive swings since it nets anyways
NO. It does not net. That is well established, and well known to all tax professionals. As has been said in this thread several times, if you file as an amateur, all net WINS must be posted as other income on your 1040. Then, all net losses (up to the total amount of your net wins) can be claimed as an itemizable deduction.
If you want to net the wins plus losses, you must file Schedule C and claim to be a pro. If Goldstein didn't file Schedule C, then he is saying he is an amateur, and must provide the results as I described above.
All of this is well established, and has been for decades. Could you go to court and get it changed? Unlikely, but anything is possible. With our current Supreme Court, no precedent is sacrosanct. But you are, IMO, highly unlikely to win this fight.
What I really didn't understand about this indictment is the part about hiring women to do little or no work. It sounds like they were officially part of the payroll of his firm, and he declared this and did everything necessary for them to be legal employees. What part of this is illegal?
NO. It does not net. That is well established, and well known to all tax professionals. As has been said in this thread several times, if you file as an amateur, all net WINS must be posted as other income on your 1040. Then, all net losses (up to the total amount of your net wins) can be claimed as an itemizable deduction.If you want to net the wins plus losses, you must f
I have my doubts about whether this is as clear cut and simple as you think. But I'm biased. I tend to think of a lot of prosecutors as agenda-driven low IQ types who lack a moral compass, prone to making dogmatic pronouncements rather than thinking with nuance.
In any case, he entered a plea of not guilty. Let's let the facts and arguments speak for themselves as gambling is not a well-defined aspect of the tax code.
Do lawyers hire other lawyers to defend them in cases? How does the lawyer representing the other lawyer have one then? Is there just an unlimited amount of lawyers defending other lawyers?
NO. It does not net. That is well established, and well known to all tax professionals. As has been said in this thread several times, if you file as an amateur, all net WINS must be posted as other income on your 1040. Then, all net losses (up to the total amount of your net wins) can be claimed as an itemizable deduction.If you want to net the wins plus losses, you must f
In 2012 a federal judge ruled that poker is not gambling. The defendant's counsel was Tom Goldstein.
The judge wrote "studies have found that skilled players defeated unskilled players both in simulations and in real-world play."
I think defining gambling and its relationship to poker with more precision is worth consideration. I know that you disagree, oddly.
The gov sees the messages where he confirms he won 50m usd. But next weekend he loses 40m of it. I could see him not including the massive swings since it nets anyways
And you would be guilty of tax fraud for underreporting income. For a rec, all wins are reported as income. Losses are reported as an itemized deduction. You are not allowed to net wins and losses across sessions and only report this net. ALL income must be reported
What I really didn't understand about this indictment is the part about hiring women to do little or no work. It sounds like they were officially part of the payroll of his firm, and he declared this and did everything necessary for them to be legal employees. What part of this is illegal?
That they did not do actual work. They have to do legit work and for a rational wage. I can’t “hire” you to come in one time for 10 min, make a pot of coffee and then pay you a $15k salary.
They were hired by his company and paid by the company. I presume he wrote off their pay as wages expense. So the company must get business related services in exchange for wages. And there needs to be a rational basis for the wages paid.
If he personally wanted to employ and pay them, then any personal services could be paid. At least as far as IRS is concerned; some services for pay might run afoul of other non IRS laws. But those wages would likely not be deductible.
I can hire some one to clean my office space and deduct that cost as a legit business expense. But if I personally hire someone to clean my house, I don’t get to deduct that cost.
If I have my business hire someone to clean my house, the business (generally) can’t write off that expense. In fact the business should include this as non cash compensation paid to me as imputed income. And I need to pay both income and payroll tax on this income.
This is what he did except he pretended these wages were a legitimate expense and had the business write them off.
That they did not do actual work. They have to do legit work and for a rational wage. I can’t “hire” you to come in one time for 10 min, make a pot of coffee and then pay you a $15k salary. They were hired by his company and paid by the company. I presume he wrote off their pay as wages expense. So the company must get business related services in exchange for wages. And there
Why do you presume to understand this case? We only have information from some prosecutor that probably couldn't crack a 160 on the LSATs.
Why do you presume to understand this case? We only have information from some prosecutor that probably couldn't crack a 160 on the LSATs.
Ok, my response up to the final paragraph was not dependent on this case. That part was answering answering a question of how you can put someone on payroll but then find out what they did was illegal.
That part is independent of the abilities of this prosecutor.
IANYL and this is not legal advice, but ime in a quick reading of this indictment, this prosecutor is in no way stretching, contorting or bending laws. It is a very straightforward indictment. If the stated facts, likely given to the prosecutor by others, are accurate, it will likely end in a conviction or more likely a plea.
So if this prosecutor, who also probably did not write it hims3lf, probably could and did break 160 on LSATs
Ok, my response up to the final paragraph was not dependent on this case. That part was answering answering a question of how you can put someone on payroll but then find out what they did was illegal. That part is independent of the abilities of this prosecutor. IANYL and this is not legal advice, but ime in a quick reading of this indictment, this prosecutor is in no way stre
The average current score for GW is 168, which is 4 points higher than it was in 2000. The average AA student score 13 points lower than the average Asian/Caucasian student and schools have accordingly made those adjustments for admission. That would suggest a score of 151-156.
