IRS suggests dropping W2G limit to $600 from $1200

[UNIMAN]

Yep, that's right, the IRS suggests lowering the limit. What a bunch of shit!
The gaming industry has 90 days to reply with their opinion.

What the article does not say, and I'm not surprised as the LV Review Journal SUCKS BIG TIME, is that all machine software out there is currently set for $1200. That means most, if not all, machines would require new software! (someone correct me if I'm wrong)

I had a $2000 W2G last year. No problem I thought, I lost more than that. So I retrieved Win/Loss statements from my favorite casinos to offset the $2000. The $2000 goes on Form 1040, the losses can only go on Schedule A, but I don't have enough other deductions to make Schedule A worth while, sooooo, I gotta pay taxes on the $2000 even though I lost more than that last year! Oh, that's really fair!!!
The bastards put gambling loses on the Schedule A. A f&*%ing shell game! 

For some reason, just the letters IRS makes me cuss a blue streak! Hmm, maybe I should have put this in the Rant section. 


http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/irs-suggests-dropping-casino-winnings-threshold-600

[BettorSlots]

Here's an interesting tidbit of history and fact for you to ponder on this subject.


The $1,200 limit was established almost 40 years ago back in 1977.  Both then and now one could argue that you could lose 100's to 1000's of dollars before you could hit a jackpot over $1,200 so I'm sure that was taken into consideration when establishing the limit.  You could say that one would lose quite a bit of money during the process so with wins and losses being considered there was no sense in accounting for small jackpots under $1,200.  I'm sure they also took into consideration the average annual salary at that time was $12,000....so 10% of that was "life changing" and thus a "jackpot".


Today however, when considering the effects of inflation, the average bankroll of the player willing to lose, and the encouragement of casinos by way of game design for one to play higher amounts per bet, its only logical that the jackpot limit should be increased.  The average Diamond (Total Rewards) and Platinum (Mlife) player, or higher, is prepared to lose thousands on any given trip.  Today the average players household annual income is a little over $50,000. 


Looking at the attached picture of an inflation calculator I found online, you can see that $1,200 then is worth about $4,800 now.  Again, close to about 10% of the average household income.  Lowering the jackpot limit to $600 is of course preposterous.  If anything it should be increased to at least $4,000 or more....all logic being considered. 


I'm sure they'll get their way though regardless of logic....

[CVslots]

Unfortunately, everyday common sense seems to play a small role in politics, especially surrounding tax collection.

I do appreciate the fact I can claim an equal amount of losses though....seems to help every year!

[TheAirBalancer]

$1200 seemed pretty low, but knowing that the amount dates from 1977, I now realize that it's just absurd. 

[Thegambler327]

I agree 100%. The 1200 is ridiculous! It most definitely should be increased. And here in Wisconsin you can't deduct your loses for state tax anymore. I can lose 50k but if I hit 1 jackpot I have to pay the taxes for state. And what drives me crazy is all table games is 9999 in 24 hours is tax free.

[CVslots]

Hmmm. That's strange, as I recall, State did not allow gambling losses, only Federal. I will let you know after I file the year!

[buybestslots]

Here's an interesting tidbit of history and fact for you to ponder on this subject.


The $1,200 limit was established almost 40 years ago back in 1977.  Both then and now one could argue that you could lose 100's to 1000's of dollars before you could hit a jackpot over $1,200 so I'm sure that was taken into consideration when establishing the limit.  You could say that one would lose quite a bit of money during the process so with wins and losses being considered there was no sense in accounting for small jackpots under $1,200.  I'm sure they also took into consideration the average annual salary at that time was $12,000....so 10% of that was "life changing" and thus a "jackpot".


Today however, when considering the effects of inflation, the average bankroll of the player willing to lose, and the encouragement of casinos by way of game design for one to play higher amounts per bet, its only logical that the jackpot limit should be increased.  The average Diamond (Total Rewards) and Platinum (Mlife) player, or higher, is prepared to lose thousands on any given trip.  Today the average players household annual income is a little over $50,000. 


Looking at the attached picture of an inflation calculator I found online, you can see that $1,200 then is worth about $4,800 now.  Again, close to about 10% of the average household income.  Lowering the jackpot limit to $600 is of course preposterous.  If anything it should be increased to at least $4,000 or more....all logic being considered. 


I'm sure they'll get their way though regardless of logic....

on total rewards  you get 1 point for every 5 bucks you put thur  slots  we just came home from Cherokee  we put 2509 points on wifes card  in 12 hours meaning we put thur over 12,500 , back in the good old days before players cards  they wrote in your book when you got change , was easy to cover all wins if you knew how to get your book filled with  a lot of change buying  , a rack of $5  tokens was 500 in book and they only wrote in what you bought not what you cashed back in at another change window , like you said 1200 is low 600 is a joke, high limits room would need a lot more help  on a 5 buck and up  machine there would be a lot of slips going  out

[SolidSilver]

There are 3 reasons for this situation:

1. Government "Social Engineering." Gambling is like any other investment: you risk money for the chance of gain. (And if you think playing the slots is a risky investment, talk to all the folks who bought DotCom stock.) But Da Gummint prefers to discourage gambling, and therefore separates it from other investment modes. Or maybe they just figure it's easier to squeeze money out of gamblers without public protest. This Social Engineering aspect is obvious from the fact that there is a limit at all. Why not a limit on oil exploration or pork belly futures?

2. Gambling "investment" (losses) are rarely documented,  but big jackpots are automatically reported. To the Infernal Revenue Suckers, jackpots appear as "windfalls". A windfall profit to the IRS is like chum to a flock of seagulls.

3. It is unelected faceless bureaucrats, who are rewarded at Performance Review time by how much $$$ they can suck up,  who make these decisions.

Until public outcry forces a change (yeah, sure...), all you can do is scrupulously document every damn dime you "invest" in gambling;
and on April 15th determine if the offset is worth doing a Sched A or just taking the Standard Deduction.

Or, you can vote for me to become Emperor of the US. I promise you, all this will change!

(Yeah, I agree: this thread probably belongs in Rants & Raves.  )

[lookes]

SolidSilver has my vote.