‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ potentially very bad for poker (players) in the US + STAY ON TOPIC!!
This makes Black Friday look like a children’s birthday party.
There’s no chance this passes right? It would
Could rake be deducted separately from losses as a “fee” charged by the casino (the literal definition of rake), rather than including it in losses?
If so, this could be a workaround to help offset the damage done by this bill, although it would be very hard for live players to track compared to online players.
To clarify, here is an example.
Session Wins: $300
Session Losses not including rake: $200
Session Rake: $15
Loss Deduction at 90%: $180
Rake Deduction: $15
Net Taxable Income: $105
Still not great, because your taxable income would be $85 if you could deduct normally, but it could be something, assuming this is a potentially legal thing to do … this was an example with arbitrary numbers though, and with thin win rates online (but lots of rake) it could be a better scenario than I described.
Could rake be deducted separately from losses as a “fee” charged by the casino (the literal definition of rake), rather than including it in losses?If so, this could be a workaround to help offset the damage done by this bill, although it would be very hard for live players to track compared to online players.To clarify, here is an example.Session Wins: $300Session Losses not i
I’m not sure what you mean by “session wins” and “session losses”. A “session” is either a win or a loss, not both. In your example, you had a single taxable session win of $85 and no deductible gambling loss.
I’m not sure what you mean by “session wins” and “session losses”. A “session” is either a win or a loss, not both. In your example, you had a single taxable session win of $85 and no deductible gambling loss.
Sorry bad example - essentially I’m just saying could you deduct 100% of rake and 90% of losses (not including rake)?
A better example would be:
Winning Sessions: $5,000
Losing Sessions (not including rake fees): $4,000
Rake: $200
Loss Deduction at 90%: $3,600
Rake Deduction: $200
Other businesses are allowed to deduct “fees” as business expenses, and rake is a fee, so why shouldn’t a player be able to deduct all of it?
The gambling in poker does not happen between the player and the casino, it happens between players. Rake is just a fee the casino charges to pay for overhead, and make a small profit.
I understand the law may not allow for this - just asking specifically whether this is a valid loophole or not.
Sorry bad example - essentially I’m just saying could you deduct 100% of rake and 90% of losses (not including rake)? A better example would be:Winning Sessions: $5,000Losing Sessions (not including rake fees): $4,000Rake: $200Loss Deduction at 90%: $3,600Rake Deduction: $200Other businesses are allowed to deduct “fees” as business expenses, and rake is a fee, so why shouldn’t
Counting rake as a gambling loss rather than an expense is beneficial to recreational gamblers, because expenses related to gambling are only deductible for professional players.
If you are allowed to deduct 100% of expenses, I suppose interpreting it this way would be helpful to a professional. But I seem to recall someone saying the new law also placed the 90% cap on expense deductions. So in this case it wouldn't matter either way.
https://apnews.com/article/gambling-tax-...
Senate republicans block attempt to repeal gambling tax……. Both sides are the same dontcha know.
https://apnews.com/article/gambling-tax-...
Senate republicans block attempt to repeal gambling tax……. Both sides are the same dontcha know.
It’s a pretty amazing situation. Republicans passed the thing, want it undone, won’t do it without dem concessions, and are sounding the alarm about how problematic the law is. We should study politician brains for tumors.
If one wants to go down the knowledge hole look at where it came from, whose assistant was in charge of it, and what dirt is there. It won't get further than that tho. But it's pretty salacious.
What I will say is that it wasn't fiscally motivated. Which is why it kinda blindsided peeps. Nor was it politically motivated. Although it should've been given what the net positivity of this industry has given our nation. To be fair tho, Black Friday kinda killed that.
Just to recap:* The UIGAE was introduced in 2006 which made online poker in the USA effectively illega, and it was introduced by a Republican named Jim Leach, under a Republican white house (Bush), a Republican majority Senate, and Republican majority House, and influenced by major Republican donors like Sheldon Adelson* The UIGAE was enforced in 2011 (Black Friday) and the onl
Just want to append to this with the new information,
* Democrat politician Catherine Cortez Masto led a bill to revoke the gambling tax change (also sponsored by Democrat Jacky Rosen)
* Republican politician Todd Young blocks the change
Only tiniest bit of poker support from R was Cruz also co-sponsoring the bill though he made no public statements in support of it (not surprising given that courting evangelicals was always a huge part of his campaign strategy and they are the ones who tend to be anti-gambling)
Anyone who thinks that the "old Republicans" did this and new ones dont are obviously completely wrong. Last time I checked, evangelicals still have huge influence in the GOP.
And to address all the counterarguments again:
"Democrats are corrupt and dont care about you either" -> thats great but Id pick their indifference to having evangelicals actively try to screw poker players over, and as mentioned above, Democrats have in reality have gone to bat for poker players. All the many religious people who think gambling is a sin are Republicans. Despite constant rhetoric to the contrary, Republicans are the party of big government, moral busybody, nanny states
"But this really happened by
"Democrats are bad for other reason" -> Maybe but this is a poker forum on the poker topic and lets focus on the specific issues of poker where Republicans are clearly trying to screw us over and Democrats are clearly trying to prevent that
"Its ok cause we'll just cheat on our taxes" -> Government is already cracking down on stuff like this, look at how closely theyre looking at Venmo these days. Cheating on your taxes is a crime and "lets all just commit a crime , that does sometimes get enforced" is a terrible strategy
"It wont impact players that much since most people dont have that much to report" -> While I think only high-volume tourney pros will be badly impacted by this, a lot of people are going to be slightly impacted by this, and cumulatively itlll add up to a general drain on the industry. If you increase rake or increase taxes, its just a drain on the poker economy and the small impact across many people will add up to a big impact and compounding impact, its generally better to be growing than shrinking and higher taxes will lead to more shrinking
"Poker players are scumbags who deserve it" -> Firstly, there will be plenty of other people impacted by this such as dealers and casino employees who could lose their jobs if industry shrinks. Furthermore, I really dont understand the purpose of this mindset on a poker forum. Why are you even here if you hate poker players? I personally think pro poker players are much bettter for society than say, bartenders, as alcohol kills over 150k people every year in the USA. But I personally am a bit libertarian and think people have the right to drink and gamble, as most people do it responsibly. Poker pros keeps games going so people can enjoy one of americas oldest past times same way bartenders run a bar so people can have a night out.
the tl;dr is again that an overwhelming amount of evidence shows that Republicans will **** over poker players and Democrats will typically be indifferent but occasionally stick up for us, or in some cases like Yang make it a central part of their platform. All the conspiracy theories and excuses and "both sides are the same" is simply delusion and refusal to admit being wrong even when all evidence is staring you in the face proving otherwise.
The facts are overwhemling and obvious: if the health of the poker industry and economy is your priority, by far the best thing you can do is be politically active to help Democratic candidates defeat Republican candidates
Just want to append to this with the new information,* Democrat politician Catherine Cortez Masto led a bill to revoke the gambling tax change (also sponsored by Democrat Jacky Rosen)* Republican politician Todd Young blocks the change Only tiniest bit of poker support from R was Cruz also co-sponsoring the bill though he made no public statements in support of it (not surprisi
Religion does have something to do with it in a sense but not necessarily in the way you think. Also, it isn't the Evangelicals that pushed this. I'll just leave it at that.
It’s a pretty amazing situation. Republicans passed the thing, want it undone, won’t do it without dem concessions, and are sounding the alarm about how problematic the law is. We should study politician brains for tumors.
That is kinda why I find politics to be gross. The reason why it got blocked was in part because the R's don't want to hand a win to the D's (even though it was co-sponsored by Cruz, it was the Dems to go to the press first, thus they get most of the credit.) Whether there was more resistance BTS is obfuscated (but there very well could be.)
What aspects of you life have changed? Nothing in mine has. So, it seems like a psychological issuse you're having.
Note: I’m not the guy you quoted. But here are a few.
The bill kills poker for Americans who aren’t playing due to being a degen, or who aren’t willing to cheat on taxes.
Turns out there is no legal workaround including moving abroad. I asked about this earlier and used Deep Research on Chat GPT and the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion won’t apply since the IRS doesn’t consider gambling as “earned income”. Even if it would, it still means no professional poker in the USA without cheating on your taxes or getting destroyed on taxes.
That leaves cheating on your taxes or renouncing citizenship and getting residency/citizenship somewhere else as the only option if you want to play poker professionally.
For most people this won’t be a big deal, but obviously this is a poker forum.
There are plenty of other issues that wouldn’t be happening if Trump wasn’t in office that are making the lives of specific groups of people worse.
The most obvious example is anyone who isn’t white now has to worry about ICE ****ing with them.
Passing out some infractions and temp bans for insults and off-topic posts. Knock it off!
Note: I’m not the guy you quoted. But here are a few.The bill kills poker for Americans who aren’t playing due to being a degen, or who aren’t willing to cheat on taxes.Turns out there is no legal workaround including moving abroad. I asked about this earlier and used Deep Research on Chat GPT and the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion won’t apply since the IRS doesn’t consider ga
If you are willing to move abroad, you likely qualify as professional gambler. If you do and file using sched C, your winnings are earned income. The rest I have not looked into but def can be earned income.
As to Trump making things worse for some, he is making it better for others. Not a zero sum game. Many feel he is helping far more than he is hurting.
Also have many nonwhite friends none of whom are worried and none have been ****ed with by ICE.
They have to beat an additional 10% rake to the government now instead of just beating the other players, the casino rake/fee, and promo fund drops. Most likely can't survive that kind of butchering of already slim margins.
Turns out it's not as bad as I thought. Calculated it today based off my actual numbers. My pre rb/rewards wins were about 50k and losses about 25K. Would have been like a $500 increase for my 2022 (playing 50NL/30NL) ... and if I extrapolate my play at 100NL from that year it would be like another $2k-$3k in taxes (which would have been easy to afford at that point - with net income around 90k).
Glad you posted this, because now I'm thinking of starting up the grind again.
Where it will probably be a big deal is for people firing huge MTTs, where you could get a situation of having $1,000,000 in winnings and $900,000 in losses or similar ... which would be $100k taxable income under old rules and $210K under new rules. In this example, the tax liability sees over a 100% increase (goes from 25.5K to 62K for people in Michigan, where I'm at). Basically if you have a bad year at MTTs you get kicked in the nuts on top of the fact you're probably broke already unless you're one of the top MTT grinders with deep pockets. Even having something like 300K wins and 250K losses results in a 7-8K tax increase. Higher ROI would pay less tax and lower ROI gets punished.
Seems, really ****ed up for MTT grinders, but would be interesting to see some real life numbers from an MTT grinder to see how bad it really is. Obviously, still against this because it makes no sense to tax anything this way.
For everything it is going to have a negative trickle down effect. The slight winners/breakevens will have to drop down in stakes or quit playing which will in turn make lower stakes harder/lower win rate. The whales will continue to whale so that means bum hunting will be more important and catering to said whales will be even more important than it already was. It encourages private games and the money laundering and degeneracy that goes along with that part of it.
For everything it is going to have a negative trickle down effect. The slight winners/breakevens will have to drop down in stakes or quit playing which will in turn make lower stakes harder/lower win rate. The whales will continue to whale so that means bum hunting will be more important and catering to said whales will be even more important than it already was. It encourages
99.99% of break even and slight winners in cash games do not pay taxes lol
well, it doesn't kill it. If you play a lot and have not many more winning sessions than losing ones, this will ding you quite a bit. If you're a huge MTT grinder but have a low ROI, this might be enough to start thinking about maybe not playing so many.
