Yeah, I've heard things like this before, but it's good to see someone
actually quote a definitive source (first time I've seen that).
Obviously, my research involved reading primarily IRS publications, not
court opinions. I admit that most of my understanding on these rules go
back to years that I was a software contractor, doing system
administration and development on a contract basis. The courts
obviously see the activities as ultimately different, simply because it
is a different, non-traditional field of endeavor.
The funny thing is that I do fit all of the requirements
except full-time. I rely on the income as part of my
livelihood, I'm acting in good faith (I keep records, treat it like a
business), and I play regularly. While I understand that the world
doesn't often operate according to logic, I have a hard time seeing
how someone who takes on some computer consulting in the evenings
part-time for some extra income is somehow legitimately filing a
schedule while I am not simply because I don't put in full-time
hours.
There are expenses in my life I couldn't pay without the additional
income. I'd have to take another part time job or, to use their
terminology, change my livelihood if I were to cease pursuing my
part-time poker job. Russell says, the US tax code is complex and
unfair to gamblers. I suppose that's true, but, frankly, someone had
to fight the case to get laws changed. I read everything that the IRS
sources offered me, and acted in good faith to follow the rules.
And, one must consider, what if people have two full time jobs? Many
people in today's society work 80 hours a week. Traditionally, a
full-time job is 40. This past month, I've probably worked as many
hours at poker as I had at my real job. Will the IRS consider my
professional status on a month-by-month basis, or does one have to hit
full-time status by a number of hours in a year? Or, does the mere
fact that you have two jobs disqualify you?
The thing that bugs me most about this is that a citizen acting in good
faith, reading all the IRS publications, cannot figure it out. I
suppose to this extent I have some libertarian leanings. I'm
for paying taxes, and I never ever want to cheat. But, if I
read all the IRS publications and still can't figure out what the
right thing to do is without hiring an expert, isn't the tax code too
complicated?
Anyway, ISTR the book I mentioned elsewhere in this thread was written
by Russell Fox. I'll be searching for it again soon when March
rolls around; I'll have some fresh posts about the tax questions
then.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: professional?
Date: 2007-02-01 16:20 (UTC)Yeah, I've heard things like this before, but it's good to see someone actually quote a definitive source (first time I've seen that). Obviously, my research involved reading primarily IRS publications, not court opinions. I admit that most of my understanding on these rules go back to years that I was a software contractor, doing system administration and development on a contract basis. The courts obviously see the activities as ultimately different, simply because it is a different, non-traditional field of endeavor.
The funny thing is that I do fit all of the requirements except full-time. I rely on the income as part of my livelihood, I'm acting in good faith (I keep records, treat it like a business), and I play regularly. While I understand that the world doesn't often operate according to logic, I have a hard time seeing how someone who takes on some computer consulting in the evenings part-time for some extra income is somehow legitimately filing a schedule while I am not simply because I don't put in full-time hours.
There are expenses in my life I couldn't pay without the additional income. I'd have to take another part time job or, to use their terminology, change my livelihood if I were to cease pursuing my part-time poker job. Russell says, the US tax code is complex and unfair to gamblers. I suppose that's true, but, frankly, someone had to fight the case to get laws changed. I read everything that the IRS sources offered me, and acted in good faith to follow the rules.
And, one must consider, what if people have two full time jobs? Many people in today's society work 80 hours a week. Traditionally, a full-time job is 40. This past month, I've probably worked as many hours at poker as I had at my real job. Will the IRS consider my professional status on a month-by-month basis, or does one have to hit full-time status by a number of hours in a year? Or, does the mere fact that you have two jobs disqualify you?
The thing that bugs me most about this is that a citizen acting in good faith, reading all the IRS publications, cannot figure it out. I suppose to this extent I have some libertarian leanings. I'm for paying taxes, and I never ever want to cheat. But, if I read all the IRS publications and still can't figure out what the right thing to do is without hiring an expert, isn't the tax code too complicated?
Anyway, ISTR the book I mentioned elsewhere in this thread was written by Russell Fox. I'll be searching for it again soon when March rolls around; I'll have some fresh posts about the tax questions then.