Main Menu |
Most Favorited Images |
Recently Uploaded Images |
Most Liked Images |
Top Reviewers |
cockalatte |
649 |
MoneyManMatt |
490 |
Still Looking |
399 |
samcruz |
399 |
Jon Bon |
398 |
Harley Diablo |
377 |
honest_abe |
362 |
DFW_Ladies_Man |
313 |
Chung Tran |
288 |
lupegarland |
287 |
nicemusic |
285 |
Starscream66 |
282 |
You&Me |
281 |
George Spelvin |
270 |
sharkman29 |
256 |
|
Top Posters |
DallasRain | 70819 | biomed1 | 63636 | Yssup Rider | 61234 | gman44 | 53344 | LexusLover | 51038 | offshoredrilling | 48794 | WTF | 48267 | pyramider | 46370 | bambino | 43216 | The_Waco_Kid | 37397 | CryptKicker | 37228 | Mokoa | 36497 | Chung Tran | 36100 | Still Looking | 35944 | Mojojo | 33117 |
|
|
01-20-2010, 02:13 PM
|
#1
|
Pending Age Verification
User ID: 3424
Join Date: Dec 30, 2009
Location: East Coast
Posts: 1,945
My ECCIE Reviews
|
Taxes
Some gentlemen have asked me about how I deal with paying taxes (yes, I pay), and providers have asked me for advice as well. I think for both, this article makes for interesting reading.
http://www.slate.com/id/2229094/
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-20-2010, 02:22 PM
|
#2
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Posts: 2,073
|
Having the accounting background, I agree that the penalty for non-filing/tax evasion penalty is stiffer (no pun intended) than the other penalties we've discussed in other threads.
Being self-employed allows you to write off other "business related" expenses as long as you're prudent about how its done. I'll be happy to discuss it one on one and assist with the tax filing. Tax strategies are best not aired in the public forum. Any and all PM me if you have any questions.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-23-2010, 11:07 PM
|
#3
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 2, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 241
|
Imagine turning in itemized receipts for work related expenses:
Many different kinds of condoms, lubes, oils, oh and of course the "toys."
Maybe this is one area where you take the loss.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 12:13 AM
|
#4
|
Pending Age Verification
User ID: 3382
Join Date: Dec 30, 2009
Location: Northwest Arkansas
Posts: 95
My ECCIE Reviews
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by trubrit
Imagine turning in itemized receipts for work related expenses:
Many different kinds of condoms, lubes, oils, oh and of course the "toys."
Maybe this is one area where you take the loss.
|
I've been writing dildos and the like off for years not to mention panties, lingerie, clothes...I'm a self employed entertainer! All above board!! Kisses Randi
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 06:38 AM
|
#5
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Sep 5, 2009
Location: SW Arkansas NE Texas
Posts: 754
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randi
I've been writing dildos and the like off for years not to mention panties, lingerie, clothes...I'm a self employed entertainer! All above board!! Kisses Randi
|
Just to clarify.....
IRS Publication 529
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p529/ar02.html
Work Clothes and Uniforms
You can deduct the cost and upkeep of work clothes if the following two requirements are met.
You must wear them as a condition of your employment.
The clothes are not suitable for everyday wear.
It is not enough that you wear distinctive clothing. The clothing must be specifically required by your employer. Nor is it enough that you do not, in fact, wear your work clothes away from work. The clothing must not be suitable for taking the place of your regular clothing.
Examples of workers who may be able to deduct the cost and upkeep of work clothes are: delivery workers, firefighters, health care workers, law enforcement officers, letter carriers, professional athletes, and transportation workers (air, rail, bus, etc.).
Musicians and entertainers can deduct the cost of theatrical clothing and accessories that are not suitable for everyday wear.
However, work clothing consisting of white cap, white shirt or white jacket, white bib overalls, and standard work shoes, which a painter is required by his union to wear on the job, is not distinctive in character or in the nature of a uniform. Similarly, the costs of buying and maintaining blue work clothes worn by a welder at the request of a foreman are not deductible.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 06:52 AM
|
#6
|
Pending Age Verification
User ID: 3382
Join Date: Dec 30, 2009
Location: Northwest Arkansas
Posts: 95
My ECCIE Reviews
|
Yep! Not everyday wear...costume/club type,
thnx Mac
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac92451
Just to clarify.....
IRS Publication 529
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p529/ar02.html
Work Clothes and Uniforms
You can deduct the cost and upkeep of work clothes if the following two requirements are met.
You must wear them as a condition of your employment.
The clothes are not suitable for everyday wear.
It is not enough that you wear distinctive clothing. The clothing must be specifically required by your employer. Nor is it enough that you do not, in fact, wear your work clothes away from work. The clothing must not be suitable for taking the place of your regular clothing.
Examples of workers who may be able to deduct the cost and upkeep of work clothes are: delivery workers, firefighters, health care workers, law enforcement officers, letter carriers, professional athletes, and transportation workers (air, rail, bus, etc.).
Musicians and entertainers can deduct the cost of theatrical clothing and accessories that are not suitable for everyday wear.
However, work clothing consisting of white cap, white shirt or white jacket, white bib overalls, and standard work shoes, which a painter is required by his union to wear on the job, is not distinctive in character or in the nature of a uniform. Similarly, the costs of buying and maintaining blue work clothes worn by a welder at the request of a foreman are not deductible.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 08:56 AM
|
#7
|
Permanently retired
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,518
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randi
Yep! Not everyday wear...costume/club type,
thnx Mac
|
That poses an interesting question. Since club wear costumes could be used by "civilians" to spice up their ordinary sex life, I wouldn't be surprised if the IRS might deny that one in an audit, claiming that such costumes are suitable for "everyday" wear (though not "out in public" kinda wear).
Damn, that's the kinda tax law that might have enticed me into that specialty, but for the fact that practicing tax law makes you bald and fat and causes you to drink Scotch and vote Rethugnican. No way am I ever going to stoop that low.
Cheers,
bcg (ok, I'm fat and I do occasionally drink Scotch, but I still have all my hair and I'll die before I vote Rethugnican)
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 11:59 AM
|
#8
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Sep 5, 2009
Location: SW Arkansas NE Texas
Posts: 754
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluffcityguy
Damn, that's the kinda tax law that might have enticed me into that specialty
|
Keep in mind, that which is cited is NOT tax law. IRS publications are not tax law and can not be relied upon to justify a position taken on a tax return. Only the Internal Revenue Code (1986) and the regulations issued by the Congress and IRS are considered "tax law." Tax law created by "case law" is a whole nother matter. It can prove to be very confusing at times, but rewarding to those you like change that occurs DAILY.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 12:28 PM
|
#9
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Posts: 2,073
|
When your "business" is reported on a Schedule C, normal and ordinary business expenses can be deducted wheter as an entertainer, meeting arranger, personal concierge, etc. Unless your number is "up" for an audit and you make that 1/2 percent or so annually, those items are not usually examined unless income and expense fall outside of the norm. Just be sure you can adequately document it.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 12:37 PM
|
#10
|
Permanently retired
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,518
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac92451
Keep in mind, that which is cited is NOT tax law. IRS publications are not tax law and can not be relied upon to justify a position taken on a tax return. Only the Internal Revenue Code (1986) and the regulations issued by the Congress and IRS are considered "tax law." Tax law created by "case law" is a whole nother matter. It can prove to be very confusing at times, but rewarding to those you like change that occurs DAILY.
|
By "tax law" I'm thinking more of things like my hypothetical question ("Would a dancer's 'club clothes' be considered 'suitable for everyday wear' and therefore non-deductible because they could be worn by non-dancers as an adjunct to a healthy sexual relationship?"), counseling an "adult entertainer" on such an issue, the research of possible case law bearing on that issue, and the possibility of litigation of such questions either in the US Tax Court or Federal District Court, which I think counts as "the practice of tax law". I'm well aware that IRS pubs aren't "tax law", though the cite you made did raise a few tax law related questions in my mind.
I'm going to stop now before I start losing my hair, gaining more weight, start thinking seriously about pouring my Redbreast Irish down the sink and buying Scotch to replace it, and start thinking that I should have voted McCain/Palin in '08...
Cheers,
bcg
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 01:01 PM
|
#11
|
Account Disabled
User ID: 4202
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: Arkansas/Florida
Posts: 750
|
I say F*ck uncle sam
i mean might as well..i have f*cked everyone else
joking, paying taxes is a good thing..really it is
being able to document is a good thing, don't get greedy and things should be good
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 01:30 PM
|
#12
|
Account Disabled
|
Who's the guy who wrote off 100K? lmfao - you go boy!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-24-2010, 07:24 PM
|
#13
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 11, 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 138
|
If you notice most netorious gangsters and prostitutes were convicted of tax evasion not of being a gangster or prostitute. Also since I was a tax advisor for the last few years with the VITA program you should note if you get audited the IRS has the burden of proving your income while you have the burden of proving deductions. So if they can not prove income such as cash to cash transactions (not cash to bank) than they have no leg to stand on. That being said theoreticly by law if you find $20 on the ground you are suppost to report it as income but they must prove that you found it LOL.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-25-2010, 12:00 AM
|
#14
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 2, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 241
|
I quess we have my home country to thank for all this tax crap. Just imagin, if you lot hadn't thrown the tea into the Boston Harbour, you would all be talking like me and playing "football" not soccer!!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
01-25-2010, 04:23 AM
|
#15
|
Permanently retired
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,518
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by trubrit
I quess we have my home country to thank for all this tax crap. Just imagin, if you lot hadn't thrown the tea into the Boston Harbour, you would all be talking like me and playing "football" not soccer!!
|
And even worse, cricket vice baseball.
If you guys think that the balk rule is incomprehensible, be glad you don't have to deal with the LBW law.
Cheers,
bcg (not to mention terminology like "googly" )
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
|
AMPReviews.net |
Find Ladies |
Hot Women |
|