***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[biggie62]

It’s not all income though, what if I buy lunch for 5 of my co workers because it’s easier to put it on one card and they just Venmo me, which actually happens a lot because skymiles.

I know we haven’t been taxed yet but how are they going to differentiate? Not all online transactions are income.

Overall it’s just petty, the whole message is close the loopholes for the 1% not tax regular people for every petty thing.

See this is the misinformation that’s spreading.

The only way PayPal and Venmo will send you a 1099 is when you use the option with payment protection with the fee. Meaning you’re doing it for a transaction and want buyer/seller protection.

If you send it friends and family then there is no 1099. But if you decide to buy or sell this way to avoid the tax, then the payment service has no reason to protect any one or you because you are assuming the risks. But no 1099.

Technically even redeeming miles, CC points, and cash back is a taxable transaction. Sometimes CCs will hit you with a 1099 but it’s pretty inconsistent. Most people don’t know this but it is income since they have a monetary value with your basis being zero so when you redeem it they can issue you a 1099 on that as well.

 

[kungfu koala]

"Tuck Around and Find Out"

 

[WASHED KING]

If you plan to resell it, that would be smart.

You can just take a pic of the receipt and save it to the cloud




If you want to lie on your taxes, that is between you and the IRS.

But for some reason, I doubt they will be going after people for receipts/paperwork/proof like that.

I’m not a reseller, 99% of the time it’s a shoe leaving to replace another.

For example I got the big bubble air maxes so I sold my 2017 anniversary pair and took that money to buy the new pair.

I now have to report that sale as income even though that money was directly used for another item?

I just can’t wrap my head around this and be like “This is fair”.

 

[biggie62]

I’m not a reseller, 99% of the time it’s a shoe leaving to replace another.

For example I got the big bubble air maxes so I sold my 2017 anniversary pair and took that money to buy the new pair.

I now have to report that sale as income even though that money was directly used for another item?

I just can’t wrap my head around this and be like “This is fair”.

So if I buy a $1k of Apple shares sell it for 20k and want to buy 20k of Google shares i shouldn’t be taxed?

 

[RustyShackleford]

I’m not a reseller, 99% of the time it’s a shoe leaving to replace another.

For example I got the big bubble air maxes so I sold my 2017 anniversary pair and took that money to buy the new pair.

I now have to report that sale as income even though that money was directly used for another item?

I just can’t wrap my head around this and be like “This is fair”.

You literally resold a pair of shoes.

You report the difference from what you paid when you sold the 2017 pair this year, and what you bought it in 2017.

2023 Sale price - 2017 purchase price. If the number is positive, you pay taxes on the difference.

If you made a profit, you get taxed on the profit. If you didn't make a profit, you pay no taxes

That has always been the law you had to do that. I think it is fair for the government to view that as income and tax it.

If you want to say that is a hassle for you, ok fine. I get it. But that doesn't really have to do with fairness of the tax code.

 

[1995]

I feel like the weaknesses of Biden's public speaking skills are vastly exaggerated

 

[TSCQ]

I paid taxes when I brought the shoe, and I pay taxes when I’m selling the same shoe I already paid taxes for. I love this country.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I paid taxes when I brought the shoe, and I pay taxes when I’m selling the same shoe I already paid taxes for. I love this country.

This isn't the banger of a comment you think it is.

 

[biggie62]

I paid taxes when I brought the shoe, and I pay taxes when I’m selling the same shoe I already paid taxes for. I love this country.

If you made income on the resale you pay taxes on your profits of the transaction as it was income and not the gross sale . What’s so hard to understand? It’s just as any other income.

 

[RustyShackleford]

You paid a state or local government a sales tax when you bought the shoe.

You are gonna pay the federal government taxes on the profit you made when you resold the shoe.

Economic transactions being taxed is not unique to America.

 

[WASHED KING]

You literally resold a pair of shoes.

You report the difference from what you paid when you sold the 2017 pair this year, and what you bought it in 2017.

2023 Sale price - 2017 purchase price. If the number is positive, you pay taxes on the difference.

If you made a profit, you get taxed on the profit. If you didn't make a profit, you pay no taxes

That has always been the law you had to do that. I think it is fair for the government to view that as income and tax it.

If you want to say that is a hassle for you, ok fine. I get it. But that doesn't really have to do with fairness of the tax code.

I appreciate the clarification. Now that I know I’m only responsible for the difference I know what I gotta do.

 

[cragmatic]

So here’s my beef with the tax thing, the IRS can just double/triple/quadruple dip on taxes endlessly.

So to make it simple, let’s say I bought 3 different shoes that retail for 200, for 250 each. They already taxed the income used to buy said shoes, and the sellers paid taxes when buying them at retail. Their income used to buy them at retail also was taxed. Now if I turn around and sell
The shoes for a loss, and sell for 200
Each, so I “made” 600, but really I lost 150,
That 600 that’s already been taxed several times is going to be taxed again?

Maybe I just can’t wrap my head around it, but the potential “dipping” on resale is unlimited, I’m sure many resale products have multiple owners before reaching their final taxable resting spot.

 

[WASHED KING]

So here’s my beef with the tax thing, the IRS can just double/triple/quadruple dip on taxes endlessly.

So to make it simple, let’s say I bought 3 different shoes that retail for 200, for 250 each. They already taxed the income used to buy said shoes, and the sellers paid taxes when buying them at retail. Their income used to buy them at retail also was taxed. Now if I turn around and sell
The shoes for a loss, and sell for 200
Each, so I “made” 600, but really I lost 150,
That 600 that’s already been taxed several times is going to be taxed again?

Maybe I just can’t wrap my head around it, but the potential “dipping” on resale is unlimited, I’m sure many resale products have multiple owners before reaching their final taxable resting spot.

Nah apparently that would be a loss according to those above, so you wouldn’t owe. I thought the same thing.

From this day forward every shoe I’ve bought I paid resell for it early, from Sneakercon resellers.

 

[RustyShackleford]

So here’s my beef with the tax thing, the IRS can just double/triple/quadruple dip on taxes endlessly.

So to make it simple, let’s say I bought 3 different shoes that retail for 200, for 250 each. They already taxed the income used to buy said shoes, and the sellers paid taxes when buying them at retail. Their income used to buy them at retail also was taxed. Now if I turn around and sell
The shoes for a loss, and sell for 200
Each, so I “made” 600, but really I lost 150,
That 600 that’s already been taxed several times is going to be taxed again?

Maybe I just can’t wrap my head around it, but the potential “dipping” on resale is unlimited, I’m sure many resale products have multiple owners before reaching their final taxable resting spot.

If you made a lost on the sale, you pay zero in taxes

It seems you don't understand the law.

 

[cragmatic]

Nah apparently that would be a loss according to those above, so you wouldn’t owe. I thought the same thing.

Okay, but they are still collecting taxes each time the shoe is sold. If a shoe is “sold” 3/4 times, they keep collecting taxes on the same product, regardless of profit margins.

 

[cragmatic]

If you made a lost on the sale, you pay zero in taxes

It seems you don't understand the law.

I understand that now after reading several posts, but it still doesn’t change the fact the IRS can potentially collect taxes to the buyer each time the product is purchased as well. So if someone was already sold multiple times, they can double, triple dip, etc on sales tax.

Seems silly to me but it is what it is.

 

[kungfu koala]

Yep. % of sale or purchase regardless of loss or profit. Every fn time.
This scheme is good.

 

[biggie62]

So here’s my beef with the tax thing, the IRS can just double/triple/quadruple dip on taxes endlessly.

So to make it simple, let’s say I bought 3 different shoes that retail for 200, for 250 each. They already taxed the income used to buy said shoes, and the sellers paid taxes when buying them at retail. Their income used to buy them at retail also was taxed. Now if I turn around and sell
The shoes for a loss, and sell for 200
Each, so I “made” 600, but really I lost 150,
That 600 that’s already been taxed several times is going to be taxed again?

Maybe I just can’t wrap my head around it, but the potential “dipping” on resale is unlimited, I’m sure many resale products have multiple owners before reaching their final taxable resting spot.

Simplified.

Say you scored a pair of OWs and got them for 250 shipped and sales tax. Now net of any fees you sell them for 1k. Your income subject to tax is $750.

Now you have a second pair you purchased and now are bricks. Purchased for $200 but sold for $150 net of fees. That $50 loss is added to your $750 profit so now you’re only taxed on $700.

So yes if you offload something profitable you should also offload any bricks the same year to minimize taxes and get some cash back from the bricks.

Multilevel taxing on multiple transactions is normal. How many times are works of art sold for. Each time someone makes a profit on it it’s a taxable transaction. A loss though also can reduce your taxes if you’ve sold a gain to offset it.

Now if say you made zero income from 1099s and say sold a brick on December 30 for that loss of $50. Well then you can’t deduct that $50 since you have no gain.

Easy? I’m a CPA so I do this for a living. While I don’t work on individual taxes and only corporate. I do sell sneakers as a side hobby so this affects me directly.

 

[cragmatic]

Simplified.

Say you scored a pair of OWs and got them for 250 shipped and sales tax. Now net of any fees you sell them for 1k. Your income subject to tax is $750.

Now you have a second pair you purchased and now are bricks. Purchased for $200 but sold for $150 net of fees. That $50 loss is added to your $750 profit so now you’re only taxed on $700.

So yes if you offload something profitable you should also offload any bricks the same year to minimize taxes and get some cash back from the bricks.

Multilevel taxing on multiple transactions is normal. How many times are works of art sold for. Each time someone makes a profit on it it’s a taxable transaction. A loss though also can reduce your taxes if you’ve sold a gain to offset it.

Now if say you made zero income from 1099s and say sold a brick on December 30 for that loss of $50. Well then you can’t deduct that $50 since you have no gain.

Easy? I’m a CPA so I do this for a living. While I don’t work on individual taxes and only corporate. I do sell sneakers as a side hobby so this affects me directly.

This definitely clarifies things on the seller side, still just insane to me they can infinitely tax buyers on products that have already had sales tax on them in some cases several times already.

Heck I remember when the OW’s dropped, there were dudes buying at resale banking on resale going up even more to sell later. Shoes amongst other products can be resold and resold again.

Guess it is what it is.

 

[WASHED KING]

Simplified.

Say you scored a pair of OWs and got them for 250 shipped and sales tax. Now net of any fees you sell them for 1k. Your income subject to tax is $750.

Now you have a second pair you purchased and now are bricks. Purchased for $200 but sold for $150 net of fees. That $50 loss is added to your $750 profit so now you’re only taxed on $700.

So yes if you offload something profitable you should also offload any bricks the same year to minimize taxes and get some cash back from the bricks.

Multilevel taxing on multiple transactions is normal. How many times are works of art sold for. Each time someone makes a profit on it it’s a taxable transaction. A loss though also can reduce your taxes if you’ve sold a gain to offset it.

Now if say you made zero income from 1099s and say sold a brick on December 30 for that loss of $50. Well then you can’t deduct that $50 since you have no gain.

Easy? I’m a CPA so I do this for a living. While I don’t work on individual taxes and only corporate. I do sell sneakers as a side hobby so this affects me directly.

Wait you can’t use it as a loss in the same way you can as a loss against capital gains?

So let’s say you buy 5 shoes for $200 each and end up selling them for $100. You can’t file a loss of $500?

Does it have to hit $600 both ways?

 

[mplsdunk]

Look at what I started.

 

[biggie62]

This definitely clarifies things on the seller side, still just insane to me they can infinitely tax buyers on products that have already had sales tax on them in some cases several times already.

Heck I remember when the OW’s dropped, there were dudes buying at resale banking on resale going up even more to sell later. Shoes amongst other products can be resold and resold again.

Guess it is what it is.

It’s a taxable transactions. Think of my art analogy or stocks. So only the first person ever should pay taxes? Every time someone sells something for a gain it’s INCOME and thus taxable. Otherwise some people to infinitely just make profits. Now there’s a lot of tax planning strategy that comes into play with stuff like that. Hence you you’ll hear people talking about loss harvesting and such.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I understand that now after reading several posts, but it still doesn’t change the fact the IRS can potentially collect taxes to the buyer each time the product is purchased as well. So if someone was already sold multiple times, they can double, triple dip, etc on sales tax.

Seems silly to me but it is what it is.

I am not even gonna say no offense because knowing you, you will take offense anyway

But this post sounds like a rant you would here at a local libertarians convention.

The government taxes economic transactions.

If you are against this concept with shoes, then you are against the entire system of taxation. An entire pillar of a functioning advanced economy.

 

[biggie62]

Wait you can’t use it as a loss in the same way you can as a loss against capital gains?

So let’s say you buy 5 shoes for $200 each and end up selling them for $100. You can’t file a loss of $500?

Does it have to hit $600 both ways?

You can only offset a loss with a gain. Can’t take a loss outright.

 

[mplsdunk]

Crypto boys know loss harvesting.