2015 Prospect Rush Draft Hit Parade

[Bob Loblaw]

Originally Posted by zeeropointzeero

Sorry to get off topic, but trust me - most of us pay up the wazoo in the US as well (on top of paying tax on prizes and lottery/gambling winnings). It's really disgusting how lottery winnings are not considered to be double-taxation considering the government gets a cut twice.

$1.00 taken in by lottery
-0.50 taken right off the top for gov't
------
0.50 left for prizes
-0.20 (39.6% federal income tax)
-0.05 (10% state tax in NY/NJ)
------
$0.25 payout

Imagine playing a casino game with a 75% house take?

It's like a box of Prospect Rush!

[motu79]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Calling someone an idiot is called for now? C'mon buddy.

Sidenote - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Seems to be in Websters dictionary.

I'll email them and tell them they are wrong though.

Please stop getting upset that you are wrong.

Only because I have no time, but Dictionary.com has it as side note:

Side note | Define Side note at Dictionary.com

Carry on...

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by Addison

The breaker buys a case for 500. He sells 10 spots for 600 total. Gross revenue is 600, COGS sold is 500 and let's call shipping/expenses 50. Net profit is $50 which all goes on Sched C if that's how you file.

Breaker transfers ownership of the case to the 10 clients when they pay for the spot.

Since this isn't a lottery/raffle/game of chance but rather a service, there would be no need for tax forms in the potential of a big hit (which is the whole point of this conversation).

Yes I understand a schedule C. COGS sold (redundant much?)

In order for the ownership to be transferred it needs to be owned. They bought the case and then sold it. Thank you for agreeing with me.

[chezball]

Originally Posted by HadWayTooMuch

All I can say is I have no doubt Will is loving this thread now that it no longer screams of "I only got $800 value for my $2800" box!

This is about the 95th time you've said the same thing.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by motu79

Only because I have no time, but Dictionary.com has it as side note:

Side note | Define Side note at Dictionary.com

Carry on...

Never said that "side note" was wrong.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Calling someone an idiot is called for now? C'mon buddy.

Sidenote - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Seems to be in Websters dictionary.

I'll email them and tell them they are wrong though.

Please stop getting upset that you are wrong.

You should. Although they probably already know that, since when you type in the word sidenote to any platform with spellcheck, that little red squiggly line shows up. Also, when you send someone a link for "proof", make sure it's not behind a paywall so they can actually see it.

As for the tax thing, search "Michael Pruser taxes" on Google. You might find someone that has written hundreds of tax related articles for financial websites, including Turbo Tax, H&R Block etc. Feel free to email them as well, tell them I'm a fraud, and my knowledge of taxes should be forever questioned.

After all, you file your own taxes.

[Boo]

Originally Posted by chansen10

I think we should ask our resident cpa friend asujbl about this one

Yes, let's invite the other "thinks they know everything in the world about everything" into the thread!!

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

You should. Although they probably already know that, since when you type in the word sidenote to any platform with spellcheck, that little red squiggly line shows up. Also, when you send someone a link for "proof", make sure it's not behind a paywall so they can actually see it.

As for the tax thing, search "Michael Pruser taxes" on Google. You might find someone that has written hundreds of tax related articles for financial websites, including Turbo Tax, H&R Block etc. Feel free to email them as well, tell them I'm a fraud, and my knowledge of taxes should be forever questioned.

After all, you file your own taxes.

Yes it does (the red line). I looked for "proof" because I wasn't sure and since you are a writer I believed you but wanted to see for myself. You are getting quite defensive though so I'll happily end this conversation (finally)

I most definitely don't file my own taxes but I work closely with my tax attorney to get them done. Making assumptions is probably never a good idea, but you know that already.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Yes it does (the red line). I looked for "proof" because I wasn't sure and since you are a writer I believed you but wanted to see for myself. You are getting quite defensive though so I'll happily end this conversation (finally)

I most definitely don't file my own taxes but I work closely with my tax attorney to get them done. Making assumptions is probably never a good idea, but you know that already.

side note, you forgot a period in the last sentence of your first paragraph.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

side note, you forgot a period in the last sentence of your first paragraph.

Thanks Mike, you are the man! Should we continue this digression?

You, a writer, made the same simple grammatical error twice in two posts. Seems like it really upsets you that I told you that.

Have a good one bud.

(for some reason I forget punctuation when I use parenthesis)

[cyndeeg3]

Originally Posted by cnewby

Quit acting like a baby.

haha, thanks for that. Not only necessary, also greatly appreciated. What was the purpose of you posting this, aside from confirming that you are a window-licker?

Just for fun, I decided to take a look at a couple of your previous posts, basically you come in to a thread, say something stupid, irrelevant, add no value to the discussion and leave. OR you get on your knees for your mancrush Derek Jeter, defending him like he is a buddy of yours because you have some of his cards.

All I am trying to point out in this thread, which has derailed (87 times), is that a group breaker owns the product they are "breaking." For the sake of my sanity, I will say I exclude BO GB'ers from this discussion - every single group breaker (outside of BO) 100%, for sure, absolutely owns every single case they break. That is fact. Whether or not they provide a service with their product is irrelevant - they own the case. Very simple, but has become complicated because some (like you) are unable to admit when they are wrong.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Thanks Mike, you are the man! Should we continue this digression?

You, a writer, made the same simple grammatical error twice in two posts. Seems like it really upsets you that I told you that.

Have a good one bud.

(for some reason I forget punctuation when I use parenthesis)

No, I'm upset that throughout an entire conversation, you felt it necessary to point out a typo of no consequence as some kind of attempt to "one up" the person on the other side.

It's a bully move, and it's something that a lot of members in this thread like to use all the time to feel superior.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

No, I'm upset that throughout an entire conversation, you felt it necessary to point out a typo of no consequence as some kind of attempt to "one up" the person on the other side.

It's a bully move, and it's something that a lot of members in this thread like to use all the time to feel superior.

Well you ASSUMED that is what I was doing. I am now assuming you often make assumptions. You made the same exact typo twice which is something I did not expect from someone that I consider one of the more intelligent members of the board. Looking back I probably should've PM'd you to tell you. I know you are a writer so it confused me even more.

That being said calling me an idiot was completely uncalled for but I am assuming (see I am doing it now) it was a defense mechanism.

Sorry that you got upset about correcting a simple error. Funny that you went and escalated to name calling on a message board while you consider that stuff bullying.

[benjamincarm]

Further proof I'm the world's worst CPA, I'm barely following any of the this conversation about taxes.

GBs that collect money and then buy a case is a broker.
GBs that buy the case with their own money and break are not and would classify it as COGS.

It's dependent on the funds in which it is purchased, correct?

[DetectiveChrome]

This thread should be renamed to "wasted effort" (and I'm definitely not talking about PR).

[Addison]

Originally Posted by benjamincarm

Further proof I'm the world's worst CPA, I'm barely following any of the this conversation about taxes.

GBs that collect money and then buy a case is a broker.
GBs that buy the case with their own money and break are not and would classify it as COGS.

It's dependent on the funds in which it is purchased, correct?

Correct and back to the original tax point before the riffraff chimed in, if your client hits a (for example) $20,000 card, no paper work or tax forms are necessary unlike if you hit a casino jackpot or won the lottery - correct?

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by benjamincarm

Further proof I'm the world's worst CPA, I'm barely following any of the this conversation about taxes.

GBs that collect money and then buy a case is a broker.
GBs that buy the case with their own money and break are not and would classify it as COGS.

It's dependent on the funds in which it is purchased, correct?

How do you account for supplies, shipping and fees associated if you are just acting as a broker?

[chezball]

This thread should be locked until the beginning of the National.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Well you ASSUMED that is what I was doing. I am now assuming you often make assumptions. You made the same exact typo twice which is something I did not expect from someone that I consider one of the more intelligent members of the board. Looking back I probably should've PM'd you to tell you. I know you are a writer so it confused me even more.

That being said calling me an idiot was completely uncalled for but I am assuming (see I am doing it now) it was a defense mechanism.

Sorry that you got upset about correcting a simple error. Funny that you went and escalated to name calling on a message board while you consider that stuff bullying.

Heh, OK. So you consider me to be more intelligent, you know I am a writer, and yet you genuinely thought I didn't know the difference between your and you're, and wanted to help me by pointing it out. This immediately after you rebutted my statement by saying I was "simply false".

Doesn't seem to add up.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Heh, OK. So you consider me to be more intelligent, you know I am a writer, and yet you genuinely thought I didn't know the difference between your and you're, and wanted to help me by pointing it out. This immediately after you rebutted my statement by saying I was "simply false".



Doesn't seem to add up.

I never said I didn't believe you knew the difference. I said you were using the wrong one (multiple times). Those are two different statements. You should read what is written and not try to examine it for hidden meaning.

I try not to wordy (doesn't always work). I am straight to the point which you should know by now. When I think someone is wrong I don't know what more to say then you are wrong. :/

Don't assume things that I don't say. It's a lot easier than imagining or assuming different meanings behind them.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by chezball

This thread should be locked until the beginning of the National.

Houdini already said that wasn't happening and that it wouldn't be locked until the super is worked out. (I think that's what he said, but it was 40 pages back)

[Bruvydsb]

Adding some clarification here, just because you are a CPA does not mean you are a tax expert (or know anything about tax for that matter).

That is equivalent of thinking your eye doctor can do brain surgery just because he (or she) is a doctor.

Sincerely,

A CPA who knows nothing about taxes

[chezball]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Houdini already said that wasn't happening and that it wouldn't be locked until the super is worked out. (I think that's what he said, but it was 40 pages back)

He did,but that's before it has gotten to this stage.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

I never said I didn't believe you knew the difference. I said you were using the wrong one (multiple times). Those are two different statements. You should read what is written and not try to examine it for hidden meaning.

I try not to wordy (doesn't always work). I am straight to the point which you should know by now. When I think someone is wrong I don't know what more to say then you are wrong. :/

Don't assume things that I don't say. It's a lot easier than imagining or assuming different meanings behind them.

You try not to wordy?

Perhaps it would be best to look past the occasional typo, and not publicly call out people for making them?

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

You try not to wordy?

Perhaps it would be best to look past the occasional typo, and not publicly call out people for making them?

Mike, I already admitted I should've PM'd you about it and told you that I looked past the first one.

And I do TRY to not be wordy but I fail often. :/