ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 3646
June 20, 2012 8:03 AM
Tags : None
Interact
Posts: 1976
June 20, 2012 8:18 AM
Posts: 5655
June 20, 2012 8:33 AM
Posts: 15807
June 20, 2012 8:41 AM
Moshalito wrote:Is it your position that MSNBC is the "mainstream media" but Fox News is not? That would fit nicely with your "liberal media" theme, I guess.
June 20, 2012 12:16 PM
Posts: 13712
June 20, 2012 1:18 PM
Posts: 2418
June 20, 2012 1:26 PM
June 20, 2012 1:39 PM
ThisCharmingFan wrote:So we are ignoring the part where he says he isn't making light of her MS?
Posts: 10000
June 20, 2012 2:45 PM
Loudmouth Bastard "Cold pizza is for assholes. If the delivery guy brought it cold, you'd kick him in the fucking nuts."
June 20, 2012 2:47 PM
Blab of Bacon wrote:ThisCharmingFan wrote:So we are ignoring the part where he says he isn't making light of her MS? Why should he get to ignore that part and I can't?
Posts: 10809
June 20, 2012 4:15 PM
Remember when teachers, public employees, Unions, Planned Parenthood, Acorn, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?
*
Me neither.
Posts: 6752
June 20, 2012 4:52 PM
Posts: 1478
June 20, 2012 9:58 PM
BigAppleBucky wrote:Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.
June 20, 2012 11:14 PM
Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.The loss doesn't even provide any benefit until the activity (in this case the horse) generates income. Why is the loss/deduction amusing? It is the same as any other activity, if you incur an expense to generate income, you can offset that income with the expense. Pretty simple concept.
BigAppleBucky wrote: Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.
Republicans apparently love government so much they're buying it.
June 21, 2012 7:13 AM
BigAppleBucky wrote:Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.The loss doesn't even provide any benefit until the activity (in this case the horse) generates income. Why is the loss/deduction amusing? It is the same as any other activity, if you incur an expense to generate income, you can offset that income with the expense. Pretty simple concept.Hobby losses are not deductable for tax purposes. Business losses are. But, as I pointed out, it's really tough to make a business out of horses. Calling a single horse a business is a huge stretch.
June 21, 2012 8:43 AM
Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.The loss doesn't even provide any benefit until the activity (in this case the horse) generates income. Why is the loss/deduction amusing? It is the same as any other activity, if you incur an expense to generate income, you can offset that income with the expense. Pretty simple concept.Hobby losses are not deductable for tax purposes. Business losses are. But, as I pointed out, it's really tough to make a business out of horses. Calling a single horse a business is a huge stretch. Hobby losses are deductible against incidental income generated by that hobby. Why shouldn't/wouldn't they be? It makes complete sense that they are.
BigAppleBucky wrote: Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.The loss doesn't even provide any benefit until the activity (in this case the horse) generates income. Why is the loss/deduction amusing? It is the same as any other activity, if you incur an expense to generate income, you can offset that income with the expense. Pretty simple concept.Hobby losses are not deductable for tax purposes. Business losses are. But, as I pointed out, it's really tough to make a business out of horses. Calling a single horse a business is a huge stretch.
Posts: 7344
June 21, 2012 8:51 AM
BigAppleBucky wrote:Hobby losses are not deductable for tax purposes. Business losses are. But, as I pointed out, it's really tough to make a business out of horses. Calling a single horse a business is a huge stretch.
June 21, 2012 10:16 AM
BigAppleBucky wrote:Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Bobadger wrote: BigAppleBucky wrote: Made fun of the tax deductability of a dressage horse. No fun whatsoever made of Ann's MS. In fact, they specifically said, "not to make light of . . . this desease.".78,000 business deduction for a hobby (yes, owning a horse for anyone not running a racing stable or breeding farm is a hobby, not a business) is nice if you can get it.It's not a medical deduction since she doesn't even ride the horse, just owns it.The loss doesn't even provide any benefit until the activity (in this case the horse) generates income. Why is the loss/deduction amusing? It is the same as any other activity, if you incur an expense to generate income, you can offset that income with the expense. Pretty simple concept.Hobby losses are not deductable for tax purposes. Business losses are. But, as I pointed out, it's really tough to make a business out of horses. Calling a single horse a business is a huge stretch. Hobby losses are deductible against incidental income generated by that hobby. Why shouldn't/wouldn't they be? It makes complete sense that they are.What income from a dressage horse? None.
Posts: 6519
June 21, 2012 10:18 AM
The flowing robes, the grace, bald... striking.
Ulbian wrote:.then how in the hell was I able to deduct a new trolling motor and a new fuel pump on my main engine?
Posts: 2387
June 21, 2012 10:27 AM
June 21, 2012 11:24 AM
FS-2008-23, June 2008
The Internal Revenue Service reminds taxpayers to follow appropriate guidelines when determining whether an activity is engaged in for profit, such as a business or investment activity, or is engaged in as a hobby.
Internal Revenue Code Section 183 (Activities Not Engaged in for Profit) limits deductions that can be claimed when an activity is not engaged in for profit. IRC 183 is sometimes referred to as the “hobby loss rule.â€
Taxpayers may need a clearer understanding of what constitutes an activity engaged in for profit and the tax implications of incorrectly treating hobby activities as activities engaged in for profit. This educational fact sheet provides information for determining if an activity qualifies as an activity engaged in for profit and what limitations apply if the activity was not engaged in for profit.
Is your hobby really an activity engaged in for profit?
In general, taxpayers may deduct ordinary and necessary expenses for conducting a trade or business or for the production of income. Trade or business activities and activities engaged in for the production of income are activities engaged in for profit.
The following factors, although not all inclusive, may help you to determine whether your activity is an activity engaged in for profit or a hobby:
An activity is presumed for profit if it makes a profit in at least three of the last five tax years, including the current year (or at least two of the last seven years for activities that consist primarily of breeding, showing, training or racing horses).
If an activity is not for profit, losses from that activity may not be used to offset other income. An activity produces a loss when related expenses exceed income. The limit on not-for-profit losses applies to individuals, partnerships, estates, trusts, and S corporations. It does not apply to corporations other than S corporations.
What are allowable hobby deductions under IRC 183?
If your activity is not carried on for profit, allowable deductions cannot exceed the gross receipts for the activity.
Deductions for hobby activities are claimed as itemized deductions on Schedule A, Form 1040. These deductions must be taken in the following order and only to the extent stated in each of three categories:
Share This