quote:

Originally posted by hjs157:
Whoa! Historically, the threshold for reporting cash transaction has been $10,000. Am I to understand this has been lowered to $600?

I deposit more than $600 cash all the time, no one asks anything about it. I deposited $22k in cash once when selling a car and delivering it to the buyer in LA. I didn't want all that cash on me for the weekend, so I took it to a share branch of my credit union in Burbank - as in the Burbank where all the TV shows and studios are based. You'd have thought they'd never seen so much cash. They didn't know how to handle it, took some paper out of a printer and started writing down my answers to their made up questions, even wanted to see Mrs. Lee's DL. It was such a circus. But it would have been pretty easy to match paperwork with that cash, if the gov't. had forced the issue.

My understanding is that banks are required to report cash transactions of TEN thousand, not six hundred. My transcriptionist gets a 1099 every year if her income exceeds six hundred dollars.

Banks are required by law to report any deposit they deem suspicious, within 30 days of the transaction.

Now, add in the variable of "Karen's Agenda" and that $10,000 limit is made of Jell-O.

Live aware and do all you can to protect yourself, and expect that there will be more such shenanigans.

Same thing with obtaining USPS money orders over a certain limit being reported. Happened to me years ago.

quote:

Banks are required by law to report any deposit they deem suspicious, within 30 days of the transaction

^^^^^^^^^
Suspicious. You mean with blood stains??

quote:

Originally posted by dfens:
Which is such a low amount that for most sellers who do it as a hobby or for some extra cash it will no longer be worth it.

My on-line sales via the popular auction sites have generally been limited to used firearms, used gun related items and a few chachkies left over from my parent's estate. Unless .gov rescinds the $600 threshold, I have sold my last item on any of these sites. I tolerated the unusual taste in my mouth when these auction sites were forced to collect sales tax. However, as a low volume hobbyist I refuse to swallow by being subjected to a confiscatory IRS tax scheme.

I dislike taxes.

But I pay mine.

What's the problem?

quote:

What's the problem?

three pages discussing .gov mendacity might be a hint.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
It's not about the money, it's about control.

Those on the take (per dfens post) are "compliant" to the government, even though they are cheating, they are careful to lick the hand that feeds them.

They will vote, they will piss and moan about "what they want/need", and the government will oblige them a pittance with laws and amendments that provide them a "win" in exchange for votes and support of agenda.

Meanwhile, those that desire to be self sufficient, free and unencumbered by the government, will find themselves at odds in greater amount over time.

Yeah, and like sigmonkey says, this will continue to get worse over time.

Build Back Better is a scheme by the globalists to eliminate the middle class through power and control over everything. A digital currency is part of this where the government can not only monitor transactions but decide what you can and cannot buy.

The gradual end game: You will own nothing and be happy.

Except human nature will get in the way of that.

quote:

Originally posted by wishfull thinker:

quote:

What's the problem?

three pages discussing .gov mendacity might be a hint.

All I'm seeing is that people who were previously under reporting their income, now will have a harder time of doing it with impunity.

I see no additional burden, because taxpayers already had the obligation to report income. Those who have or will report their income legitimately are not impacted.

Basically, some people are pissed because they're putting up a security camera at the subway ticket turnstiles. Those that pay for their rides don't care--only the folks that have been jumping the turnstiles are affected.

Like I said, I dislike taxes. But hard to be sympathetic to people who are knowingly evading theirs.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
All I'm seeing is that people who were previously under reporting their income, now will have a harder time of doing it with impunity.

I see no additional burden, because taxpayers already had the obligation to report income. Those who have or will report their income legitimately are not impacted.

Basically, some people are pissed because they're putting up a security camera at the subway ticket turnstiles. Those that pay for their rides don't care--only the folks that have been jumping the turnstiles are affected.

Like I said, I dislike taxes. But hard to be sympathetic to people who are knowingly evading theirs.

People who have been cheating on their taxes complaining that they won't be able to cheat as much?

Oh, the horror.

Let’s not confuse legal with just, this country was founded partly because of an unjust tax
I’m sure the British thought it was perfectly reasonable and legal
Why would those darn colonists care if we tax their tea at an exorbitant rate, they should be glad to pay their fair share

Would this be considered double taxation on merchandise you were already taxed on?

Say you bought something retail, paying a sales tax, then sold that item at a later date getting charged by the IRS via a 1099-K. Aren’t there laws against that?

If you sold it for more than you paid it is a capital pure and simple. Taxed at less than regular income. Perfectly legal.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
All I'm seeing is that people who were previously under reporting their income, now will have a harder time of doing it with impunity.

Nobody was bitching when the annual threshold was $20,000. A reasonable person would recognize this discussion has more to do with governmental overreach than tax evasion.

quote:

Originally posted by hjs157:

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
All I'm seeing is that people who were previously under reporting their income, now will have a harder time of doing it with impunity.

Nobody was bitching when the annual threshold was $20,000. A reasonable person would recognize this discussion has more to do with governmental overreach than tax evasion.

Not overreach at all. The law has stated that if you sell something for more than you paid for it, you have Capital Gains and they're taxable. That's been true for a long time.

The only thing that's changed is the threshold for getting a 1099 issued to you for sales, thus forcing you to pay taxes on the gains.

It has nothing to do with governmental overreach and everything to do with the amount of people who were cheating on their taxes increasing rapidly.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:

quote:

Originally posted by hjs157:

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
All I'm seeing is that people who were previously under reporting their income, now will have a harder time of doing it with impunity.

Nobody was bitching when the annual threshold was $20,000. A reasonable person would recognize this discussion has more to do with governmental overreach than tax evasion.

Not overreach at all. The law has stated that if you sell something for more than you paid for it, you have Capital Gains and they're taxable. That's been true for a long time.

The only thing that's changed is the threshold for getting a 1099 issued to you for sales, thus forcing you to pay taxes on the gains.

It has nothing to do with governmental overreach and everything to do with the amount of people who were cheating on their taxes increasing rapidly.

So, an individual who occasionally sells used personal property and doesn't claim the proceeds as income is a tax cheat? Legions of Americans use various on-line auction sites to occasionally sell used and/or unwanted personal items - almost always at a loss. In this economy, it wouldn't take too long to reach $600 in sales. Before you explain Capitol Loss, may I suggest that retaining original sales receipts for inexpensive items one may elect to sell far in the future is most unrealistic. Further, Americans who are not engaged in a bonafide business for profit should be free to dispose of their personal property without burdensome regulation or taxation.

“It has nothing to do with governmental overreach and everything to do with the amount of people who were cheating on their taxes increasing rapidly.”

Sorry but that is a load of horse shit. If i buy something for $1000 and paid taxes on it at the time of purchase, then turn around and sell it for a loss at $700, the government has no right to tax the “income” when there is a proven loss. Yes people cheat on paying taxes but you’re paining with an overly broad brush.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:

Sorry but that is a load of horse shit. If i buy something for $1000 and paid taxes on it at the time of purchase, then turn around and sell it for a loss at $700, the government has no right to tax the “income” when there is a proven loss. Yes people cheat on paying taxes but you’re paining with an overly broad brush.

I sell collectible books on eBay -- mostly castoffs and duplicates from my own collection -- but "collectible" only in the sense that typically they hold their value or, at least, don't plunge in value ala a James Patterson NY Times HC bestseller. Occasionally I'll garner more than I paid originally, but that's certainly the exception, not the rule. So now not only have I paid sales tax on the original purchase, I now have to pay income tax on the resale of it...double taxed.

I knew a half-year ago or so that this was coming, but it certainly doesn't make it any more palatable. I've already exceeded the $600 for 2022, so am committed, but at some point soon will have to crunch the numbers to see how ugly it is, and if it's even worth continuing this side gig in 2023. With eBay fees of 14% (on both item and shipping) on top of the new income tax -- on items that more often than not are already at less than what I originally paid (years ago, yes, but still...), it's hard to justify the effort anymore.

Reviewing a few articles about these new 1099-K rules, it's still rather confusing. If you sell a few things you purchased years ago as with at-home-daddy, it looks like the entire transaction amount is subject to capital gains tax if the IRS considers it a 'hobby business'. On the other hand, if the IRS considers it a normal business, deductions are allowed. Are those deductions enough to make it so you only pay taxes on your profits?

The articles seem to say if you sell a few items on ebay, you now can't deduct your item cost and pay tax on only the profit. Instead, you need to pay capital gains tax on the entire transaction amount, i.e. the amount on the 1099-K form.

If you have a business, for example, where you buy things at estate auctions and resell them on ebay, you now need to track all expenses at a per-item basis to deduct the correct amounts.

All this sounds like it would ruin most hobby business transactions. Or maybe it will drive them to crypto transactions that don't include any bank in the middle.

I am wanting to raise money for a Milling Machine I want to buy. Most of it I was going to put on ebay. But no, I think I may try other routes.