Die Hard Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2965703 I'm sorry... that story cracks me up.... and at the same time literally disgusts me (and doesn't surprise me one bit). 30-man pile up.... bloodied face and they ****ers tore his game jersey so bad he had to throw it out. Despicable. I think it's hilarious he'll have to pay $200,000 in tax on it this year (a college student no less) so he's going to lose a little leverage because the dude HAS to sell it in the next 6-8 months Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Sounds like a decent good, so good for him. I read something else that said the tax law isn't quite so clear as to when he incurs the liability. In any case, it seems to me the price will be higher sooner rather than later, before all the hype cools down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Yeah - sell it now before football starts, the season ends, Bonds goes to prison, he hits some more or announces he's retiring, making the last ball valuable too. I heard a sports auctioneer tonight say that the McGuire ball sold for $3M, and at that time they could sell signed balls and bats for $2,500 and $10k a piece. Now they can't sell them at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'd just give it to the HOF. Sike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins4life234 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Even if he doesnt sell the ball, I find it unfair the government can still tax him for it. In a way its a gift. And a baseball really only cost a few bucks. Meaning to a ball shouldn't add price to it in the gov/laws view. Only to individuals unless made in a sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanCollins Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Even if he doesnt sell the ball, I find it unfair the government can still tax him for it. In a way its a gift. And a baseball really only cost a few bucks. Meaning to a ball shouldn't add price to it in the gov/laws view. Only to individuals unless made in a sale. opps, I lost it. pssst please deposit the money in my offshore account sankyou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 opps, I lost it. pssst please deposit the money in my offshore account sankyou I also think it's strange.... that the government can appraise something that has an actual value of $5 and a subjective value of $600,000.... and tax you on the subjective value (the value of what a few prospective buys may pay). I mean, what's to stop me from telling the government that I'd be willing to pay my mortal enemy $1.5M for his Ford Fiesta.... so that the government can tax him 35% of my subjective value for the current tax year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borninblood Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 i didn't even know bonds broke the record Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanCollins Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I also think it's strange.... that the government can appraise something that has an actual value of $5 and a subjective value of $600,000.... and tax you on the subjective value (the value of what a few prospective buys may pay).I mean, what's to stop me from telling the government that I'd be willing to pay my mortal enemy $1.5M for his Ford Fiesta.... so that the government can tax him 35% of my subjective value for the current tax year. I agree with your logic and think that a tax attorney could make a good argument against, especially given the controversy surrounding Bonds, however the law isn't always logical so it's a tough call. I'm waiting for DJTJ or Predicto to weigh in. maybe they'll debate each other. As far as the "Fiesta" argument goes, they'd say that there would be many buyers willing to pay for the ball. Personally I don't think he should have to pay taxes until he sells, but if you were to win a new car and decided to keep it, you'd be paying taxes. Good argument for, but big difference between a car with a certain value and a $10 baseball with an assumed value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Its a shame that a guy who catches a baseball at a game can't afford to keep it if he wants to just because Uncle Sam wants to reach into his pocket and grab some green. So now some rich dude gets to keep that ball instead of a college kid who went to the game and got mauled to get it. Granted I'd have no trouble selling that ball, but its a shame that Uncle Sam is forcing him to sell it based on a speculative value of a $5 ball. I just hope that our dear Uncle doesn't start coming into our homes and charging us on the "speculative" value of our things, that would suck bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'd just give it to the HOF.Sike. The steroid ball doers not belong in the HOF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyansRangers Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 The steroid ball doers not belong in the HOF exactly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.