Reverb, online market places, & the IRS

[harryconway]

This plus the addition of 87000 more IRS "employees".

That's actually a number that was just "grabbed" off an actual IRS plan (as a talking point) ...... to hire 86, 852 new workers ...... BY 2031 Funny, no one ever mentions 2031, in their talking point With the IRS expecting to lose (retirement and other reasons) approx. 50,000 workers in the next 5 years (2027) ...... It might not be a far stretch to imagine another 4 years go by (2027 - 2031) and the IRS loosing another 36,852 ...... in which case they would be breaking even.

How many of Biden’s new IRS agents will be packing heat — and how many of us will they target?

The IRS arsenal of 4,600 guns includes 3,282 pistols, 621 shotguns, 539 rifles, 15 fully automatic weapons and four revolvers.

nypost.com

That's just another talking point, carried from a 2018 GAO study, that the IRS had 4,487 guns ..... and 5,062,006 round of ammunition. The IRS does have a Criminal Investigation Special Agents Division, and they are the only ones allowed to carry guns (at least on government time) They number roughly 2,100. So ..... adding up rifle, shotgun & "automatic weapons" ..... you get 1,175. So ..... not enough to even equip their 2,100 agents who can carry. Most officers who carry a long gun, would also carry a pistol ..... but even if you just gave 1 gun to 1 agent, with the current total number of agents at around 78,661 ..... distribute 4,457 weapons amongst them .... you're arming less than 5.7% Spread those agents out amongst the approx. 600 locations the IRS has ..... that's 7 or 8 agents per location.

To put these numbers into perspective ..... LAPD has almost 10,000 officers. NYPD has 36,000.

 

[Stroman]

That's actually a number that was just "grabbed" off an actual IRS plan (as a talking point) ...... to hire 86, 852 new workers ...... BY 2031 Funny, no one ever mentions 2031, in their talking point With the IRS expecting to lose (retirement and other reasons) approx. 50,000 workers in the next 5 years (2027) ...... It might not be a far stretch to imagine another 4 years go by (2027 - 2031) and the IRS loosing another 36,852 ...... in which case they would be breaking even.

That's just another talking point, carried from a 2018 GAO study, that the IRS had 4,487 guns ..... and 5,062,006 round of ammunition. The IRS does have a Criminal Investigation Special Agents Division, and they are the only ones allowed to carry guns (at least on government time) They number roughly 2,100. So ..... adding up rifle, shotgun & "automatic weapons" ..... you get 1,175. So ..... not enough to even equip their 2,100 agents who can carry. Most officers who carry a long gun, would also carry a pistol ..... but even if you just gave 1 gun to 1 agent, with the current total number of agents at around 78,661 ..... distribute 4,457 weapons amongst them .... you're arming less than 5.7% Spread those agents out amongst the approx. 600 locations the IRS has ..... that's 7 or 8 agents per location.

To put these numbers into perspective ..... LAPD has almost 10,000 officers. NYPD has 36,000.

Good God, Harry, don't confuse the alarmists with information.

 

[dboomer]

When using turbotax, you enter all your business deductions. After I did it says take the statutory deduction instead and when I did the amount owed dropped like a rock. So in my case, I am self employed and I lump all sources of income together and call the business “me”. So maybe if that total is high enough (although there is a $168k limit) that's how it worked???

 

[dboomer]

How many of Biden’s new IRS agents will be packing heat — and how many of us will they target?

The IRS arsenal of 4,600 guns includes 3,282 pistols, 621 shotguns, 539 rifles, 15 fully automatic weapons and four revolvers.

nypost.com

This is complete BS and a straight up political jab. It has no place on this forum. Please remove your post.

 

[Otto]

If you're selling a lot of gear you need to file a Schedule C anyway. You can list the original cost of the drums as an expense, and show that your "business" operated at a loss, and bango, $0 in taxes to pay on it.

Wanna spot a professional?

They are the ones talking itemized deductions, not paradiddles! : )

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

This is complete BS and a straight up political jab. It has no place on this forum. Please remove your post.

So, that is "political and must not stand". But the use of "wage theft" as a talking point is not.
**sigh**

 

[Stroman]

So, that is "political and must not stand". But the use of "wage theft" as a talking point is not.

Thanks for the clarification.

In truth, almost none of the responses have been helpful to the OP.

Does anyone know just how to report this on a tax return so that he doesn't have to pay taxes on money that is not actually profit, if he is not a business? That would be useful information. IDK know the answer, or if it's even possible.

On the other hand, unless someone sells tons of gear, those few sales are highly unlikely to boost income to a higher tax bracket or significantly increase the amount of taxes you'd pay here in the US. And if you sell a bunch, you probably ought to treat it as business, perhaps?

 

[SmoothOperator]

This is a good thing, actually. The IRS is severly underfunded and underemployed, and have been for iirc over ten years at this point. There's a lot of high end white collar crime / tax fraud cases that are flying under the radar because the IRS doesn't have the manpower to investigate it. They're often framed in popular media as the ultimate evil to the average joe, but that's just a big lie engineered by big corporations to keep the common person to go against the agency that can actually go after the real crimes happening in this country.

Wage theft is the biggest theft in the United States by a huge margin, blowing shoplifting out of the water. But IRS bad, amirite?

No, it is pretty underwhelming going after the sale of a used drum kit. EG they don't have the manpower to investigate things, but the things they investigate are chump change, classic. IRS for thee not for me sort of hypocrisy.

 

[Over50drumguy]

In truth, almost none of the responses have been helpful to the OP.

Does anyone know just how to report this on a tax return so that he doesn't have to pay taxes on money that is not actually profit, if he is not a business? That would be useful information. IDK know the answer, or if it's even possible.

On the other hand, unless someone sells tons of gear, those few sales are highly unlikely to boost income to a higher tax bracket or significantly increase the amount of taxes you'd pay here in the US. And if you sell a bunch, you probably ought to treat it as business, perhaps?

@dboomer
”This is complete BS and a straight up political jab. It has no place on this forum. Please remove your post.”

The response below is not directed at @Stroman ….

In truth all of the posts that mention the IRS are political . The IRS is a federal US government agency and responses of pro or anti IRS are political in nature , yet it’s interesting how you @dboomer only want mine deleted , which is actually only an article , yet when a certain political persuasion posts articles here as fact or to back up their point of view when it’s full of lies , that’s ok as long as it lines up with what you believe politically? I guess since it doesn’t fit what you think or believe it should be silenced , but when you agree that’s ok ? .
It’s funny how some peoples first amendment rights are championed here by some members at all costs even when they post non factual articles and data and their political OPINIONS, yet others should remain silent ! And if they don’t you call for their silencing .
I never start political posts and most times refrain from responding, but your response to MY post and not to others with whom you may line up with politically is EXACTLY why I posted ! The hypocrisy is absolutely staggering and happens quite often here and always from the same people and side of the aisle . You know ….. the tolerant side .

 

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

Why do people think that their 'First Amendment Rights' are being attacked on a private forum? It only applies to the government prosecuting you for your speech and has nothing to do with anything else. 'Free Speech' in the context of the First Amendment is not 'Free Speech' in general...

May I also remind you that this isn't a US forum and the US isn't the Centre of the Universe.

bUt I kNoW mY rIgHts!!1!!one

No, you don't.

Also see the other part of that. The so-called 'tolerance' strawman.

Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How much more of the bingo card do you want to fill up @Over50drumguy ? Because you're speaking a whole load of crap right now and I only need a couple more clichéd, meaningless arguments to fill up the row.

 

[Over50drumguy]

This is complete BS and a straight up political jab. It has no place on this forum. Please remove your post.

Why do people think that their 'First Amendment Rights' are being attacked on a private forum? It only applies to the government prosecuting you for your speech and has nothing to do with anything else. 'Free Speech' in the context of the First Amendment is not 'Free Speech' in general...

May I also remind you that this isn't a US forum and the US isn't the Centre of the Universe.

bUt I kNoW mY rIgHts!!1!!one

No, you don't.

Also see the other part of that. The so-called 'tolerance' strawman.

Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How much more of the bingo card do you want to fill up @Over50drumguy ? Because you're speaking a whole load of crap right now and I only need a couple more clichéd, meaningless arguments to fill up the row.

So let’s leave the first amendment out of it then .
So if I hear you correctly it’s ok on this forum for a member to want to silence another because they don’t agree with a “political” post , but not call out to silence other political posts because they happen to agree with them so that political post or others they AGREE with are ok ? Yet another who wants call ME OUT without calling out others because they agree with them
Now who’s talking crap .
The hypocrisy is thick with a good group of folks here . Again …… the “tolerant” ones.

 

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

It's also completely ridiculous that a country that is as otherwise advanced in many was as the US doesn't have a PAYE tax system and everybody has to file their own tax returns. Utter madness.

 

[Mediocrefunkybeat]

So let’s leave the first amendment out of it then .
So if I hear you correctly it’s ok on this forum for a member to want to silence another because they don’t agree with a “political” post , but not call out to silence other political posts because they happen to agree with them so that political post or others they AGREE with are ok ? Yet another who wants call ME OUT without calling out others because they agree with them
Now who’s talking crap .
The hypocrisy is thick with a good group of folks here . Again …… the “tolerant” ones.

Have you heard of the 'Paradox of Tolerance'? I never said I was tolerant. And if I'm tolerant of intolerance, then the intolerance wins. It's not hypocritical at all and all you're doing is making a total arse of yourself. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

Political discussions are not permitted on this forum based upon the rules which are clearly stated in the General Discussion forum. There's a bit of leeway here and there because the moderators are practical people - but I'm not trying to shut you down, you're just deciding to go against the rules that you agreed upon when you signed up. I'm just mentioning that you're talking a whole load of crap. Feel free to continue to post a load of crap and make a tit of yourself because - if nothing else - it's mildly entertaining to see somebody so completely convinced of their own debating genius and yet so wildly off the mark.

 

[Seafroggys]

Honestly, the answer to OP's question can be answered by asking a tax accountant. Aside from Todd, I doubt anybody here is truly experienced enough to answer (I can always talk to my brother-in-law, he's a CPA, but I'm not feeling super generous right now). Part of this is because Trump drastically rewrote the tax code a few years back, and a lot of knowledge that we spent learning over the past decade+ is now useless because it all changed like 4-5 years ago. Hell, my brother-in-law is still trying to figure out the new tax code, and he does it for a living (from his professional opinion, he says its worse than it used to be. Not trying to make a political statement, just that the old system was far easier for laymen to figure out).

Also, does no one else see the irony in someone thinking that its ridiculous that the IRS has guns, but its okay that police departments do? They're both enforcement agencies. Either its okay for both of them to have it, or neither. I respect consistency, not hypocrisy.