On beyond absurd would'nt you say?

Should Olympic medal winners be exempted from paying taxes on their winnings?

Why?

quote:

Why?

WHY, what? I asked a very simple question.

Since when has asking a simple question became the Non-PC thing to do?

I feel that yes they should be exempt. We are not talking about professional career athletes (NFL,etc.)I consider the Olympian athletes in a seperate category.Heaven knows they'll a huge sum of taxes on their cereal box picture,etc.I'm sure the lawyers can make hay over that issue.I am definately opposed to them being taxed on the precious metal values of their medals.

This came up on another site I am on and after all the initial "knee jerk" reactions and further reading into the situation, things are not quite what they are made out to be.

One of the outlets that was discussing this issue was Fox Sports. We all know how the media can twist things. But according to their sources, Bronze medals carry a tax burden of $2.00 for the winner. Gold medals come in at $236.00 each. According to one source a "Gold" medal is worth a littler over $600.00 dollars.

The "Gold" medals are supposedly actually 90+% silver that is gold plated.

Here is part of what Fox Sports reported concerning the medals and the taxes for winning them.

The U.S. Olympic Committee awards prize money to American medal winners: $25,000 for gold, $15,000 for silver, $10,000 for bronze. That prize money is taxed at a rate of as much as 35 percent, Americans for Tax Reform calculated. On top of that, the medals themselves are taxed: You only have to fork over $2 to the IRS for the privilege of keeping your bronze medal, but carve off $236 worth from that gold medal.

Michael Phelps should have no trouble shouldering the tax burden — he makes millions in endorsements. But fellow U.S. swimmer Allison Schmitt has won two golds, a silver and a bronze in London. That’s $75,000 in total prize money — and $26,857 owed to the United States Treasury.


JMO, I think the rate at which they are being taxed, + or - 35 percent, is in need of modifacation, but, and again this is JMO even though these folks are reprersenting the U.S. in the games they will be reaping the benefits, if they are as good in their business dealings as they are in the competitions, for the rest of their lives. I for one do not really see a problem with them being taxed. Again I think the rate they are being taxed at needs some revision, but I really have no problem with them being taxed.

If one wants to argue that the US tax code should be reformed, I'm in full agreement but if you want to exempt someone from taxes just because they won an Olympic medal, that is beyond fair. The Olympians are doing something they apparently enjoy doing and if they get rewarded monetarily for it, why should they not be subject to the same taxes as every other US citizen? As an example, US service members have to pay taxes and, whether they enjoy their occupation or not, there is little question that is it much more hazardous and much more critical to the US's interests than being an Olympic athelete. I'm very proud of each US Olympian, whether they won a medal or not, but to suggest that they shouldn't pay taxes because they won? Bah, humbug.

BTW the current Olympic gold medals are 92.5% silver and 1.34% gold (pure, I assume) and weigh between 375 and 400 grams.

My view is they should be taxed just like everyone else, at the same rates as everyone else, based on their annual gross taxable income after deductions.

I think the major flaw in this whole thing is the thought that their final tax is 35% on the medal winnings. Not so!

That is their MAXIMUM WITHHOLDING rate. (It may be less, depending on their forecast deductions.) Depending on their gross income and eligible deductions it is entirely feasible they will finally be taxed at less than 15% when they file their annual tax return. Whatever was withheld in excess of their tax obligation will make up part of what probably will be a sizeable tax refund check for most of them. They might even get back ALL of what was withheld just like many retired and other low income folks do every year.

What I think is a shame is that any amateur athlete should receive any cash prize at all for competing in amateur sports. To award cash prizes is to start the same "under the table professionalization" which has in my opinion ruined much of college althletics.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Why?

WHY, what? I asked a very simple question.

Since when has asking a simple question became the Non-PC thing to do?

Now it's my turn to say What? I asked a simple question about your simple question. Why do you feel the Olympic athletes shouldn't be taxed on their winnings?

quote:

but I really have no problem with them being taxed.

Already answered that. Yes, they are representing the U.S. at the Games, but in the long run, who is going to reap the most benefits from their participation???????

Yes they sacrafice a lot to be able to participate, but the rewards they will obtain if they win a medal will more than make up for the effort they put forth. Look at Michael Phelps, 27 years old, and if he gets a sharp business manager to handle his affairs, he will never have to do another thing in his life if he chooses to do so.

One question, do Active Duty American Military personnel pay income tax?

Damn, Crazyhorse you are starting to sound like a new age democrat/socialist that feels that people should be fined/taxed because of their individual effort + success. In answer to your final query + I repeat myself ( I know they will make $$$ on endorsements ,great,tax them on that.)Last question answered,yes,we pay.We don't pay an additional tax on the metal value of decorations.(none there sad to say;the price of valor). It is different but too similar to totally dismiss..

Does the military have to pay tax on their medals?

quote:

One question, do Active Duty American Military personnel pay income tax?

Yes.

quote:

Does the military have to pay tax on their medals?

Referring to the US military, theoretically yes, but the value (cost of production and/or materials or market value, mostly base metals or plated,) is so low (with the possible exception of the market value of a MOH WHICH ARE ILLEGAL TO SELL OR POSSESS IN THE US unless one is recipient or an heir thereof) as to make it a moot point. Even the frigging IRS knows that trying to tax a MOH winner, assuming he was alive, might make for poor public relations.

As an aside, based on a 2008 law, living MOH recipients now receive an $1,129 per month tax-free stipend. That is a 2008 number which would be higher now, and I BELIEVE is a post active military service benefit.

Tax the remainder after allowing the max amount that can be called a gift- like when you gift a tax-free sum to a relative or friend.

I think the amount is around 12,000 dollars, anyone know for sure?

quote:

Damn, Crazyhorse you are starting to sound like a new age democrat/socialist that feels that people should be fined/taxed because of their individual effort + success.

Sorry that you feel you have to resort to insults, simply because I have an opinion and am willing to state it.

My question concerning Active Duty Military personnell paying taxes while defending our country, makes me wonder why people feel Olympic medal winners should be given a free pass, when after the military personnell end their tour of duty, they are not going to be appearing on Wheaties boxes receiving millions of dollars of income for having laid their life on the line.

If a person feels that the medal winners should not have to pay a dime in taxes ever for representing the U.S., that is their business, I do not agree with it, but I don't get insulting with it.

I guess it is just easier to insult then simply disagree.

quote:

Originally posted by tin can:
Tax the remainder after allowing the max amount that can be called a gift- like when you gift a tax-free sum to a relative or friend.

I think the amount is around 12,000 dollars, anyone know for sure?

$13,000 individually, $26,000 as a couple, as of 2011.

Just to get this --t deeper and muckier, let me toss in that I don't buy the "representing their country" red herring.

Though their country presents the athletes as representing it, thus riding on their shoulders, the athletes are representing themselves. Top drawer athletes don't do what they do primarily as a service to others.

They do it to see just how good they can get...what they can achieve...as the Army ads put it, to be "the best they can be". They do it for their own sense of accomplishment and the sheer joy of doing it the very best.

The medal is just a symbol of how well they achieved that goal compared to other athletes in the same sport(s).


They can enjoy it by showing it to others, just caressing it and looking back to their memories of when they were the very best in the world, or heck, they can even wear it as rare jewelry worth far more than mere money.


In that same sense, they should be taxed the same way anyone else at the apex of their career is, whether a highly skilled doctor, teacher, wall-street banker, or prune-picker.

Lord God AC, Do Not confuse these folks with reality. I am accused by some one who has never met me, of being a Socialist simply because I stated my opinion on the matter.

It does not matter that I do not agree with the 35% crap, it does not matter how I have voted in the past, it does not matter that our active duty military personnell being shot and killed for representing this country have to pay taxes on their income, No, No, to hell with all that.

I mean even gamblers have to pay taxes on their winnings! It is far easier to rank a person right in there with Hitler, simply because they stated that they did not have a problem with these atheletes being taxed as long as it was done within reason.

IRS - Any way they can get it !
Next year the Death Tax goes up to 55 % .Pay taxes all your life but it doesn't end .Pay again when you die !

Crazyhourse,my appologies if you were offended.
I did not personally decry you as such,I said that you are acting like it.Please do not bring Hitler into the discussion as that is always the last gasp of argument/discussion.We are friends here,conversing on difference of opinions. Back to basics then :No ONE LIKES TAXES!!! We must confess that some amounts are necessary for the services provided (too many social [my own input] )but those to be accountable + truly for the benefit of OUR people. That does bring me to your closing statement.."within reason". That is what started this entire discussion.We are only talking theories + opinions Amigo......I have thrown you a branch,can you cross the mere? I can.

All I said was, that I have no problem with the Olmypians being taxed. Do I want them taxed to the maximum, no.

The reason I got offened because I was merely giving MY OPINION. I do not have a theory about taxing the atheletes, I just do not have a problem with them being taxed. I do not agree with the tax rates listed, I think that needs to be changed.

The point remains, I merely stated my opinion and I am accused of being a socialist. I do not remember calling you anything. Now you are throwing me a branch. Why should I accept the branch, I was the one called a socialist merely for stating my opinion.

Am I supposed to just say, that is okay, you really do not know one thing about me, but it is okay you can make accusations and I will just accept it.

Would you be so willing to profer the Olive Branch if I had accused you of being a socialist? I wonder?

Just did. Your play.

Yes, you did. Problem is, I did Not call you a Socialist for merely stating an opinion.

I ask again, would you be so willing to extend that branch if I had accused you of being a Socialist.

You accusing me of being one, makes me the offended party, NOT YOU.

Somehow you insulting me, then trying to get me to act like everything is okay is not just exactly the way the game is played.

I am not asking for an apology/a branch extended or anything at all from you, other than just a little civility and courtesey. Don't accuse me of being something I am not, simply because I have a different opinion/POV.

Especially in a case such as this where I merely stated that it would not bother me if the medal winner were taxed. I wa not ranting or raving about it, I just said I would have no problem with it. YOU were the one that decided to put a label on me, when in reality you know absolutely nothing about me.

Not a US citizen so factor that in. These athletes have generally spent their whole lives training for this event. During that time they have likely spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to reach that level. Is that tax deductible? Is it right to tax the winnings but not allow the expense. Also for every winner there are thousands of competitors who have spent millions of dollars to try and get the right to compete at the olympics. If the IRS taxes the winners should they not allow the expenses of all the competitors? Not an answer just food for thought.

quote:

Originally posted by Norman Conquest:
Just did. Your play.

Norman:

Stupid and psychotic sometimes appear similar. Keep that in mind.

If IRS classified it as Income than the athlete states that it is his business to complete and all expenses associated with that income would be an expense, trust me they will get a tax loss because their expensive if in fact they paid them would exceed the income.

Just like gambling, you can only deduct losses against winning, no winnings no deductions

IRS has allowed expenses to be deducted by prostitutes, imagine the auditor who gets to review them

A tempest in a teapot.

Anyway, as for me, I'd DEARLY LOVE to be in a position to owe and pay the IRS $1 Billion per year in income tax at current maximum rates.

And I'll bet most Olympians would love to be taxed on eight or more Gold Medals every time they go to the games.

A tempest in a teapot indeed.

Tax them, Don't tax them, I really don't care either way, my comments were NOT anything to be labeled a Socialist over. I had seen this topic brought up on another site and just like on here, a few people had a knee jerk reaction to this when it first came out, without reading in thru it more. All they saw was the word tax and went into their normal paranoid histrionics. I can think of folks that need to be taxed more, and I csn see groups that need to be taxed less, such as Front Line Military Personnell.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Tax them, Don't tax them, I really don't care either way, my comments were NOT anything to be labeled a Socialist over. I had seen this topic brought up on another site and just like on here, a few people had a knee jerk reaction to this when it first came out, without reading in thru it more. All they saw was the word tax and went into their normal paranoid histrionics. I can think of folks that need to be taxed more, and I csn see groups that need to be taxed less, such as Front Line Military Personnell.

Speaking of which, if folks want something to rant and rave about, I think the shabby treatment of our combat troops would be a great theme to take up.

Not only do they pay income tax on what they get for being shot at, bombed, and otherwise put in deadly peril, they get charged for all kinds of things no previous U.S. government would ever have dared even think of IF what I am hearing more and more is true.

For instance, one of our neighbor's boys was sent with his guard unit to Iraq. When their time there was up, they had to pay for their seats on a commercial airliner to bring them home!! He was there an extra two months while he and his mom got together the money for his flight. At least that's what she tells us. He also had to buy his own desert camo outfit to wear there, and his own flak vest, along with something to do with his rifle.

I think it is time to pay Congress ONLY the same annual sum as the troops get, send them to the same places, and charge them the same for their trips and equipment. Then maybe they'd be a bit more careful about when and where they send our kids.

Don't forget the Chosen One also wanted to charge GIs for their insurance. "... after all they volunteered didn't they...."

Active duty military serving in a combat zone do not pay taxes on the money earned while in the combat zone (as it should be).

When military are not serving in a combat zonne (like stationed in the USA, tho can be other places too were no combat zone has been declared) they pay taxes on their base pay and some other pays (can't remember them right now).

As to the medal winning olympic atheletes, heck its money earned (as an awarded prize amount) and they SHOULD pay taxes on that money at whatever prevailing rate they fall within when as dutifull americans they file their yearly tax returns,

Politicians now on the other had should pay the same taxes based on final tax return preparation also as dutifull american, but its amazing how many politicians fail to file let alone pay their taxes when they should.

The american tax system needs a complete overhaul anyway!

why are they being payed??????????
i remember when olympians were amateur athletes.
i didn't know it was a career move.

Bisonhunter---If money a military receives has PAY in the title it is taxed. For example--Base PAY, Combat PAY, Hazardous Duty PAY. If PAY is not in the title, it is not taxed. Clothing ALLOWANCE. Housing ALLOWANCE. Basic Allowance for subsistence

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Bisonhunter---If money a military receives has PAY in the title it is taxed. For example--Base PAY, Combat PAY, Hazardous Duty PAY. If PAY is not in the title, it is not taxed. Clothing ALLOWANCE. Housing ALLOWANCE. Basic Allowance for subsistence

Not true if the individual is serving in a combat zone or is hospitalized as a result of combat zone injuries. From the IRS site:

quote:

Q-2: I am a member of the U.S. Armed Forces performing services in a combat zone. Is any part of my military pay for serving in this area excluded from gross income?

A-2: Yes, if you serve in a combat zone as an enlisted person or as a warrant officer (including commissioned warrant officers) for any part of a month, all your military pay received for military service that month is excluded from gross income. For commissioned officers, the monthly exclusion is capped at the highest enlisted pay, plus any hostile fire or imminent danger pay received.

Gatogordo, Bisonhunters original statement was that when military are not serving in a combat zone (like stationed in the USA, tho can be other places too where no combat zone has been declared) they pay taxes on their base pay and some other pays (can't remember them right now). My answer was if PAY is in the title it is taxed and if pay is not in the title it is not taxed. That is correct. Yes there are exceptions if this PAY was received in a combat zone.

Military medals are not made of precious medal and have no worth based on weight. What you normally see the military person wearing is a ribbon that represents the medal--not the actual medal. Long story: I do have a medal that was worth $1048.83. When General Bennie L. Davis (not Benjamin O. Davis--the black general) was a brigadier (one star)he was commander of Air Force Recruiting Service. He made a promise that recruiter of the year and rookie recruiter of the year would be awarded an Air Force commendation medal. This medal is worth 3 points for promotion. I was rookie of the year but was denied the medal. General Davis had been promoted to Major General (two star) and moved on when the year ended. His replacement, general Andrew P. Iosue would not honor his promise. I missed promotion by .83 of one point. 7 years later General Davis was a 4 star general and Commander of Strategic Air Command. He learned of my not receiving the medal and he awarded it, back dated to when I should have received it. With correction of records the promotion I had missed was back dated and I received back pay (taxed).