| Author | Message | ||
     Etennuly |
The IRS taxing medals won at the Olympic games seems stupid. Of all of the things that should be granted an exemption, I would think this should be one. A lot of these young athletes work from early childhood to earn a medal for their country, all the effort, the pride, and determination, just to be handed a tax bill for the medal. It seems like a bunch of cheap bastards are in charge, who can write off their yachts, limos, and apartments for their 'beneficial friends', but an Olympic medal winner has to pay tax. I would have liked to have won a gold medal for my country, just so I could jamb it up the ass of some law maker. I would call it a donationto my country. | ||
| Trojan |
How do they value the medals for tax purposes? They are not really made of gold or silver, so can't be valued on weight alone. They are also won outside the country (unless ou happen to be a British medal winner of course), so are not liable to domestic taxes surely  How about offsetting the amount of money athletes spend on training, travelling etc against the tax on a medal they MAY win? I think the IRS would owe them a lot of money. | ||
| Etennuly |
I think the IRS would owe them a lot of money.  IRS only 'owes' when they mistakenly over charge. An athlete might just have to PAY LESS. They have a price on the medals. I read it this morning. It was like $685 or so for a gold and $120 for a bronze.....someone will correct me on those amounts..... To me, to earn a medal for your country and then be taxed for it, is not unlike the coal miners and steel workers of old, who were indentured servants, who owe all to the company store. It sure isn't an example of freedom as promoted to the World. | ||
| Kyrocket |
Is it just our athletes or every olympic medal winner? Either way I agree it's bogus. | ||
| Trojan |
It certainly doesn't apply to athletes from outise the USA (there would be riots in the streets of England at the thought of Bradley Wiggins being taxed on his gold medal!), so I am assuming it is a purely USA thang so far  Either way I can't see a plan like this holding water for very long. How do they apply it if the athlete concerned decides to leave his medal outside the US? How on earth can they tax it? Does Michael Phelps get a bulk discount? | ||
| Sifo |
I was trying to understand this and finally found part of the answer. Turns out they also get $25,000 in cash for a gold medal. It drops to $10,000 for a bronze. Not sure how much for the silver. The article also doesn't make it clear who is paying the cash. I can see where this is considered income. I would think they would be able to write off their training/travel/etc. expenses and easily pay nothing. Phelps may have problems finding that much in expenses though. I really wouldn't have a problem with an exception for this income though. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/1/rub io-bill-eliminates-federal-tax-olympic-medals/ | ||
| Xdigitalx |
A report I saw said there are 23 other countries that do this as well. The reporter pretty much didn't make a big deal about it. I guess the athletes are not unlike a U.S. embassy overseas representing the usa. But also taxable.... I didn't see the whole report though. | ||
| Kyrocket |
Well, I too am a little more informed now... http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-plac e-medal/winning-gold-medal-brings-9-000-tax-bill-1 71555961--oly.html and now it makes a little more sense. I thought they were getting taxed on just the medal itself but it's actually the $25,000 in prize money like Sifo said for a gold. $15,000 for silver and $10,000 for bronze. That's a horse of a different color. I'm sure a good accountant could iron out all the wrinkles. | ||
| Ulyranger |
Maybe we could call it a "gift" from a grateful nation. No, if you win Gold you must be a one- percenter........and O says we need to start paying down the debt.....at least once every night during NBC's coverage. | ||
| Sifo |
I see this as a tempest in a teapot issue. They get income and are expected to pay taxes. No big deal. Unless they are in the top tax bracket they will pay far less than the amounts being thrown around in the news stories. If they really want to add yet more complications to the tax code by providing an exemption for Olympic athletes on their winnings, it really won't make any difference to our current trillions in debt, so not a big deal. I would go along with it in the name of national pride even though I would be against it on the basis of keeping a fair and simple tax code. Excuse my while I have a big yawn. | ||
| Trojan |
Turns out they also get $25,000 in cash for a gold medal. It drops to $10,000 for a bronze. I am assuming that this prize money is paid by the national organisations rather than the Olympic organisers themselves, as there has been no mention of any paymemts here in the UK and I'm sure in this current economic climate there would be some uproar about it if there was any suggestion that the UK organising committee(i.e.UK taxpayers) are paying foreign athletes for medal winning performances. If it is taxation on prize money given by the US Olympic team organisers then it should quite rightly be taxed of course, just like any other earnings. Somehow I still find it quite distateful to think that athletes are being paid for performances in the Olympic games (as quite opposed to World Championships or Grand Prix meetings). I always thought that it was the last bastion of competing for the honour of it rather than financial gain. I thought the Olymics was for country and honour, not money  | ||
| Notpurples2 |
Prize money is small potatoes compared to the endorsment money they'll get, especially the big viewer sports like swimming and track events. | ||
| Ulyranger |
I think that last bastion thing officially ended when real, on the books professional athletes started competing and athletes could accept multi-million dollar endorsement deals...... Still a fan for the less commercialized sports and inter-country competition, waving the flag and all that. | ||
| Hootowl |
"IRS only 'owes' when they mistakenly over charge" Nope. EIC. | ||
| Psykick_machanik |
They should pay DOUBLE TAX because they work harder than the rest of us and thats just not fair to those who sit on their asses waiting for a hand out........besids, they "didnt actually earn it them self's" | ||
| Etennuly |
I see no problem with olympians paying tax on income, that is income. But being taxed on the medal itself.....come on! That is chicken shit taxation.  Do Generals in the military have to pay tax on their gold stars? If the Obaminator gets as ass kissing medal from a foreign country or the UN, does he pay tax on it? | ||
| Strokizator |
I hope that $25k doesn't throw Kobe, LeBron, et al into a higher tax bracket. They're barely getting by as it is. | ||
| Hootowl |
"Do Generals in the military have to pay tax on their gold stars?" Yes. They have to pay sales tax on them when they buy them at the uniform shop. The star is uniform insignia like any other. Edit: Correction. Last time I was on base, there was no sales tax (federal property) but that was a long time ago, and there was talk of charging local sales tax because governments were complaining about the loss of tax revenue. Don't know whether that ever happened. So those generals may not be paying sales tax on their uniforms. (Message edited by hootowl on August 02, 2012) | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
You have to pay a tax for winning prizes on Wheel of Fortune, no difference here. | ||
| Brinnutz |
Actually, you don't pay tax on the PEX, NEX, et. al. on military bases. There is no such thing as sales tax there. So, no, the General does not pay sales tax on the stars that he buys. | ||
| Sifo |
But he has already been taxed on the money that he is making his tax free purchase with. | ||
| Hootowl |
"There is no such thing as sales tax there" Yes, I remembered and updated my post a while ago. | ||
| Etennuly |
I am surprised that a General would have to purchase his own stars. In that case they would not be "given" to him as part of his earnings, ergo no income tax on it. Sales tax would likely be up to the state in which they were purchased. Still a chicken shit deal. Damn, I thought these guys who have earned them through their service, would be working for a gobmt entity who could afford to decorate their officers with the appropriate medals. If a soldier earns a Purple Heart in battle, is that medal "given" to him, or does he get a paper award and have to go to the PX to buy one? If so is the value of the medal taxed as income by the Fed? | ||
| Slaughter |
Income is income. Like most $&#^ on the 'net, it gets mis-reported by people who are too d a m n e d lazy to do the research. Move along now, nothing more to see here. | ||
| Reepicheep |
.000001% of people get 100% of all olympic medals. I demand a gold medal. I am the 99.99999%. | ||
| Slaughter |
... and you don't EVEN want me to get started on the British aristocracy trying hard to keep the rabble out of a "gentleman's" game like the Olympics. They tried to keep it "pure" by mandating that NO professional athletes be allowed to compete in the modern olympics. In fact, they even tried (and for a while succeeded) to keep ball sports out of the Games just because "those" games were for the lower classes. Amateur athletes? We have a load of idiots who think that the whole amateur athlete as olympic competitor is some noble idea. Read up on the origins of the modern olypics. "Amateur athlete" was a romantic notion created by the nobility as a way to keep out the lesser classes. (Message edited by slaughter on August 02, 2012) | ||
| Pkforbes87 |
The hypothetical General buys and maintains his uniform and accessories with a uniform allowance. This tax-exempt income amount is determined by rank and years in service, and is paid annually. That being said, anyone who maintains inspection-ready uniforms at all times spends more than the allowance and dips into their taxed income to cover the difference. For a Purple Heart, he'll probably get the first medal for free but he'll have to go buy the ribbon and any future replacements. | ||
| Trojan |
... and you don't EVEN want me to get started on the British aristocracy trying hard to keep the rabble out of a "gentleman's" game like the Olympics. They tried to keep it "pure" by mandating that NO professional athletes be allowed to compete in the modern olympics. In fact, they even tried (and for a while succeeded) to keep ball sports out of the Games just because "those" games were for the lower classes. Actually the modern Olympics were the idea of a Frenchman, not British. He did base a lot of the 'Olympic ideals' on the British sense of 'fair play' though. The rule on purely amatuer athletes was a pretty good one on the whole and lasted for a very long time. It is only in the last few years that purely professional athletes have become the norm. As for ball sports, there were and have been all sorts of ball sports and other sports in the modern Olympics over the years, including poetry and etching in the 1948 London games. Various sports come and go, but the original modern Olympic idea idea was to have 'classic' sports events rather than modern ganmes like football etc. | ||
| Rich |
Local news had a story on the tax hardship, then cut to a McDonald's commercial featuring Ryan Locht. | ||
| Ulyranger |
Oh yes, the Olympics feel sooooo much more "common man" with the likes of Kobe and Lebron in attendance....... Between NBC's horrific coverage and the over-commercialization they just don't have the appeal for me that they used to. |
