Please tell me that John Barrie, a tax lawyer with Bryan
Cave LLP in New York, is mistaken when he says that Matt
Murphy will owe Federal income taxes based on catching Barry
Bond's 756th homerun hit baseball, EVEN IF Murphy DOES NOT
SELL IT, but rather simply keeps it in his posession.
How in the world, if he doesn't sell it, nor rent it out,
would he owe income based on his possession of it?
What if, two months from now, he threw it in the trash?
Would he still owe taxes on his two month possession of it?
I own an old baseball cap. If tomorrow it becomes publicly
known that the cap had belonged to Hank Aaron, would I
suddenly owe Federal income taxes?
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-bonds-ball&prov=ap&type=lgns or
TinyURL.com/36wm7w
Moderator:
Mr. Barrie's opinion is news to me. But then I only know
what I read here.
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
Posted by joetaxpayer on August 11, 2007, 2:19 am
Please log in for more thread options
maya_souj@hotmail.com wrote:
> Please tell me that John Barrie, a tax lawyer with Bryan
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
