----------
Last edited:
No one is barred from the US Open events
- Thread starter Mark Griffin
- Start date
----------
Last edited:
Mr. Barton,
Your IDEA is very true! So, true I highlighted it! These LEAGUES pay millions in TAXES. Well, why not spend the TAX money on advertising and supporting pro pool. I am certain their ADVERTISING budgets would be an INTERCHANGEABLE expense eligible to fund pro pool by funneling the advertising budgets into the sport!
Any tax experts please chime in?????
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/taxable-advertising-expenses-23465.html
According to this article leagues could SPONSOR and advertise to minimize their TAX LIABILITY!!!!
KD
Last edited:
This math doesn't quite work. Because... Let's say an entity is paying a total of 40% taxes on PROFITS. If they spend for example $10,000 to a pro pool fund, then they have $10,000 less taxable profit, thereby reducing their tax bill by $4,000. Net out of pocket is $6,000.
I took this Quote below from the article I posted a link to. They itemize the deductions and get 100% not 40%. I am no tax expert and I looked around for info on this topic and asked for tax experts to chime in. If the article is WRONG please let me know???
Taxable Advertising Expenses
by Jennifer Moore, Demand Media
When you itemize your advertising cost on your yearly tax filing, you can list your advertising expenses and reduce these from your profits, thereby lowering your taxable income. Although most advertising expenses fall under this category, there are expenses that cannot be listed and are considered taxable income.
Defined
Businesses itemize their business costs in the separate entries. They then subtract these costs from their total earnings. The result is the taxable income for the business. Advertising is a business expense just as other items like office equipment, supplies or employee costs.
Thanks
KD
False, the person that runs our USAPL league will be there (probably not playing, but will be there), and he is a lawyer. You should see how much paperwork we need to fill out when he gets called over to watch a hit.
Party of the first part who will be called "the shooter" henceforth shall be scruitinized for any foul that may or may not occur as a result of the shooters actions at the table, and he shall be held liable for any infraction of the rules including but not limited to ball in hand or loss of game, to be awarded to the party of the second part, who has been in the vicinity of said foul. The verification of the possible occurance of the foul will be observed by no more than one (1) person who is called upon to represent the second party as a "proxy" to call out in audible fasion if a "good hit" was made or not. Said call shall be legal binding unless superseeded by federal law and is not valid if the shooter is a nit. Signed on this day of our lord blah blah.
Well, no. Just work through some examples, assuming a tax rate of, say, 30%. You have gross receipts (total sales) of $3,000,000. Normal expenses are $2,000,000 for things like salary, rent, phones, licenses, the advertizing you already do, etc. That leaves $1,000,000.
Path 1: You do no tour sponsorship. You pay $300,000 in taxes and put $700,000 in your pocket.
Path 2: You sponsor a tour for $300,000 for the year. Your profit drops to $700,000. You pay $210,000 in taxes on that reduced profit and put $490,000 in your pocket.
Which would you rather have, $700,000 in your pocket or $490,000 in your pocket? Is it worth that $210,000 difference to have sponsored a tour? Do you get anything from the tour sponsorship? Other than a warm feeling and a lot of whining about the prize fund not being large enough.
If your sponsorship leads to annual sales of $5,000,000 after three years because all of the players are endorsing your product, then maybe you end up making money on the deal. Maybe you would have done better by other kinds of advertizing.
Bob,
When businesses itemize they get 100% deductible according to the article again we need a tax expert to answer if it is correct? That is why I posted the link to the article.
Kd
Businesses cannot deduct the advertizing from their taxes. The deduction is from gross revenue to find net, taxable revenue. I don't think the article said anything different. I itemize including advertizing expense. It does not come off of my taxes. It comes off my gross income to determine taxable income. As the article says, it is treated like any other expense.
Bob, as my late Brother used to say, if you want to do good deeds for others, go outside and pee your pants in the winter. It will give you a nice warm feeling for a few minutes and then get cold real quick.
thats correct, tax rite-offs don't come without a price. You just get a discount on what you buy at the end of the day your still spending $$, unless you lie and write off 100%-but that wont hold up in a audit-VERY bad plan.
thats correct, its a line item deduction at best, like other expenses. Some line item expenses are not 100% deductible like food & beverage thats only 50% deductible, so that $500 hob nob dinner to close a deal is only a $250 deduction against the top line, the other $250 gets taxed at 50% or what ever it is now-nice huh? most people dont know this stuff Bob, I know you do. Your a biz man, 1040 employees live in a different world and share the same roads.....
That technique is somewhat more useful when scuba diving in cold water. Be sure to rinse thoroughly after the dive. Do not attempt when wearing a dry suit.:grin-square:
----------
Last edited:
No one's barred?
Not even T.A.P.'s defending champions?
(not that any of THEM could win at this
level- there's no way for them to cheat!)
Bushka, I was just teasing. Of course there are people that do good deeds that are only doing it for show. The rest do it to benefit others. That nice warm feeling, you get to keep all to yourself whether people know of your deed or not.
Just as a matter of amazement, I helped a blind man across the street the other day.
FKing inconsiderate drivers wouldn't stop long enuff to give the guy and his dog a break.
It was a four way stop and I could see that the dog was getting confused by the traffic.
He wanted to go but couldn't. Poor doggie.
Its the world we live in these days. they were in too much of a hurry to get home, crack a beer and light the bar b cue.
I hope they burnt their steaks. I had a warm 18 pack in the truck. I figured that a couple of extra minutes wasn't going to make my beer any colder.
Yeah, I do these things on occasion. Even Trolls have a good side.
Just as a matter of amazement, I helped a blind man across the street the other day.
FKing inconsiderate drivers wouldn't stop long enuff to give the guy and his dog a break.
It was a four way stop and I could see that the dog was getting confused by the traffic.
He wanted to go but couldn't. Poor doggie.
Its the world we live in these days. they were in too much of a hurry to get home, crack a beer and light the bar b cue.
I hope they burnt their steaks. I had a warm 18 pack in the truck. I figured that a couple of extra minutes wasn't going to make my beer any colder.
Yeah, I do these things on occasion. Even Trolls have a good side.
Last edited:
----------
Last edited:
I think others have addressed the tax issue but that wasn't my thought really. My thought is to INCREASE the fees to league players by .25cts per player per week and use that money to fund a sustainable professional tour with television exposure and a vast grass roots marketing campaign to put pro pool in the hearts and minds of as many people as possible. The broad base of financial support would be barely noticeable on an individual level but the up side would be larger leagues, more payouts, better trips, more contact with pros, and of course a clear path from the amateur league to professional pool with some common ground. In tennis, bowling, golf etc...the amateurs play the same game as the pros.
So doing this would have the effect of building pool on a solid foundation that doesn't rely on an infusion of "new money" nor on new games or a savior or a hit movie.
Eventually the idea is that when and if the tour were constant and solid and on TV then it would attract bigger sponsors, fortune 500 advertisers and that then would make it even bigger.
Imagine, all those old players who still want to and can compete......Geritol, when the Champion inside you still wants to win the US Open, again! - Nick Varner.
Pool can speak to every age group and still be played at a high level by every age group. So for advertising purposes it speaks to every demographic.
But as long as there is infighting and malicious rumors such that the best people currently in the sport have to dispel them this way we won't ever get there.
Hmm!.....I truly enjoy your posts, but, as usual JB, so close but not quite on the mark........the mix of empathy that comes with your experience needs to be properly reciprocated......in my opinion only.