NIL act passed - NCAA allows athletes to monetise their name, image, likeness

[30Something]

In NotSure's defense, I have heard several idiots repeat this idiotic statement over the years.

Yeah, there are a pile of asshats that repeat it. Honestly, the IRS WILL let you pay more, and they DO ask you where you want the additional funds to be designated. However, the intent is that you designate it to something like "next quarter's expected tax liability" and not some conceptual program like "universal health care" that hasn't been funded, authorized, or otherwise approved in a legislative spending bill.

In case you're wondering, I still haven't received my sandwich. Dude's a ****ing deadbeat.

 

[Creebuzz]

Old, but relevant to the latest thread jack.

Bill Gates preaches the aid gospel, but is he just a hypocrite? | Ian Birrell

Ian Birrell: The world's richest man is seen as a secular saint. But he should question the example Microsoft is setting by avoiding tax

www.theguardian.com

 

[Creebuzz]

I would also add that people fail to fully comprehend the mind of the ultra wealthy, which is understandable. When a billionaire like Bill Gates gives away money, it’s in appreciated stock donated to his charity. He avoids the capital gains taxes and gets a massive charitable tax deduction. So, now that money is washed through the tax system at 40 cents on the dollar. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation now has the money, but effectively Bill Gates still controls it through his stewardship of the charity. While it’s a good thing to have a charity, he still gets all the power and vanity of having people grovel and stroke his ego as they make a play for the cash. In that manner, it’s no different to the Uber rich guy than having any other vanity item, like a yacht, where people ooh and ahh over a helipad. The public, however, is enriched through the charity, while the yacht offers the world nothing. On balance, I’d rather have Gates, but it’s somewhat less altruistic when you meet these people in real life.

 

[14er]

I will never understand how the right has been brainwashed to defend the billionaires not paying taxes. They earned it let them do what they want...

Make them pay their fair share.

 

[Buffnik]

I somewhat agree with @Not Sure - except I'd say hypocrisy would be if he said what he said and then pays a fortune every year to CPAs & tax attorneys to find every way to shelter money & reduce his tax burden. If you think your tax burden is more than fair, you wouldn't put any more effort to it than filing through H&R.

 

[Hank]

I somewhat agree with @Not Sure - except I'd say hypocrisy would be if he said what he said and then pays a fortune every year to CPAs & tax attorneys to find every way to shelter money & reduce his tax burden. If you think your tax burden is more than fair, you wouldn't put any more effort to it than filing through H&R.

Couldn't disagree with you more. Someone earlier alluded to this idea:

This is a fundamental tenet of tax law. People often conflate tax avoidance (legally avoiding taxes) with tax evasion (illegally avoiding taxes). There is absolutely nothing wrong or immoral with the former. We all need to play by the same rules.

 

[Hank]

I will never understand how the right has been brainwashed to defend the billionaires not paying taxes. They earned it let them do what they want...

Make them pay their fair share.

I used to ask myself the same question all the time. It drove me mad.

After the last few years, I kind of get how that can happen. Not everyone thinks like we do. Or even close to it.

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

All taxation is theft

 

[skibum]

I used to ask myself the same question all the time. It drove me mad.

After the last few years, I kind of get how that can happen. Not everyone thinks. Or even close to it.

FIFY.

I mean the original could be read that way, but it also could be read that they are thinking, just "in a different way."

 

[Buffnik]

Couldn't disagree with you more. Someone earlier alluded to this idea:

This is a fundamental tenet of tax law. People often conflate tax avoidance (legally avoiding taxes) with tax evasion (illegally avoiding taxes). There is absolutely nothing wrong or immoral with the former. We all need to play by the same rules.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with tax avoidance.

I'm saying that if you think you're getting a smoking deal and believe you should be paying more, it wouldn't make sense to put significant effort into haggling. That it would be so incongruent I'd say the person who did so is a hypocrite (and likely unable to be self-aware because he's on the sociopathic spectrum that's common to many of the rich & powerful).

 

[MtnBuff]

I would also add that people fail to fully comprehend the mind of the ultra wealthy, which is understandable. When a billionaire like Bill Gates gives away money, it’s in appreciated stock donated to his charity. He avoids the capital gains taxes and gets a massive charitable tax deduction. So, now that money is washed through the tax system at 40 cents on the dollar. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation now has the money, but effectively Bill Gates still controls it through his stewardship of the charity. While it’s a good thing to have a charity, he still gets all the power and vanity of having people grovel and stroke his ego as they make a play for the cash. In that manner, it’s no different to the Uber rich guy than having any other vanity item, like a yacht, where people ooh and ahh over a helipad. The public, however, is enriched through the charity, while the yacht offers the world nothing. On balance, I’d rather have Gates, but it’s somewhat less altruistic when you meet these people in real life.

There is nothing fundamentally in conflict between these two separate ideas that Bill Gates has advocated.

1. Much more could be accomplished for the common good if the wealthy were to pay more in taxes and he would be willing to pay those increased taxes as a part of benefiting the common good along with the other high earners being forced to pay more in taxes.

2 In the absence of being mandated to pay more taxes he and his ex-wife can do more good with the specific money that they put towards the common good than the government would with that same money were he to voluntarily give it to the government in the absence of other wealthy persons being required to pay more.

He would have no objection to all wealthy persons paying more and he would comply as a part of that but in the absence of that mandate he will instead put that money and more towards specific projects and targets that the Gates Foundation has identified.

Both can be true.

 

[Highlander]

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with tax avoidance.

I'm saying that if you think you're getting a smoking deal and believe you should be paying more, it wouldn't make sense to put significant effort into haggling. That it would be so incongruent I'd say the person who did so is a hypocrite (and likely unable to be self-aware because he's on the sociopathic spectrum that's common to many of the rich & powerful).

Most people don’t think of it terms of a % of income as being a reasonable tax.

They simply see their taxes owed are hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars and say to themselves “I need to ensure my CPA finds all the deductions I’m eligible for”.

 

[PAHIBuff]

Whatever you (plural) think of Gates, his motivations, or taxes, or billionaires in general, it can't be denied that his donations to charitable causes do a very real good in the world. So I tip my hat to him for that.

P.S. He's somewhat shallow overall and once remarked to Steve Jobs about the "small" size of Jobs's house. (Source: Isaacson's book Steve Jobs)

 

[SerenityBuff]

The Gronkowski family is hooking up UA players with NIL deals. This is how you do it in 2022 college football. Arizona isn't playing around and it's reflected in their recruiting. Meanwhile, in Boulder...

 

[14er]

 

[Go Buffs]

CU doesn’t need to bother with these sorts of deals. We have Karl’s well-articulated vision for the program, so all is good.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

It’s so on brand for the NCAA to investigate Oregon and Nike for the NIL stuff, that is likely more legit within the spirit of NIL, while just allowing Bama, Texas, Georgi, aTm, etc just pay players.

 

[WasianCU]

CU doesn’t need to bother with these sorts of deals. We have Karl’s well-articulated vision for the program, so all is good.

I recognize the sarcastic font and agree with the sentiment but CU was the first school in the nation to make this sort of deal. CU has a 5 year deal with PointsBet that was announced back in 2020:

CU, PointsBet Announce Corporate Partnership - University of Colorado Athletics

BOULDER – Learfield IMG College, the media rights holder of University of Colorado Athletics, and PointsBet, a premier global gaming operator, announced Tuesday

cubuffs.com

There's a thread about it here.

 

[PAHIBuff]

Here's a Question (Theoretical):

If a local company that sells its products/services in the Denver-Boulder area was putting together a radio ad package consisting of a few ads that it intended to run on local radio next September, and it wanted to pay 2 or 3 CU football players to "read the scripts / do jokey banter" in the ads, who in the CU Athletic Department would that company contact to get the ball rolling? Or could it go straight to the players and bypass the AD? (preferred)

Is the answer Known?
Is the answer Knowable?
Or is it a Rumsfeldian Unknown Unknown?

Just a theoretical curiosity of mine.

 

[RollTad21]

 

[ShnaultzSaltNMaltAssault]

I will never understand how the right has been brainwashed to defend the billionaires not paying taxes. They earned it let them do what they want...

Make them pay their fair share.

Judging by, "they earned it let them do what they want" I can see you missed the message. We don't blame anyone for wanting to keep their money, this includes people making 1 million a year, and yes even 1 billion a year. We realize income inequality is a problem but some solutions we hear are just flat retarded. Janet Yellens solution, taxing unrealized capital gains, is literally the dumbest idea ever proposed. A 45 year old single earner 90k a year is in the federal tax bracket at 24%. That percent is .5% MORE per year than THE best stock for the past 30 years Apple (according to below). Even if Yellens solution wasn't part income based, are we seriously suggesting taxing money that isn't even in the investors pocket? You might as well make it illegal for someone making 50-150k to invest. What's the solution when a stock is in the red for the year, is the government going to give people money? Yeah fat chance. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ki...03777/30-best-stocks-of-the-past-30-years?amp

If we really gave a **** about billionaires paying their fair share then the highest tax bracket wouldn't begin at 539k, it would begin at 5-10 mill. Are we more concerned about the small business owner, perhaps your favorite resturant owner who may or may not be scraping by, or the executives of a corporation making 10000x their typical employee?

All taxation is theft

My uncle was a dentist. He paid his way through medical school and when he was done, he started his own practice. He employed 3 people for 30 years and due to that + overhead, he never made the top tax bracket. To boot, if he got sick or wanted to go on vacation...aka if he couldn't go into work, yeah he didn't get paid. No sick leave for you!... That is until the day he got leukemia and had to retire and sell his practice. Boy holy **** did the government come knocking then! They took 30% of his earnings selling depreciated assets... literally taking money in which his total investment was a net loss. LOL, in a world where the government can just print money whenever they need it anyway, Based Murray Rothbard remains based. All taxation is theft

 

[Highlander]

Judging by, "they earned it let them do what they want" I can see you missed the message. We don't blame anyone for wanting to keep their money, this includes people making 1 million a year, and yes even 1 billion a year. We realize income inequality is a problem but some solutions we hear are just flat retarded. Janet Yellens solution, taxing unrealized capital gains, is literally the dumbest idea ever proposed. A 45 year old single earner 90k a year is in the federal tax bracket at 24%. That percent is .5% MORE per year than THE best stock for the past 30 years Apple (according to below). Even if Yellens solution wasn't part income based, are we seriously suggesting taxing money that isn't even in the investors pocket? You might as well make it illegal for someone making 50-150k to invest. What's the solution when a stock is in the red for the year, is the government going to give people money? Yeah fat chance. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kiplinger.com/investing/stocks/603777/30-best-stocks-of-the-past-30-years?amp

If we really gave a **** about billionaires paying their fair share then the highest tax bracket wouldn't begin at 539k, it would begin at 5-10 mill. Are we more concerned about the small business owner, perhaps your favorite resturant owner who may or may not be scraping by, or the executives of a corporation making 10000x their typical employee?


My uncle was a dentist. He paid his way through medical school and when he was done, he started his own practice. He employed 3 people for 30 years and due to that + overhead, he never made the top tax bracket. To boot, if he got sick or wanted to go on vacation...aka if he couldn't go into work, yeah he didn't get paid. No sick leave for you!... That is until the day he got leukemia and had to retire and sell his practice. Boy holy **** did the government come knocking then! They took 30% of his earnings selling depreciated assets... literally taking money in which his total investment was a net loss. LOL, in a world where the government can just print money whenever they need it anyway, Based Murray Rothbard remains based. All taxation is theft

If his investment was a net loss, there is no tax.

 

[Not Sure]

Well, there’s a shot across the bow. Doubt anybody is paying attention, though.

 

[AeroBuff99]

Judging by, "they earned it let them do what they want" I can see you missed the message. We don't blame anyone for wanting to keep their money, this includes people making 1 million a year, and yes even 1 billion a year. We realize income inequality is a problem but some solutions we hear are just flat retarded. Janet Yellens solution, taxing unrealized capital gains, is literally the dumbest idea ever proposed. A 45 year old single earner 90k a year is in the federal tax bracket at 24%. That percent is .5% MORE per year than THE best stock for the past 30 years Apple (according to below). Even if Yellens solution wasn't part income based, are we seriously suggesting taxing money that isn't even in the investors pocket? You might as well make it illegal for someone making 50-150k to invest. What's the solution when a stock is in the red for the year, is the government going to give people money? Yeah fat chance. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kiplinger.com/investing/stocks/603777/30-best-stocks-of-the-past-30-years?amp

If we really gave a **** about billionaires paying their fair share then the highest tax bracket wouldn't begin at 539k, it would begin at 5-10 mill. Are we more concerned about the small business owner, perhaps your favorite resturant owner who may or may not be scraping by, or the executives of a corporation making 10000x their typical employee?


My uncle was a dentist. He paid his way through medical school and when he was done, he started his own practice. He employed 3 people for 30 years and due to that + overhead, he never made the top tax bracket. To boot, if he got sick or wanted to go on vacation...aka if he couldn't go into work, yeah he didn't get paid. No sick leave for you!... That is until the day he got leukemia and had to retire and sell his practice. Boy holy **** did the government come knocking then! They took 30% of his earnings selling depreciated assets... literally taking money in which his total investment was a net loss. LOL, in a world where the government can just print money whenever they need it anyway, Based Murray Rothbard remains based. All taxation is theft

Selling depreciated assets is considered income because you already deducted the cost of that outlay from your income over several years until the assets had no value left. So in theory because you took the entire purchase cost from your income any value you get from selling that asset is value that you depreciated and deducted from your taxes that you shouldn't have, hence the tax on that. One solution would be to never depreciate the asset and only claim the loss of actual value when you sell the asset, but nobody does that because that is stupid. Most of the time, fully depreciated assets are sold when you have other losses to offset the income from the sale.

 

[RollTad21]

I think McChesney is doing some NIL stuff. I've seen a few players tweet something like this out and Wiley was just asking today for NIL opportunities:

 

[ShnaultzSaltNMaltAssault]

If his investment was a net loss, there is no tax.

From the accounting perspective you're right but from an economic perspective it's stealing. All his assets were section 1245 property aka subject to depreciation recapture aka the sales are taxed as income not capital. So considering the IRS is basically making you take a lesser value by making you choose between not taking a deduction and recouping at a rate of 3k a year (150k loss is regained in 50 years!) vs a gain in yearly tax deductions that is less than the tax on a sale plus income, they're literally taxing you for an asset in which you lost on the net investment and then taxing you when you sell it

 

[ShnaultzSaltNMaltAssault]

Selling depreciated assets is considered income because you already deducted the cost of that outlay from your income over several years until the assets had no value left. So in theory because you took the entire purchase cost from your income any value you get from selling that asset is value that you depreciated and deducted from your taxes that you shouldn't have, hence the tax on that. One solution would be to never depreciate the asset and only claim the loss of actual value when you sell the asset, but nobody does that because that is stupid. Most of the time, fully depreciated assets are sold when you have other losses to offset the income from the sale.

Yes I didn't see this when I replied earlier but you're correct from the accounting perspective. From an economic perspective 1245 is stealing. Forcing you to take a deduction at an earlier point just so they can justify taking more later? Yeah bull****, how about you don't rip me off the difference (I won't take the deduction and you won't take more in taxes later) and i can keep the whooping 40k bonus i get from working my ass off for 30 years and employing 3 other citizens, deal?

 

[RollTad21]

 

[SewallBeach]

 

[SewallBeach]

Here's a Question (Theoretical):

If a local company that sells its products/services in the Denver-Boulder area was putting together a radio ad package consisting of a few ads that it intended to run on local radio next September, and it wanted to pay 2 or 3 CU football players to "read the scripts / do jokey banter" in the ads, who in the CU Athletic Department would that company contact to get the ball rolling? Or could it go straight to the players and bypass the AD? (preferred)

Is the answer Known?
Is the answer Knowable?
Or is it a Rumsfeldian Unknown Unknown?

Just a theoretical curiosity of mine.

It can go straight through the players. When RG was asked this, I believe he suggested contacting compliance to get the ball rolling.