Blog Post

IRS Practice and Procedure News Briefs for October 2020

Joshua A. Nesser • October 28, 2020

TAXING GAMBLING WINS AND LOSSES – Coleman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2020-146 (2020)


Why this Case is Important:  With new forms of gambling being legalized throughout the country and more people gambling, it is important that gamblers understand how their wins and losses are taxed.


Facts:  In Coleman, the taxpayer, a compulsive gambler, received 160 separate Forms W-2G from four different casinos reporting gambling winnings of $350,241 in 2014. Because he did not file an income tax return for 2014, the IRS prepared a substitute return, and on that return taxed the full amount of winnings reported on the Forms W-2G. This resulted in a tax deficiency of $128,886 plus penalties of $46,025. The taxpayer filed a Tax Court petition contesting this substitute return, and in doing so submitted what he considered to be a corrected tax return. On that return, he included a tax deduction of $350,241 in gambling losses to offset the income reported on his Forms W-2G.


Law and Conclusion:  The general rule of the Internal Revenue Code is that all revenue, including gambling winnings, is taxed. A taxpayer who does not gamble as a trade or business is permitted to take gambling losses as an itemized deduction, but only to the extent of his or her gross gambling winnings; a deduction in excess of those winnings is not permitted. The issue that often arises is that taxpayers are unable to substantiate their claimed losses because they do not maintain complete records of their gambling activities. In those cases, if the taxpayer can at least prove that there were some losses, the Tax Court is willing to estimate the total losses and allow that amount as a deduction. While the taxpayer did not keep a complete diary of his wins and losses in 2014 and the casinos he gambled at did not have a full record of his gambling, at trial he presented other financial information from that year, such as credit card and bank statements, to show that there was no increase to his wealth over the course of the year, in support of his argument that he did not profit from gambling. In addition, he presented testimony from a mathematics expert that, based on his gambling habits in 2014, including his time spent gambling and the types of games he played (generally slot machines), it was almost statistically impossible for him to have profited from gambling in 2014. Based on this evidence, the Court accepted the Taxpayer’s position that he had no net gambling winnings in 2014 and found in his favor.


FEDERAL TAX LIENS AND BANKRUPTCY – Webb v. IRS, No. 1:17-cv-00058 (S.D. Ind. 2020)


Why this Case is Important:  Individuals in bankruptcy often misunderstand the effect that a bankruptcy discharge will have on any federal tax liens filed against them, and the tax liabilities that are the subject of those liens. 


Facts:  In Webb, the IRS filed notices of federal tax lien against the taxpayers in 2010. In 2013, the taxpayers filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition, listing their home as exempt from bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court granted a discharge in 2013. Apparently, unbeknownst to the taxpayers, that discharge did not extend to the tax liabilities covered by the IRS liens. The IRS, believing that the taxpayers’ liabilities had been discharged by the bankruptcy, abated the liabilities and released its tax liens in 2014. In 2016, realizing that the liabilities had not been discharged, the IRS reversed its abatement and filed revocations of its releases of the tax liens. The IRS then filed suit against the taxpayers demanding payment of the taxes. As part of that lawsuit, the IRS filed a motion for summary judgment, requesting that the Court determine that, following the revocation of the lien releases, the tax liens were valid and attached to all property owned by the taxpayers as of the date of their bankruptcy filing, including their home. The taxpayers argued that they were entitled to summary judgment on the issue based on their tax liabilities having been discharged in bankruptcy and abated by the IRS and the IRS having released the tax liens.


Law and Conclusion:  Under Section 6321 of the Internal Revenue Code, a federal tax lien arises when a taxpayer fails to pay taxes due. When a tax liability is assessed, a lien automatically arises and attaches to all property and property rights owned by the taxpayer during the life of the lien. Tax liens survive bankruptcy even following a discharge. Section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code makes clear that the debt secured by a tax lien filed against bankruptcy-exempt property, such as a residence, is not subject to discharge. The Court disagreed with the taxpayers’ argument that the IRS could not reinstate the tax liens because, while the taxpayers argued that the underlying taxes had been discharged, in reality they had not. While a bankruptcy discharge may eliminate personal debt, a creditor’s lien, such as a federal tax lien, if validly established prior to the bankruptcy filing, will survive the bankruptcy discharge. In this case, because the tax liens were established prior to the taxpayers’ bankruptcy filing, the bankruptcy did not invalidate the liens. Furthermore, the fact that the liens survived the bankruptcy meant that the tax liabilities covered by the liens were not discharged - as the Court stated, where liabilities are secured by a lien that survives bankruptcy, those liabilities are not discharged as a result of the bankruptcy, and no law prevents the IRS from reversing its mistaken abatement of tax liabilities. Finally, based on Section 6325(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, which allows the IRS to revoke a release of a tax lien if the release was issued “erroneously or improvidently,” the Court held that the IRS validly revoked its release of the tax liens, such that the liens were valid as if they had never been revoked. Having found in favor of the IRS on each of these issues, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the IRS.


If you would like more details about these cases, please contact me at 312-888-4113 or jnesser@lavellelaw.com.


 


More News & Resources

Lavelle Law News and Events

LATEST UPDATE on the Corporate Transparency Act and New Deadline for Filing BOIR
By Frank J. Portera February 20, 2025
This article will serve as another update to the ongoing Corporate Transparency Act developments. As of February 17, 2025, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas lifted the injunction it had ordered on January 7, 2025, in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, 6:24-cv-00336 (E.D. Tex.), allowing the federal government to once again enforce the Corporate Transparency Act and its Beneficial Ownership Information Report requirements.
A Step-by-Step Guide to Bringing a Lawsuit in Illinois
By Sarah J. Reusché February 14, 2025
This article is the second in our Litigation 101 series. It focuses on the flip side: how to sue someone else. Suing someone is a serious decision that requires careful thought and preparation. Before pursuing legal action, it’s crucial to reflect on the issue and understand the steps involved in bringing a lawsuit. This article outlines the basics to help you approach the process with confidence and make informed decisions.
Updates Regarding the Corporate Transparency Act Hold: Key Implications for Businesses
By Frank J. Portera February 13, 2025
On December 11, 2024, we published an article titled “Corporate Transparency Act on Hold: Key Implications for Businesses,” which addressed the nationwide injunction impacting the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act and its Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting rule. Since then, there have been a few significant legal developments that businesses should monitor closely. While the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is currently prohibited from enforcing BOIR requirements, ongoing litigation, and the related appeals may alter this status. Below, we provide a timeline of key events and insights into what business owners should anticipate moving forward.
IRS Special Payments Sent to 1 Million Taxpayers Who Did Not Claim 2021 Recovery Rebate Credit
By Timothy M. Hughes February 10, 2025
The Internal Revenue Service is issuing automatic payments to eligible people who did not claim a Recovery Rebate Credit on their 2021 tax returns. The payments are in follow up to an IRS announcement last month of the intent to take this special step. The IRS took this step after reviewing internal data showing many eligible taxpayers who filed a return but did not claim the credit. The Recovery Rebate Credit is a refundable credit for individuals who did not receive one or more Economic Impact Payments (“EIP”), also known as stimulus payments.
SCOTUS Resolves Circuit Split on FLSA Exemption Standard
By Steven A. Migala February 5, 2025
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes federal minimum wage and overtime pay requirements, with exemptions for employees in bona fide executive, administrative, professional, computer or outside sales roles. 29 U.S.C. § 213. Employees classified as "outside sales" must primarily engage in making sales or obtaining contracts for services or the use of facilities, and they must conduct their work primarily away from their employer’s place of business. 29 C.F.R. § 541.500.
Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA)
By Sarah J. Reusché January 23, 2025
Amendments to BIPA SB 2929 became effective on August 2, 2024. Codified as 740 ILCS 14/10 and 14/20, this Act introduced two pivotal changes to BIPA that dealers should be aware of: • Limiting Per-Scan Damages: The amendments clarify that a single violation under BIPA accrues per type of violation, rather than per scan. This significantly reduces the financial exposure for dealerships. • Electronic Consent: The amendments formalize electronic signatures as a valid means of securing biometric consent, streamlining compliance processes for businesses.
IRS National Taxpayer Advocate Releases Annual Report to Congress. And in an Unrelated Matter DOJ Ta
By Timothy M. Hughes January 10, 2025
The National Taxpayer Advocate recently released her annual report to Congress. A few highlights from the report are summarized in this article.
Nearly 300 New Illinois Laws are going into effect in 2025.
By Lavelle Law January 8, 2025
Nearly 300 New Illinois Laws are going into effect in 2025. Listed below are some that may have a significant impact on you or your business.
Happy New Year and Cheers to New Adventures in 2025!
By Lavelle Law December 31, 2024
As we say farewell to 2024, we’re excited to look back on the unforgettable moments from our Koozie Challenge! From the frozen wonders of Antarctica to the excitement of the Paris Olympics, and countless incredible destinations in between, the Lavelle Law koozie truly went the distance this year! A big thank you to our clients, staff, family, and friends who took part in the fun. Here’s to even more adventures in 2025! Happy New Year from Lavelle Law!
Lavelle Law concludes the 2024 annual food drive.
By Lavelle Law December 30, 2024
Schaumburg-based Lavelle Law wrapped its annual food drive benefiting the Schaumburg Township Food Pantry. During the month of October, Lavelle Law set up collection boxes around Schaumburg and the surrounding area, where residents and workers could drop off nonperishable food items, paper goods, personal care items, baby food and diapers. Participants could also make cash donations online.
More Posts
Share by: