Depends on value received, deal made

Post #309,788 by mhuber 6/17/09 9:32:50 AM Reply	Depends on value received, deal made You have to pay taxes on barter deals, and those tend to involve items with no face value at all. It wasn't a cash deal, it was a barter deal. The fact that the barter goods also have a face value doesn't change it unless the person receiving those goods was willing to accept other currency. It comes down to the meeting of minds. What is the deal worth to those involved? If I have a penny jar and the pennies are worth more than face value (either as scrap metal or because they are worth something to coin collectors) and I trade that jar of pennies to somebody based on that higher value, that's barter. The reason it usually doesn't become a tax issue is that the metal or numismatic value of the penny jar is usually not large enough to worry about.
Post #309,795 by drook 6/17/09 11:28:55 AM Reply	On taxing barter Barter is one of the easiest ways to make a libertarian argument. Let's say I help my neighbor paint his house. The next week he helps me build a deck on my house. Technically we just engaged in barter, and we both owe taxes on the work done. Why isn't this enforced? Because people clearly see that it's wrong. Not legal/illegal, but wrong. Now what if it's a straight quid pro quo: You do this and I'll do that. Is that taxable? How about if it's quid pro quo with someone who's not my neighbor? Extend the argument, and you start asking, "Hey, yeah, why do I pay income taxes? I'm trading my labor for their money. Why don't I get to claim my labor as an expense to offset my taxes?" And that's why all these tax protesters keep getting hauled into court by the IRS. -- Drew
Post #309,805 by jay 6/17/09 5:09:39 PM Reply	I don't see anything wrong Let's say I help my neighbor paint his house. The next week he helps me build a deck on my house. Technically we just engaged in barter, and we both owe taxes on the work done. Why isn't this enforced? Because people clearly see that it's wrong. Not legal/illegal, but wrong. I don't see anything wrong with taxing that transaction. I see a lot impractical, but nothing wrong. Taxes are applied to the exchange of value, money is simply a handy tool for keeping score. Jay
Post #309,809 by boxley 6/17/09 5:46:54 PM Reply	keeping score is a bitch I charge $175 for consulting, helping drew build a deck takes 10 hrs of my time. I should be able to take a tax loss of $1750 because I didnt get paid or do I offset drew's loss of $1750 for his 10 hrs painting my deck? either way no gain or profit has been realized
Post #309,811 by drook 6/17/09 6:07:56 PM Reply	"no gain or profit has been realized" If I charge $175/hour, and I spend 8 hours at work, that's 8 hours I wasn't doing something else. In other words, my time has value, and I just exchanged it. No profit has been realized. So say the tax protesters. -- Drew
Post #309,815 by boxley 6/17/09 7:43:34 PM Reply	sounds good to me however, I am happy to scam banks, insurance co's unions and other organized thieves but the IRS is one I leave strictly alone. One audit even tho I was not given a penalty is enough

Welcome to IWETHEY!