Boosters losing tax deduction for ticket rights could hit CollegeSports in the wallet

[Username1]

Oh no you caught me! My work is shoddy and I have to bribe people to work with me. Idiot.

I work with high net worth individuals. Business owners and C suite executives. They don't take their money to an investment firm because they get Buckeye tickets. That is just a perk to being with a good firm that makes their clients a lot of money.

You know what is better than having a suite and season tickets to a major sporting venue?? Someone else having those things and taking you to the event on their dime.

I deal with guys who make all kinds of money. I have never had to wine and dine to get the job. They call me or have one of their associates call. I am sorry you do shoddy work and are a shady business guy. In fact I actually get invited to their suites after they gave me money... now who is doing it right?

No matter what it's not needed to do business or get a job done. Do better work and you won't have to buy suites to "sell" your customers on your crappy work.

Before you said it was necessary part of business, now you say it's a perk....what is it? Perks are non deductible.

 

[Buck_98]

I deal with guys who make all kinds of money. I have never had to wine and dine to get the job. They call me or have one of their associates call. I am sorry you do shoddy work and are a shady business guy. In fact I actually get invited to their suites after they gave me money... now who is doing it right?

No matter what it's not needed to do business or get a job done. Do better work and you won't have to buy suites to "sell" your customers on your crappy work.

Apparently you can't read so I'm not sure how you get any business done. Again, what wealthy individual ($10mm+) would gauge their investment firm on football tickets???

"Hey Username1 my investor had a 15% return this month on my investments." "Well John my investor gave me tickets to the OSU football game." You're still an idiot and of course you get invited to your client's suites. They need someone to get their beer and polish their balls at half time.

 

[Username1]

Apparently you can't read so I'm not sure how you get any business done. Again, what wealthy individual ($10mm+) would gauge their investment firm on football tickets???

"Hey Username1 my investor had a 15% return this month on my investments." "Well John my investor gave me tickets to the OSU football game." You're still an idiot and of course you get invited to your client's suites. They need someone to get their beer and polish their balls at half time.

Lol that got a chuckle out of me. But the real idiot is the one who thinks buying a suite is part of doing business and needs to be written off. Guess what???? It isn't.

Answer the question, is it a perk or not?

 

[ronnie mund]

Ted seems like a more honest business man. I'd go with him.

 

[Buck_98]

Lol that got a chuckle out of me. But the real idiot is the one who thinks buying a suite is part of doing business and needs to be written off. Guess what???? It isn't.

Answer the question, is it a perk or not?

I never said it needed to be written off. Look at my first post. Again, reading comprehension is a must.

It is a perk for clients that is a necessity for businesses. Especially businesses that get a lot of work done in a casual setting. Dinner, sporting events, golfing, etc..

You are telling me you have never done any business on a golf course or at a dinner?? That seems odd. Your clients don't like to interact with you in a personal setting?? I find that most wealthy individuals like a personal touch. They don't want to be sitting in the office in a suit all the time. They like to relax and get to know their trusted advisors. I also know wealthy individuals that don't care if you have a family and they are never 100% happy even if you make them boatloads of cash.

 

[cabezadecaballo]

I think you will just see a re-direction of some of these donations. If you have two choices:

1. Give $10,000 to one group. You are $10,000 poorer.
2. Give $10,000 to another group. You are $6,500 poorer and the government gets $3500 less from you.

With all things being equal, most people are going to choose option #2. I'm sure the Universities are looking to develop a new loophole as we speak to keep the contributions flowing.

Yay lobbying!! Yay Swamp!!!!


There were hundreds of changes to the "Reagan Tax Code" in the first year, the vast majority benefiting households in the top quintile. This will be no different.

 

[Username1]

I get what you are saying and yes I have picked up projects on the course....but I never take a potential client out to golf and suck up. My work speaks for itself. You are trying to build a relationship with a client to help you make money over the long haul( hopefully they make money also)I get it. You need them to keep spending their money with you. My business isn't set up like that. While I am on the job is when I build the relationship.

But again perks aren't deductible and shouldn't be. What that does is give a competitive advantage to bigger companies...not necessarily better companies. If you offer a perk that's fine, but don't expect help from the govt so you can buy it. The same companies are still going to buy the suites, they aren't buying suites because they get to write it off, they buy it because they can.

 

[HTFF]

I don't care what it falls under. I'm saying it is a necessity to do business.

You don't have to be a business to use this deduction. It's available to individuals. You are mixing apples and oranges
It's under the scope of charitable donations. Has nothing to do with business entertainment

 

[Buck_98]

You don't have to be a business to use this deduction. It's available to individuals. You are mixing apples and oranges
It's under the scope of charitable donations. Has nothing to do with business entertainment

I know what it falls under. I know it is available to individuals. All I'm saying is I can see a lot of businesses stopping this aspect of their "giving" because they can no longer deduct it. That being said it is an aspect of doing business with high net worth clients who like to do business at sporting events.

 

[Buck_98]

I get what you are saying and yes I have picked up projects on the course....but I never take a potential client out to golf and suck up. My work speaks for itself. You are trying to build a relationship with a client to help you make money over the long haul( hopefully they make money also)I get it. You need them to keep spending their money with you. My business isn't set up like that. While I am on the job is when I build the relationship.

But again perks aren't deductible and shouldn't be. What that does is give a competitive advantage to bigger companies...not necessarily better companies. If you offer a perk that's fine, but don't expect help from the govt so you can buy it. The same companies are still going to buy the suites, they aren't buying suites because they get to write it off, they buy it because they can.

Not all companies are going to continue doing it. My buddy works for a big bank that has already given up their 8 seats for MSU home games. My former company has already said they are looking at getting rid of their seats at Buckeye football and basketball games. My company is going to continue to get the suites at all the events.

 

[Termite2]

Companies used to be able to deduct all the money spent on tickets under an expense deduction, didn't seem to hurt the universities when they changed it then and don't see it being a big problem now.
The donation to the university was a sham, surprised the IRS didn't rule that donations that were required to buy tickets were not a donation but in fact a ticket purchase.

 

[SWMCinci]

Yay lobbying!! Yay Swamp!!!!


There were hundreds of changes to the "Reagan Tax Code" in the first year, the vast majority benefiting households in the top quintile. This will be no different.

Until everybody pays the same amount, the most "benefits" are always going to go to those paying the highest rates. It's virtually impossible for them not to.

Everyone should pay something and in an ideal world the tax rate would be flat and those that make more would naturally pay more than someone making less even at the same tax rate - because everyone benefits equally by opportunity.

 

[bob22]

Until everybody pays the same amount, the most "benefits" are always going to go to those paying the highest rates. It's virtually impossible for them not to.

Everyone should pay something and in an ideal world the tax rate would be flat and those that make more would naturally pay more than someone making less even at the same tax rate - because everyone benefits equally by opportunity.

Won't happen. Some extreme campaign finance reform would have to happen first. Those at the top would continue to buy politicians to make the "buyers" income "special" and taxed at a lower rate.

 

[SWMCinci]

Won't happen. Some extreme campaign finance reform would have to happen first. Those at the top would continue to buy politicians to make the "buyers" income "special" and taxed at a lower rate.

The biggest problem are those at the bottom and those representing those at the bottom that insist that 0 is a perfectly good tax rate for some while 40% is a perfectly good tax rate for others.