End of an ebay era

[lvrr325]

I really don't want to spend the time but I suppose I could dig up the links for the stories I referenced when I wrote that. Or you could just google, since every article that references responsibility for the $600 threshold change blames the current administration for it.

I certainly trust say Forbes more than a rag like Time.



Until I happened on some old, sealed in the bag receipt books at the flea market ... last year sometime? I never even carried anything to make a receipt with, and I could count the number of times I was asked on the fingers of one hand - mostly guys from Canada needed it to show at the border, once because someone else was handling a person's expenses. When I buy at shows I also rarely get a receipt; generally only those selling new product or who have a storefront somewhere take the time to calculate and charge the sales tax, and give you a receipt to show it.  I just include it in my price so I don't have to deal with carrying change.  

[dti406]

Aug 25, 2022 10:31:18 GMT -8 lvrr325 said:

I certainly trust say Forbes more than a rag like Time.

Time has an accuracy rate north of 62% while Forbes is around 38% so I would trust Time over Forbes. In addition Forbes buys most of their articles from third parties and does not confirm or fact check them. This is especially true since a company in China purchased them in 2014.

Rick Jesionowski

[valenciajim]

I chose the link to Time because it most closely resembled what I have been told by IRS personnel and in the Continuing Professional Education courses I have taken. Furthermore, the explanation was simple and easy to understand.

Today, I received an item from Forbes in my iPhone news link and that article perpetuates the myth that the IRS is hiring another 87,000 agents.

From what I understand the Forbes family sold an interest in the magazine to a Hong Kong based company. The magazine was founded by BC Forbes (Steve Forbes Grandfather) who handed it down to his son Malcom Forbes who was a hot air balloon enthusiast. Malcom, in turn, handed the magazine empire down to his son Steve, who is looking to retire, but his children are not interested in running the business. The Company is currently for sale and is looking to be bought out by a private equity firm. As Rick pointed out, Forbes has outsourced much of their writing to third parties in attempt to maximize profits. That also probably means they have to publish stuff that appeals to their audience. I was an avid Forbes reader for years. I was interviewed several times for comments on tax law developments and the interview was always followed up with a call from a fact checker to ensure that I was accurately quoted. I doubt that this process is still in place today.

When news has to show a profit, journalism tends to take a back seat. That is part of the reason why we are so divided today. Media tells people what they want to hear. Very few want to subscribe to or watch media that conflicts with their personal view of the world. It's all about media making a profit.

[atsf_4]

valenciajim--

It appears to me there may be a considerable amount of misinformation about these new IRS agents:

As reported on American Family Radio, this week; they read the actual job description on the air:

Explain to me why the job description for these new IRS agents requires them to be on call 24/7/365?
Explain to me why the job description requires them to be in top physical condition and to be ready and willing to use deadly force?
Explain to me why the job description specifically requires them to carry a gun?

IF this isn't the beginning of a FASCIST SS-style or KGB-style agency, well I don't know what else it could possibly be.

Btw: Fascist is the literal term now used for anything a Democrat does not agree with.  Except they themselves are the actual Fascists.

Also--lvrr325 was factually 100% correct when he said that if you stop selling for any period of time, Ebay (and Paypal too) treat you like a new seller. I didn't sell anything for slightly more than a year, and I'm being treated like a newbie by both Ebay and Paypal. They are holding my sales proceeds for 3 weeks and I DID verify my bank account and jump through their hoops.

I hate Ebay and Paypal, and apparently yes, they are still connected. They just want you to THINK they aren't connected, but in both private sales outside of Ebay and actual Ebay sales, they are both colluding (based on messages sent directly to me) to withhold my money.  I sent a nasty message to Paypal and they did free my money from a private sale, but I just got a message again, with the Ebay sale, that they are again holding my money (apparently so they can collect 3 weeks worth of interest).

Tax professionals normally don't have any need to carry a gun.

So just what the h..l is going on here?

I don't trust the mainstream media one iota, and anything coming out of the current administration I trust half as much as I trust the mainstream media.

[dti406]

Sept 7, 2022 13:27:39 GMT -8 atsf_4 said:

valenciajim--


Explain to me why the job description for these new IRS agents requires them to be on call 24/7/365?
Explain to me why the job description requires them to be in top physical condition and to be ready and willing to use deadly force?
Explain to me why the job description specifically requires them to carry a gun?

I will skip the politics and state the facts.

Yes there was an ad for those type of agents, but that only covered 300 agents which will supplement the 2,000 criminal investigators who handle very specific criminal case like tax cases against known mobsters etc.

The remainder of the agents will be those that check the data on submitted tax returns and if some of the income or deductions fall outside of their statistical data they will send the taxpayer a letter to provide backup for those items and then determine a refund, extra tax, penalties and interest.

Rick Jesionowski

[lvrr325]

Sept 7, 2022 13:27:39 GMT -8 atsf_4 said:

I hate Ebay and Paypal, and apparently yes, they are still connected. They just want you to THINK they aren't connected, but in both private sales outside of Ebay and actual Ebay sales, they are both colluding (based on messages sent directly to me) to withhold my money.  I sent a nasty message to Paypal and they did free my money from a private sale, but I just got a message again, with the Ebay sale, that they are again holding my money (apparently so they can collect 3 weeks worth of interest).

eBay and Paypal have some similar policies, but essentially this happened: 1. eBay bought PayPal.  2. eBay sold eBay and kept PayPal.  3.  The remaining actual eBay site went in house on payments with payment processor Ayden.  You can still use PayPal to buy on eBay but you do not collect payments from it, the money goes to eBay itself, they take their cut of the fees and you get the rest.  This lets people pay directly to eBay from their credit or debit cards and cuts PayPal out entirely if you so desire. 

As you're finding, both will hold your money as a "new" seller because they think things have a higher probability to go bad.  Blame too many rip-off artists for this one, I guess. 


As a side note, I also don't believe "accuracy ratings" that say something like Time is at all accurate.  That's a "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" kind of thing.  

[atsf_4]

I actually received a message from Paypal that the funds from a sale I made on Ebay were on hold.

And within the last week somebody tried to transfer money out of my bank account to Paypal apparently to buy gift certificates (definitely not me).  The transfer failed, but I think it's about time I close my Paypal account.

[lvrr325]

Are you sure it's not a spoof email of some sort? The only way eBay money gets to PayPal is if you send it there.

[atsf_4]

lvrr325--

Sorry I missed your post until now.

On my actual credit union bank statement the transaction shows as a failed withdrawal attempt from Paypal.  This was not one of their account verification transfers of a few cents, but over a couple hundred dollars that someone attempted to take from my account.

I did not authorize any withdrawal from my checking account to Paypal. I did contact Paypal and opened a case as they requested me to do. They subsequently said the transaction was not completed so there was nothing they could do.

I thought that was about the stupidest "investigation" I've ever heard of in my life.

I then closed my Paypal account after conveying how unhappy I was and specifically after reiterating that I was unhappy they elected to hold my funds from the recent private sale transaction after all the many hundreds of sales transactions I completed in the past with no issues.

Ebay has made the listing process more painful than before, and their fees are up to at least 14%. Ebay made my last selling transaction certainly more painful than it should have needed to be. They didn't even release my money on time but were late with that also.

I think I'm done ever trying to sell anything on Ebay again; my other listing for a mint diesel at a fair buy it now or best offer price generated no offers whatsoever over several weeks.

The only thing keeping me from closing my Ebay account is that I'm looking for a few older train books that seem to be easily found on Ebay for better prices than some of the railroad book sellers who are not on Ebay charge, as well as back issues of Passenger Train Journal. Once I've located those few items, I will most likely close my Ebay account.

To be clear, I've sent thousands of dollars of items that I would have or could have sold on Ebay to a train store that handles consignment sales.  The stuff is selling and I have no hassle with that whatsoever.  The $600 limit most likely includes the sales tax, as ebay counts the sales tax in your yearly sales proceeds.  I had two better quality locos I was going to attempt to sell on Ebay this year, to stay just under the limit, but they made the last transaction so painful that they are now gone to the local consignment place.

[scl1234]

Hate to start new thread in here only for a simple assertion:

Apparently, sellers can no longer make adjustments to shipping charges once items are in your shopping cart.

This decision saddles the buyer with paying tax on the excess shipping charge (and I can’t expect the seller to refund excess tax charge due to eBays lack of foresight).

I’m about done there any way.
Thanks in advance for any confirmation of the above.

[valenciajim]

As a consumer, I avoid eBay. it looks like eBay has motivated sellers to look elsewhere as well. Like other tech companies, perhaps eBay's best days are behind it.

[wagnersteve]

December 24, 2022, starting about 12:19 p.m., EST

Here is some likely somewhat good news. The business section of today's Boston Globe has a story with the headline "IRS delays tax change for users of payment apps", written by Alan Rappaport of the New York Times. I don't know when it appeared in the NYT. It says the IRS "said Friday that it is delaying by one year a new tax policy that will require users of digital wallets and e-commerce platforms to start reporting small transactions to the tax collection agency." This is supposed to "provide a smooth transition period for taxpayers". See the full article, based on a statement by Douglas O'Donnell, the acting IRS commissioner, for details. The text of the story in the Globe is about 7 1/2 column inches long.

[dti406]

Doesn’t make a lot of difference unless you sell a lot of stuff between now and the end of the year and it gets paid by then.

Rick Jesionowski

[lvrr325]

I can adjust shipping charges on items in someone's shopping cart, as long as they haven't paid I can adjust it. But not all sellers are honest, they want the extra few bucks.

I just paid $14 shipping myself for a purchase because the seller only does flat rate boxes. Which would be fine except seller is only about 130 miles down the road and actual weighted rate would have been cheaper. $14 got me 4 lbs going to RI, this is like half that weight. They didn't answer when I asked if they do shows out there but I'd be shocked if they don't - I'm sure it's someone I've seen before. Which is fine, some people like their anonymity on eBay.

I do well with eBay, I sold a brass engine for $1200 that never would have brought that kind of money at the shows here. Most of them my costs to set up at one work out to about triple what my eBay costs are, after table, fuel, and hotel if it's far enough away.

[valenciajim]

Dec 24, 2022 9:25:39 GMT -8 wagnersteve said:

December 24, 2022, starting about 12:19 p.m., EST

Here is some likely somewhat good news. The business section of today's Boston Globe has a story with the headline "IRS delays tax change for users of payment apps", written by Alan Rappaport of the New York Times. I don't know when it appeared in the NYT. It says the IRS "said Friday that it is delaying by one year a new tax policy that will require users of digital wallets and e-commerce platforms to start reporting small transactions to the tax collection agency." This is supposed to "provide a smooth transition period for taxpayers". See the full article, based on a statement by Douglas O'Donnell, the acting IRS commissioner, for details. The text of the story in the Globe is about 7 1/2 column inches long.

This is turning out to be a disaster for the IRS. The AICPA and several other tax practitioner groups asked for a delay in implementation as well as an increasing the $600 threshold which is based on reporting requirements first set forth in 1954.

One of the problems is determining where (or if) the information reported on Form 1099-K gets reported on the return. I suspect the IRS will create yet another form reconciling the total amounts reported on Forms 1099-K with gross income.

What is interesting about this is that the changes are mandated by a change in tax law passed by Congress, and theoretically, the IRS has to administer tax law as written.  The problem with so much new tax law in recent years is that it is written in haste, not properly vetted by Congress due to political infighting, and is based on revenue estimates that are often suspect.  Taxpayers and tax practitioners pay the price for this.  

Based on what I have read recently, I am certainly not looking forward to the coming tax season.

[valenciajim]

Dec 6, 2022 9:31:49 GMT -8 scl1234 said:

Hate to start new thread in here only for a simple assertion:

Apparently, sellers can no longer make adjustments to shipping charges once items are in your shopping cart.

This decision saddles the buyer with paying tax on the excess shipping charge (and I can’t expect the seller to refund excess tax charge due to eBays lack of foresight).

I’m about done there any way.
Thanks in advance for any confirmation of the above.

I actually did something last week that I have not done in quite a while. I purchased two Train Miniatures box cars on eBay from the same seller. There was a $6 shipping charge for each one. I checked out and paid for both at the same time. Last night I got an email from the seller through eBay telling me that $2.79 (including sales tax) of my shipping charges are being refunded and my credit card account should show the refund within 48 hours.

When it comes to sales tax on shipping charges-the way it works in most states is that if the seller charges the actual charge, the shipping charge is not subject to sales tax. However, it the shipping charge is a fixed amount, or is otherwise not based on the actual charge, the seller must charge sales tax. Since an eBay seller probably does not know in advance what the actual shipping cost is going to be, I suspect substantially all shipping charges are subject to sales tax.

[el3625]

Just read on my MSN news site that the IRS is delaying the implantation of the new tax law for the $600.00 limit. This all sounds very complicated anyhow. So, just what does this mean for 2023, can we sell more if wanting to for this year? How about a good explanation on this subject by someone who knows?

Bruce

[ChessieFan1978]

Dec 27, 2022 10:40:54 GMT -8 el3625 said:

Just read on my MSN news site that the IRS is delaying the implantation of the new tax law for the $600.00 limit. This all sounds very complicated anyhow. So, just what does this mean for 2023, can we sell more if wanting to for this year? How about a good explanation on this subject by someone who knows?

Bruce

I read that too!

[bnsf971]

www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-announces-delay-for-implementation-of-600-reporting-threshold-for-third-party-payment-platforms-forms-1099-k

[rockisland652]

Jan 1, 2023 16:03:49 GMT -8 bnsf971 said:

www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-announces-delay-for-implementation-of-600-reporting-threshold-for-third-party-payment-platforms-forms-1099-k

Delayed until January 1, 2023. These IR S-hole bureaucrats gave you plebes from 12/23/22 thru 12/31/22 to get your house in order. Thanks for nothing once again, Biden Administration.

Of course, the IR S-holes would tell Jim that there will only be audits of the rich folks (although that sounds more like MSNBC-speak to me). As per usual, these bureaucratic stooges will spend more than they collect from 'the rich guys', then they will come after you. I guarantee that the $600+ 1099 reporting requirements will snag more taxpayers and taxpayer dollars than any of the show trial audits these IR S-holes may conduct and it will all happen without the need to employ even one more revenue agent.

Thanks for nothing, Biden Administration. America needs rescuing from you and your ludicrous policies

[valenciajim]

I was just reading in one of the tax professional publications that I receive that Congress is seeking to pass legislation that would retroactively change the reporting requirement back to what it was before 2022. I think the problem with getting the provision passed is that it loses revenue and has to be revenue neutral, so the Joint committee on Taxation will have to work with the Congressional Budget Office to score the provision, which is tax lingo for estimating the revenue loss. The Congress will have to come up with a tax increase to offset the revenue loss.

[valenciajim]

Jan 4, 2023 9:23:34 GMT -8 rockisland652 said:

Jan 1, 2023 16:03:49 GMT -8 bnsf971 said:

Of course, the IR S-holes would tell Jim that there will only be audits of the rich folks (although that sounds more like MSNBC-speak to me). As per usual, these bureaucratic stooges will spend more than they collect from 'the rich guys', then they will come after you. I guarantee that the $600+ 1099 reporting requirements will snag more taxpayers and taxpayer dollars than any of the show trial audits these IR S-holes may conduct and it will all happen without the need to employ even one more revenue agent.

Thanks for nothing, Biden Administration. America needs rescuing from you and your ludicrous policies

Unfortunately, this is an incredibly uninformed political rant. Referring to the IRS as stooges and S-holes is really not very civil and detracts from the point you are trying to make.  There is considerable misinformation posted about the IRS in general, and the increased funding in particular, which is designed to stir up populist sentiment against the IRS. Unfortunately, much of it is not factually based.  But unless you are a tax professional who, you are not able to discern this.  

I realize that you are upset about the Form 1099 compliance changes.  I agree that they place an unreasonable administrative burden on many and the 2022 version of Form 1040 is not set up to appropriately deal with people who sell model trains on eBay as part of their hobby.  However, there is no basis for the assertion that the IRS will spend more than they collect from the rich guys.  

There is precedent for the IRS improving its audit capabilities to go after tech and pharma companies who abuse the rules to park their US income in tax haven jurisdictions.  It took several years for the IRS examination division to develop the requisite expertise, but I am aware of one instance with a client of my former firm where the IRS has recently imposed a $10 billion deficiency (plus interest and penalties that will probably amount to another $4 billion over three years) and there are another six years open under the statute of limitations which will probably result in similar assessments. This is one examination of only one major corporation.  The IRS has not spent anywhere near this amount developing the expertise to audit these issues which are extraordinarily complex.  The same will be true with the funds spent on expanding the IRS capacity resulting from the legislation passed last year.  

One more point, many economists reasonably believe that the deficit problems cannot be solved by spending cuts alone. They argue that taxes will likely be raised before then of the decade.  Corporations pay about $350 billion out of the $4 trillion of annual tax collections.  If you look at the 2020 financial statements of the S&P 500, in prior years those companies took aggressive tax positions that were not likely sustainable if properly audited.  Those aggressive tax positions likely saved them trillions of dollars in tax over the past decade.  Based on disclosures in those 2020 financial statements, in 2020 the statute of limitations expired on positions that avoided $235 billion in tax.  This happens every year.  That amount is for only 500 corporations in one year and represents nearly 70% of the total tax collected from all corporations.  

You may not like Biden, but he is proposing going after aggressive taxpayers, many of whom have significant wealth, but pay less in tax than most of the members of this forum do.  I know, because I used to sign the tax returns for three Forbes 400 individuals, and we used to remark that our first-year staff paid more in taxes than those clients did.  Based on what I recently read in a tax journal that monitors tax proposals being considered by Congress, the Republicans are apparently quietly contemplating a tax proposal similar to what Paul Ryan proposed in 2016 in his "Better Way" tax proposals.  That is a 20% VAT--think of it as a national sales tax that would increase the price of many, if not most, goods and services by 20%.   I am not necessarily saying that is bad policy, but it certainly is regressive.   The proposals by Bernie and Elizabeth Warren et al are equally scary, so I think going after abusive situations to collect tax from those with the means to achieve avoidance is a better solution than either the Republican or Progessive proposals.  

I just got a couple of new locomotives that I need to test run, so for now, I will refrain from further commentary and step up to the train room for some fun.  

[ncrc5315]

I lost all respect for Time in the late eighties. The EPA, was going to release a study of ground water contamination, and Time ran a series of articles talking about how this will show how bad farmers are polluting the environment, how the government would now be able to dictate how farmers had to operate, and the government would be able to impose new taxes on farmers. As a young farmer I anxiously awaited the issue of Time to come out after the release of the report. Time never reported or commented on the EPA report. The EPA report showed only 10% of ground water was contaminated, and of that 10%, 64% was contaminated with break down chemicals from lawn care herbicides. It wasn't farmers who were the big polluters, it was home owners, golf courses, and parks. Didn't fit Time's narrative, so it wasn't reported on.

If my accountant, did my taxes, and said "Here's what you owe", and the IRS comes back a few years later, and said I owe a lot more; my next call is going to be to my attorney. Isn't that the job of the accounting/tax prep firm, to make sure the client pays as little tax as possible, without getting in trouble?

Once last question, if the IRS, is going to treat sales greater than $600.00 as taxable income, doesn't that make me a business? If I'm a business, and have a receipt, and I sell my new in box locomotive for a provable loss; do I get to take that as a business loss? Just curious.

[Baikal]

Jul 2, 2023 15:00:26 GMT -8 ncrc5315 said:

I lost all respect for Time in the late eighties. The EPA, was going to release a study of ground water contamination, and Time ran a series of articles talking about how this will show how bad farmers are polluting the environment, how the government would now be able to dictate how farmers had to operate, and the government would be able to impose new taxes on farmers. As a young farmer I anxiously awaited the issue of Time to come out after the release of the report. Time never reported or commented on the EPA report. The EPA report showed only 10% of ground water was contaminated, and of that 10%, 64% was contaminated with break down chemicals from lawn care herbicides. It wasn't farmers who were the big polluters, it was home owners, golf courses, and parks. Didn't fit Time's narrative, so it wasn't reported on.

If my accountant, did my taxes, and said "Here's what you owe", and the IRS comes back a few years later, and said I owe a lot more; my next call is going to be to my attorney. Isn't that the job of the accounting/tax prep firm, to make sure the client pays as little tax as possible, without getting in trouble?

Once last question, if the IRS, is going to treat sales greater than $600.00 as taxable income, doesn't that make me a business? If I'm a business, and have a receipt, and I sell my new in box locomotive for a provable loss; do I get to take that as a business loss? Just curious.

I had to check to see if TIME mag was still around.  I thought all it's readers were dead, like National Review.

If you are going to sue an accountant there's a 95% chance your attorney will not be taking the case on contingency.  So you'll be out that much more money.  Good luck, I do everything I can to avoid legalman.

Taxable income alone doesn't make you a business, ask your accountant what kind of filing does make you a business according to the IRS.  The State and local agencies have their own definitions.

Despite what an accountant may tell you, in the USofA you can get creative with your taxes.  Untill you can't.  I had a friend who didn't file income taxes for at least 15 years.  He ran various over & under-the-table auto wholesale deals & was Calif state licenced to do so.  Every year I'd say "Dude! how long can you keep doing this?!?"  He did til he died.

[ncrc5315]

Baikal, on the taxable income, that was kind of my point. If I'm not filling as a business, and just selling off unneeded models, why treat me as a business?

[richardthomasatal]

I don't know about the selling end but on the buying end there are a lot of great deals on auctions that start at a low price, buy it now and best offer items. I have gotten 60-80% off MSRP on items that haven't even been out for a year due to some people or stores liquidating products by just throwing items on auctions for cheap or buy it now for a good percentage off. Poor sellers are probably making pennies on the dollar after taxes, shipping and ebay taking a 16% chunk.

[typhoon]

Jul 3, 2023 5:24:39 GMT -8 ncrc5315 said:

Baikal, on the taxable income, that was kind of my point. If I'm not filling as a business, and just selling off unneeded models, why treat me as a business?

Because it is considered income, and the government wants its take.

[rockisland652]

Jul 4, 2023 16:11:21 GMT -8 typhoon said:

Jul 3, 2023 5:24:39 GMT -8 ncrc5315 said:

Baikal, on the taxable income, that was kind of my point. If I'm not filling as a business, and just selling off unneeded models, why treat me as a business?

Because it is considered income, and the government wants its take.

How many of you sell your model equipment for more than you paid for it? It is likely less.

If so, your income from the sale is negative. Do we get to take this realized loss on our taxes now? If not, then the reporting rule is completely out of bounds.




In a related policy push from the Regime:
The Potato-in-chief's handlers want to tax unrealized gains. Do we also get to deduct unrealized losses too?



The tax code is designed to enrich tax attorneys and CPAs.

[el3625]

Has anything changed this year as far as the $600.00 in sales for us modelers that are trying to sell our unwanted or unused model trains at a loss? Last year I stopped at $595.00 so I did not go over $600.00 to get 1099nd for this year.

Bruce

[nebrzephyr]

Dec 22, 2023 13:12:44 GMT -8 el3625 said:

Has anything changed this year as far as the $600.00 in sales for us modelers that are trying to sell our unwanted or unused model trains at a loss? Last year I stopped at $595.00 so I did not go over $600.00 to get 1099nd for this year.

Bruce

2023 rules