Since I rarely play tournies -- what are the laws regarding withholding for Americans...is none?
As I understand it you have to fill out a form W2G which is then submitted to the IRS for reconciliation when you file your US taxes.. I am not a tax lawyer much less a US tax lawyer...
Since I rarely play tournies -- what are the laws regarding withholding for Americans...is none?
There would be no immediate withholding but the tournament winnings would be included in your income, and you could offset with gambling losses. This is my understanding. You still pay tax effectively and likely pay more tax depending on your income levels.
There would be no immediate withholding but the tournament winnings would be included in your income, and you could offset with gambling losses. This is my understanding. You still pay tax effectively and likely pay more tax depending on your income levels.
And this gentlemen is why I agree with Wetts... Canada.... The tax free country..... well sorta..:)
No, its a tax. Markup is an option. Witholding is not.
A winning player has little/no chance of getting it back.
Investors should understand going in that your insta-up for 30% roi hit.
OP post questions what is a fair markup for a BAP. My contention is that the 30% withholding tax is an imbedded markup for most US tournament BAPs.
For purposes of recovering the 30% withholding tax that is charged to Canadian tournament players in the US, a player must be able to demonstrate they have incurred losses for other tournaments during the year. These losses typically take the form of other tournament buyins.
When a player cashes in a US tournament during the year, the buyin costs for other US based tournaments can be applied to effectively recover a portion of the withholding tax applied to the tournament cash.
As a simple example, if a player offers a $1,000 BAP at 1.2 on a US based tournament, they will effectively receive $1,200 (if they sell 100%). On the basis they have cashed in other US tournaments during the year, although it cost them $1,000 to enter the tournament, their actual out of pocket cost is $700 ($1,000 - $300) as 30% of the buy-in can be recovered by applying this buyin cost against the profits earned on other tournaments throughout the year. So effectively, the BAP markup is much higher as the player's cost is only $700 but they are receiving $1,200 in return.
As a result, to be fair to supporters of US based BAPs, the ability to deduct the cost of the buyin to recover 30% of the initial buyin should be factored into the pricing of the BAP. If a player already has a US cash during the year, the supporter of the BAP should not be charged the 30% that player can recover in withholding from the amount of the buyin. If a player wants to use a markup of 1.2 on a $1,000 to effectively earn $200 to cover their variance, the BAP should therefore be applied at a rate of 0.9 ($1,200 - $300) versus the 1.2 to account for the recovery of the withholding tax.
OP post questions what is a fair markup for a BAP. My contention is that the 30% withholding tax is an imbedded markup for most US tournament BAPs.
For purposes of recovering the 30% withholding tax that is charged to Canadian tournament players in the US, a player must be able to demonstrate they have incurred losses for other tournaments during the year. These losses typically take the form of other tournament buyins.
When a player cashes in a US tournament during the year, the buyin costs for other US based tournaments can be applied to effectively recover a portion of the withholding tax applied to the tournament cash.
As a simple example, if a player offers a $1,000 BAP at 1.2 on a US based tournament, they will effectively receive $1,200 (if they sell 100%). On the basis they have cashed in other US tournaments during the year, although it cost them $1,000 to enter the tournament, their actual out of pocket cost is $700 ($1,000 - $300) as 30% of the buy-in can be recovered by applying this buyin cost against the profits earned on other tournaments throughout the year. So effectively, the BAP markup is much higher as the player's cost is only $700 but they are receiving $1,200 in return.
As a result, to be fair to supporters of US based BAPs, the ability to deduct the cost of the buyin to recover 30% of the initial buyin should be factored into the pricing of the BAP. If a player already has a US cash during the year, the supporter of the BAP should not be charged the 30% that player can recover in withholding from the amount of the buyin. If a player wants to use a markup of 1.2 on a $1,000 to effectively earn $200 to cover their variance, the BAP should therefore be applied at a rate of 0.9 ($1,200 - $300) versus the 1.2 to account for the recovery of the withholding tax.
Thoughts?
This all makes sense, but I doubt the player will agree.
I have to go with Wetts, most US tourneys will be a losing venture for stakers or just not return the same value as Canadian. Obviously a big WSOP score or top 3 spots will have such a high ROI it might be worth taking the longshot, but you pretty much have to have an all or nothing approach when investing.
Assuming that you are investing in a winning player you are just going to lose the 30%.
If they have cashed in other US tournaments it makes it less likely that they can recover anything
Basically this.
Unless the buyer made a bad investment and got lucky (ie losing player bonks something.....^^^^^) the player will never see the money, and neither will the investor.
Maxkatz freaked out when he first found out he invested in Canadians in the US and the 30% applied.
People will continue to buy US baps for sweats and chances at big scores. But just understand its more like a lotto than a sound long term investment.
Clearly the better investment (from a Canadian standpoint) is good/great Canadian players playing in well structured Canadian (or Euro!) events.
Jah - dont like youre idea from a fundamental standpoint because its irrelevant. If you dont see a good buy, dont buy. Easy game.
Now we are going in circles. I think that part of the point is that the player doesn't have to lose the 30% and most who can cash will also be smart enough to recover some. Pretty sure they will play in States again and won't win every time...at which point the original BAP will be long forgotten.
I know some players file forms for stakes so those people actually have a shot of recovering a portion themselves, since some of "their" winnings are also with held.
What is off as hell as BTP made the point that the players lose to when he he is the only one so far that has a plan for this??? (the 80k receipts)
Unless the buyer made a bad investment and got lucky (ie losing player bonks something.....^^^^^) the player will never see the money, and neither will the investor.
Maxkatz freaked out when he first found out he invested in Canadians in the US and the 30% applied.
People will continue to buy US baps for sweats and chances at big scores. But just understand its more like a lotto than a sound long term investment.
Clearly the better investment (from a Canadian standpoint) is good/great Canadian players playing in well structured Canadian (or Euro!) events.
Jah - dont like youre idea from a fundamental standpoint because its irrelevant. If you dont see a good buy, dont buy. Easy game.
As a result, to be fair to supporters of US based BAPs, the ability to deduct the cost of the buyin to recover 30% of the initial buyin should be factored into the pricing of the BAP. If a player already has a US cash during the year, the supporter of the BAP should not be charged the 30% that player can recover in withholding from the amount of the buyin. If a player wants to use a markup of 1.2 on a $1,000 to effectively earn $200 to cover their variance, the BAP should therefore be applied at a rate of 0.9 ($1,200 - $300) versus the 1.2 to account for the recovery of the withholding tax.
Thoughts?
So you are saying that anyone who is playing in the US has a huge chance of cashing? This logic is totally flawed. The assumption of this 30% withholding as an "automatic" win for the player playing is a very poor argument.
One can easily play 10 tournies and not cash in any.
At the end of the day I think most people that take part in BAPs, myself included do it because we truly enjoy sweating others and it gives me a shot at the poker lottery.
After reading this post and your other threads regarding staking and BAP Funds it truly looks like you are trying to make a second income out of this or try to maximize some magic formula to gain the maximum out of this section. I don't think that is the right attitude to have here.
My contention is if a player has already cashed in say 2012 in the US (and was subject to withholding), this should be factored into the pricing of subsequent BAPs by the same player. Since the player will be able to recover the 30% withholding on the subsequent buy in. Its really double dipping for the player since they get a mark-up (in some cases) and can recover 30% of their buy-in.
If a player was not subject to withholding on any previous tournaments during the year, then this would not be applicable.
Statistically, any given player is an underdog to cash in a US or any tournament. I am referring to players that have already cashed during the year.
I just do BAPs for fun but like everyone, hope to at least breakeven. btw, I still do participate in US BAPs from time to time but do prefer Canadian based.
What happened in an earlier tournament has nothing to do with the one being played now. The good thing about BAP is that they are good for the horses and no make up. This is like saying because I won x amount this year I should give you money if i dont cash in your particular BAP if nothing is won the 30% withholding doesnt mean anything.
A lot of players get back the w/h they deduct from their payouts. IMO this is unfair. BTPhil is one of the exceptions that takes this into account with his BAPs.
Wow elephant in the room. I am a said player who is trying to receive funds back from with holding.
With this being said I think anyone who received a payout from me from last year did not question "but what about the 30 percent"
In my case I have to find 35000 in losses to fund a refund to give everyone extra money.
So with that being said its assumed the money is lost.
Unless you are a full time player its really unrealistic to see any of the withholding back.
In my case I have to find 35000 in losses to fund a refund to
You have to have the glass half full attitude.. you can play three main events and a $5k at a 30% discount If you happen to cash, just roll it over to the next.
You have to have the glass half full attitude.. you can play three main events and a $5k at a 30% discount If you happen to cash, just roll it over to the next.
Lol still need to pony up 15k that year to get the 30 percent discount
Back to OP. This mark up debate has come up a bit lately. Jofay an I were busting a guys balls we know for asking $42 for 5% of a $550 which is at least 1.5 MU. Hes pretty decent online but had only about 100k in live cashes over 6 years. Joke was on us cause he cashed for 6,500 in this one but...
1.20 is without a doubt my cap for buying online BAPS going forward. jofay just picked up 5% of pokerbrat13 at 1.18 for ME H and Simon has certainly proven to be amongst the most consistent ITM finishers.
Live events that require travel and accommodations, up to 1.25 seems reasonable. BTP offered to pay 20% of withholding to first 80k, so I think this MU is fair, also considering his track record.
I heard a story about Jonathan Little just getting slammed on 2+2 for going something like 1.35 and there are very few players that come even close to his track record.
I think for most players, 1.15 for online should be pretty standard. 1.2 for those with combined live online winnings of 300k-400k plus, ok, I'll bite because I think their chances during the end game and of at least making a final table are 100% better than most, all be it many also tend to be very high variance.
Hopefully we won't see to much bloating on these MU given the above, as I have been told some are definetly inflated compared to tougher marketplaces.
On one of the sites I check, they have players charging 1.6, lots with 1.4+ . You check them out and you find out they have a ROI of minus 5. Some players look for backing in MTTs but quote their S&G sharkscope stats cause they're postive
Most people who overcharge never sell out their events. But some charge a high markup because they play with other players who do the same and they back each other. So if they sell 10% or whatever of their events it just costs them less to play. Then if they hit a cash the make more money
Back to OP. This mark up debate has come up a bit lately. Jofay an I were busting a guys balls we know for asking $42 for 5% of a $550 which is at least 1.5 MU. Hes pretty decent online but had only about 100k in live cashes over 6 years. Joke was on us cause he cashed for 6,500 in this one but...
1.20 is without a doubt my cap for buying online BAPS going forward. jofay just picked up 5% of pokerbrat13 at 1.18 for ME H and Simon has certainly proven to be amongst the most consistent ITM finishers.
Live events that require travel and accommodations, up to 1.25 seems reasonable. BTP offered to pay 20% of withholding to first 80k, so I think this MU is fair, also considering his track record.
I heard a story about Jonathan Little just getting slammed on 2+2 for going something like 1.35 and there are very few players that come even close to his track record.
I think for most players, 1.15 for online should be pretty standard. 1.2 for those with combined live online winnings of 300k-400k plus, ok, I'll bite because I think their chances during the end game and of at least making a final table are 100% better than most, all be it many also tend to be very high variance.
Hopefully we won't see to much bloating on these MU given the above, as I have been told some are definetly inflated compared to tougher marketplaces.
Thoughts?
This is a markup for easily top 5 hardest online tourneys of the year though.
If that was the 1k or $100 he's prob easily selling at min 1.25 for the 1k considering it is prob top 10 softest online 1ks of the year. So his expected roi will be big. Some people don't understand markup and thats why they charge it wrong. Like the ME of wsop. MU for a good player should prob be min 1.3 but closer to 1.5. This is all what Ive read and learned.....do i believe in it...not really. I think 1.5mu for anything is pretty retarded. I think it shouldn't go much higher than 1.4. but egos are an issue as if you see someone selling at 1.25 and it sells out and you know your much better than them, given results obv than your gonna sell higher than that...
Comments
As I understand it you have to fill out a form W2G which is then submitted to the IRS for reconciliation when you file your US taxes.. I am not a tax lawyer much less a US tax lawyer...
Tax Topics - Topic 419 Gambling Income and Losses
There would be no immediate withholding but the tournament winnings would be included in your income, and you could offset with gambling losses. This is my understanding. You still pay tax effectively and likely pay more tax depending on your income levels.
And this gentlemen is why I agree with Wetts... Canada.... The tax free country..... well sorta..:)
OP post questions what is a fair markup for a BAP. My contention is that the 30% withholding tax is an imbedded markup for most US tournament BAPs.
For purposes of recovering the 30% withholding tax that is charged to Canadian tournament players in the US, a player must be able to demonstrate they have incurred losses for other tournaments during the year. These losses typically take the form of other tournament buyins.
When a player cashes in a US tournament during the year, the buyin costs for other US based tournaments can be applied to effectively recover a portion of the withholding tax applied to the tournament cash.
As a simple example, if a player offers a $1,000 BAP at 1.2 on a US based tournament, they will effectively receive $1,200 (if they sell 100%). On the basis they have cashed in other US tournaments during the year, although it cost them $1,000 to enter the tournament, their actual out of pocket cost is $700 ($1,000 - $300) as 30% of the buy-in can be recovered by applying this buyin cost against the profits earned on other tournaments throughout the year. So effectively, the BAP markup is much higher as the player's cost is only $700 but they are receiving $1,200 in return.
As a result, to be fair to supporters of US based BAPs, the ability to deduct the cost of the buyin to recover 30% of the initial buyin should be factored into the pricing of the BAP. If a player already has a US cash during the year, the supporter of the BAP should not be charged the 30% that player can recover in withholding from the amount of the buyin. If a player wants to use a markup of 1.2 on a $1,000 to effectively earn $200 to cover their variance, the BAP should therefore be applied at a rate of 0.9 ($1,200 - $300) versus the 1.2 to account for the recovery of the withholding tax.
Thoughts?
This all makes sense, but I doubt the player will agree.
I have to go with Wetts, most US tourneys will be a losing venture for stakers or just not return the same value as Canadian. Obviously a big WSOP score or top 3 spots will have such a high ROI it might be worth taking the longshot, but you pretty much have to have an all or nothing approach when investing.
Assuming that you are investing in a winning player you are just going to lose the 30%.
If they have cashed in other US tournaments it makes it less likely that they can recover anything
Basically this.
Unless the buyer made a bad investment and got lucky (ie losing player bonks something.....^^^^^) the player will never see the money, and neither will the investor.
Maxkatz freaked out when he first found out he invested in Canadians in the US and the 30% applied.
People will continue to buy US baps for sweats and chances at big scores. But just understand its more like a lotto than a sound long term investment.
Clearly the better investment (from a Canadian standpoint) is good/great Canadian players playing in well structured Canadian (or Euro!) events.
Jah - dont like youre idea from a fundamental standpoint because its irrelevant. If you dont see a good buy, dont buy. Easy game.
+1 ^^ this...
Now we are going in circles. I think that part of the point is that the player doesn't have to lose the 30% and most who can cash will also be smart enough to recover some. Pretty sure they will play in States again and won't win every time...at which point the original BAP will be long forgotten.
I know some players file forms for stakes so those people actually have a shot of recovering a portion themselves, since some of "their" winnings are also with held.
What is off as hell as BTP made the point that the players lose to when he he is the only one so far that has a plan for this??? (the 80k receipts)
What are we talking about again??
hey, wait...I don't think I like those arrows
loooolllllllllllllllllllll didnt take long to get caught.
So you are saying that anyone who is playing in the US has a huge chance of cashing? This logic is totally flawed. The assumption of this 30% withholding as an "automatic" win for the player playing is a very poor argument.
One can easily play 10 tournies and not cash in any.
At the end of the day I think most people that take part in BAPs, myself included do it because we truly enjoy sweating others and it gives me a shot at the poker lottery.
After reading this post and your other threads regarding staking and BAP Funds it truly looks like you are trying to make a second income out of this or try to maximize some magic formula to gain the maximum out of this section. I don't think that is the right attitude to have here.
If a player was not subject to withholding on any previous tournaments during the year, then this would not be applicable.
Statistically, any given player is an underdog to cash in a US or any tournament. I am referring to players that have already cashed during the year.
I just do BAPs for fun but like everyone, hope to at least breakeven. btw, I still do participate in US BAPs from time to time but do prefer Canadian based.
Wow elephant in the room. I am a said player who is trying to receive funds back from with holding.
With this being said I think anyone who received a payout from me from last year did not question "but what about the 30 percent"
In my case I have to find 35000 in losses to fund a refund to give everyone extra money.
So with that being said its assumed the money is lost.
Unless you are a full time player its really unrealistic to see any of the withholding back.
You have to have the glass half full attitude.. you can play three main events and a $5k at a 30% discount
Lol still need to pony up 15k that year to get the 30 percent discount
1.20 is without a doubt my cap for buying online BAPS going forward. jofay just picked up 5% of pokerbrat13 at 1.18 for ME H and Simon has certainly proven to be amongst the most consistent ITM finishers.
Live events that require travel and accommodations, up to 1.25 seems reasonable. BTP offered to pay 20% of withholding to first 80k, so I think this MU is fair, also considering his track record.
I heard a story about Jonathan Little just getting slammed on 2+2 for going something like 1.35 and there are very few players that come even close to his track record.
I think for most players, 1.15 for online should be pretty standard. 1.2 for those with combined live online winnings of 300k-400k plus, ok, I'll bite because I think their chances during the end game and of at least making a final table are 100% better than most, all be it many also tend to be very high variance.
Hopefully we won't see to much bloating on these MU given the above, as I have been told some are definetly inflated compared to tougher marketplaces.
Thoughts?
Pretty legit. Not many people around here should realistically be charging 1.15+.
Most people who overcharge never sell out their events. But some charge a high markup because they play with other players who do the same and they back each other. So if they sell 10% or whatever of their events it just costs them less to play. Then if they hit a cash the make more money
This is a markup for easily top 5 hardest online tourneys of the year though.
If that was the 1k or $100 he's prob easily selling at min 1.25 for the 1k considering it is prob top 10 softest online 1ks of the year. So his expected roi will be big. Some people don't understand markup and thats why they charge it wrong. Like the ME of wsop. MU for a good player should prob be min 1.3 but closer to 1.5. This is all what Ive read and learned.....do i believe in it...not really. I think 1.5mu for anything is pretty retarded. I think it shouldn't go much higher than 1.4. but egos are an issue as if you see someone selling at 1.25 and it sells out and you know your much better than them, given results obv than your gonna sell higher than that...
Quantitative Poker: WSOP