Comments on: ashpinctersayswhat? http://www.mcgees.org/2008/02/20/ashpinctersayswhat/ Website of Joshua McGee Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:21:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Moog http://www.mcgees.org/2008/02/20/ashpinctersayswhat/#comment-45470 Moog Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:12:33 +0000 http://www.mcgees.org/2008/02/20/ashpinctersayswhat/#comment-45470 1. Is it in fact a typo when she writes “Include the $40 sale price of this jacket with your gross income…”? Did she mean $20? 2. Didn’t I determine the Fair Market Value (FMV) by posting the item for auction? Isn’t the FMV then exactly the sale price plus the shipping charge? Since postage is an expense for me, am I actually marking a loss on this sale? 3. Everything non-perishable is collectible (The Onion had a funny bit on this, but it’s true.) How does/would being “collectible” change the answer? Who makes this decision? 1. I think she meant $20. 2. I think you are taking loss. Because the cost of coats of the quality, craftsmanship, materials, etc. were now more expensive than originally, that added to the value. Also, you had insured it for two years, office time/money to advertise, postage, etc. The FMV was higher than the $20, possibly higher than the original $40. The buyer got a deal, not having to pay you fairly. You sold it at a loss. 3. I think a case could be made that it was not a collectible if it was bought to worn as part of an everyday wardrobe, although I'm sure there would be dissension. 4. I think it's all word/mind games: Lawyer-tax-guy playground. 1. Is it in fact a typo when she writes “Include the $40 sale price of this jacket with your gross income…”?  Did she mean $20?
2. Didn’t I determine the Fair Market Value (FMV) by posting the item for auction?  Isn’t the FMV then exactly the sale price plus the shipping charge?  Since postage is an expense for me, am I actually marking a loss on this sale?
3. Everything non-perishable is collectible (The Onion had a funny bit on this, but it’s true.)  How does/would being “collectible” change the answer?  Who makes this decision?

1. I think she meant $20.
2. I think you are taking loss. Because the cost of coats of the quality, craftsmanship, materials, etc. were now more expensive than originally, that added to the value. Also, you had insured it for two years, office time/money to advertise, postage, etc. The FMV was higher than the $20, possibly higher than the original $40. The buyer got a deal, not having to pay you fairly. You sold it at a loss.
3. I think a case could be made that it was not a collectible if it was bought to worn as part of an everyday wardrobe, although I’m sure there would be dissension.
4. I think it’s all word/mind games: Lawyer-tax-guy playground.

]]>