A lot of people are getting all excited about that single ruling, but understand that Pete went to a lot of effort and time to fight to get that ruling, and not filing and assuming that showing that ruling, while saying "see, I do not have to pay taxes," is a bit naive. People can make whatever choices they want, but even with that ruling a person will need to be prepared to properly defend their stance and that is more than "read this ruling."

In general if there is an expectation of winning then the activity is taxable, so if you win good money at roulette then that will not be taxable because there is no expectation to win long term (no idea how exploiting a flawed game would count in that as a side note).

Staking, at least in my opinion, would always be taxable, and I do not see how the ruling everyone is so excited about would apply (at least without some very significant effort).

A properly run and documented business (whether staking or playing professionally) has many advantages as well which are often ignored. One can write off all relevant expenses including internet costs, computer costs (online), travel costs (live players) and a proportional portion of rent/mortgage interest among others. Incorporation is also a viable tax strategy with income i the 6 figures (though the banking side gets a bit tricky as no site will send checks to a corporation). HST registration has some benefits as well for this industry (and would be required for those with $30,000+ gross income a year anyway). This approach also improves a person's general credit rating as well as they RSP contribution limits. Probably the biggest cost (at least for the first 50,000 or so) is the CPP one will need to pay each year, but in theory one does get that back later in life, and some form of forced savings for poker players may not be the worst thing either.

Oh yeah, another benefit of running a business properly is one does not need to be worried about an audit. I have been audited three times, and the process was easy and painless and actually I learned how to run the business even better from the audits as they helped point out areas I could expense that I had not to hat point. AS spooky a people think tax auditors might be, I always found them and the other government workers in those departments to be fairly helpful and informative.

People can do what they want, and certainly the semi casual player who makes a couple thousand a year more than likely has nothing to worry about, but anyone doing this seriously should think about consulting an accountant and getting a better idea on what realistically needs to be done.

This was covered in the ruling, the judge said 'everybody that gambles has an expectation of profits,' so that is not a valid test.

I think you're forgetting the word "reasonable."

I didn't forget it but who decides whats "reasonable?"

As usual, the judge decides.

Right, but the Radonjic case has made it very, very difficult for the CRA to prove that a reasonable expectation of profit exists in poker. Based on my understanding, they would now have a much easier time arguing that exploiting a "flaw" in a game such as blackjack or roulette (through some cheat or loophole) equates to taxable income than they would in the case of successful poker playing. I think this is why people are getting excited. But of course, as you mentioned, anyone considering changing their stance with regards to whether or not their poker winnings are taxable should consult a professional.

Eventually the CRA will discover sites like sharkscope and OPR and even the BBV forum of 2+2 where it can be pretty well documented that in this are there are people making consistent money at poker.

I really like what Pete did with his fight against the CRA as that did show what a person with determination (and a lot of proper detailed records) can do if they endure the process. He did run a bit hot with getting the right judge.

The reality is that most people looking at that and saying "cool, that can apply to me" will not have the detailed records they need, nor the wherewithal to understand what type of fight they will be in when their assets that they should not be able to afford become questioned. I highly doubt that the CRA will listen to someone say "I won at poker" as if that forgives everything.

I'm pretty sure this is beside the point though. The fact that a small % of players win over the "long"-run adds absolutely nothing to a hypothetical CRA case versus an individual. Pete's case demonstrated that even a fairly lengthy track-record of winning cannot in itself be used as evidence that poker playing activities are taxable.

Perhaps, though again I wold suggest that anyone who is planning to use that ruling as a shield better have proper, verifiable documentation for all of their financial activities, and I suspect many here asking about that would fall a bit short in that regard.

It is true though, statistically players could have 300-400k habd bad or good run streaks which makes it very difficult. And then what happens as the players around you change and get harder, soon you are a professional that may be claiming losses. It is a tricky area, and there is no easy answer to determining if someone has an expectation for profit or not...

Looking for the same, please pm me

Thanks

I know of at least 10 people that have received a letter from the CRA in the last month. They are coming after us.

What does the letter say?

wtf @ not elaborating?

Given his recent posting history, and this being April 30th so therefore it's a popular date in the tax world in the news, I'm going to assume its a troll for the moment. Feel free to change my mind and if it is true... Uh oh we're in trouble.

believe what you want.

the guys are all living in quebec though... dont know why they are targetting this area

Seems like a troll if he's not even saying what the letter is about. Is it a reminder that the tax deadline has been extended to May 5?

Yes Monteroy, but at the same time those sites can also show how much people lose at it as well, and isn't the % of players that make money playing online below 10%. Although as we all know the % of people playing for a living profiting is very high with variance of course. I would guess the % of people reporting it is very very low.

There is just too much variance to be able to gauge this. It's hard enough to compare a persona income month to month yet alone year to year and trying to link the whole profession together, I just can't see it unless they somehow come up with a formula comparable to other independant business with highly fluctuating incomes that could show losses.

This post actually supports the opposite position to the one you are trying to advance.

Ignore him, he follows me around because we have a few trolling battles in that fringe riggie thread (which I of course always win).

Regarding a few genuine topics in the thread:

- It would not surprise me if the CRA went after a few poker professionals (likely in a specific region), just like they do at times with other self employed tradespeople (contractors, consultants etc). While I do not worry about what undocumented posters say in passing, that is always a possibility, and every person should be aware of it, along with the advantages of proper record keeping and reporting (a position I think gets a bit less credit than due in the thread).

- Henry and others can correct me if I am wrong on this, but the usual day to file and pay anything owed is April 30th, but this year that was extended to May 5th due to that virus that shut down their site for a week. Paying late just means one owes interest, and perhaps penalties (if one does not file in time or file for an extension). I always finish everything by the end of February, so I admit I am not certain how that would work.

- Asking for a good accountant in April is bad timing! I can certainly refer people to mine, but he cannot handle new clients a couple weeks before the reporting deadline, because shockingly not everyone has all their records finished in February. I can certainly pass on some information to those who need it, but expect end of May to be when he would even be read to handle any new business.

I don't support either way. I made a desicion regarding my profits and I roll the dice. I just can't see there being a valid case against players, especially these days. My close friend made close to 2 million and never claimed anything from poker, was never audited. This is over 3 years now. So I really wouldn;t worry, too much grey area.

That's funny, I am always posting first Monteroy. Funny how that works with your narcicism.

This is a tax thread. The pro wrestling style characters/posts are fine in the riggie thread where they belong, but they are out of place here.

I'm not saying you should pay taxes. I would recommend not paying them even though I believe that if CRA and the judiciary were not incompetent winning a case against a pro would be easy.

My point was that your argument is wrong. Stating that the vast majority of people lose at poker is an argument for why poker pros should be taxed and your post implied it was a reason for why it shouldn't.