Why was Joe Louis treated so poorly by the IRS?

[Vanboxingfan]

Originally Posted by janitor

Not in the case of the army navy releif fund. .

The relief fund was probably a registered charity I would think.

Originally Posted by janitor

He would have to pay a percentage of the purse in tax. As it was he gave the entire purse including the portion that would have been paid in tax to the army and navy releif fund and was then charged tax on top of that. He did not receive any portion of the purse as income. .

You honestly don't know what you're talking about. It's income if he earned the money. He earned the money when he fought. What he did afterward's doesn't influence the fact he earned it in the first place. He could have given it all to the homeless, but it doesn't change the fact he earned it in the first place. You really don't have a grasp of what your talking about. You're trying to wish a solution and assign blame without understanding the basic rules of tax.

Originally Posted by janitor

An astute acountant would have arranged for the purses to be paid directly to the army and navy releif fund so that Louis never even theoreticaly held them. As it was the money was paid to him and he paid it to the army and navy releif fund directly.

This 30 seconds when he nominaly held the money was the loophole under which he was taxed on it.

One again it simply doesn't work like this. The best he could have hoped for was to have part of the purse held back for taxes and donated the difference. He can't simply pretend he didn't earn the money. Here and now, they have credits for donations which generally would have offset a fair amount of this tax.

[RoccoMarciano]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

I'm wondering if some of the tax dectible laws that we have now were put into place for just such reasons.

Makes me wonder as well. When a person considers the character of Joe Louis, I have doubts he intentionally evaded any taxes.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by Vanboxingfan

The relief fund was probably a registered charity I would think.



You honestly don't know what you're talking about. It's income if he earned the money. He earned the money when he fought. What he did afterward's doesn't influence the fact he earned it in the first place. He could have given it all to the homeless, but it doesn't change the fact he earned it in the first place. You really don't have a grasp of what your talking about. You're trying to wish a solution and assign blame without understanding the basic rules of tax.



One again it simply doesn't work like this. The best he could have hoped for was to have part of the purse held back for taxes and donated the difference. He can't simply pretend he didn't earn the money. Here and now, they have credits for donations which generally would have offset a fair amount of this tax.

Your one of them arnt you.

[Vanboxingfan]

Originally Posted by janitor

Your one of them arnt you.

One of who?

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by Rumsfeld

So you don't believe tax dollars spent on national defense constitue a 'good cause'?

I'm very conservative republican and all, but I doubt that we are in danger of attack from Iraq. Although, I don't think we should just up and run either. IMO we should slowly back out.

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by mcvey

I think he got off lightly he should have gone to prison for tax evasion really.

Thats how I think.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by Bill1234

Thats how I think.

Louis could theoreticaly have gone to jaill over his failure to pay his taxes but lets remember that the man could harfly write his name. It is unlikley that he was purpousfully involved in some elaborate fraud to avoid paying tax on a purse that he donated to charity.

His financial advisers and promotors were to my mind been on the take.

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Vanboxingfan

The relief fund was probably a registered charity I would think.

I get the idea that it was a government run charity like the British disaster releif apeals run through the post office though I could be wrong.

You honestly don't know what you're talking about. It's income if he earned the money. He earned the money when he fought. What he did afterward's doesn't influence the fact he earned it in the first place. He could have given it all to the homeless, but it doesn't change the fact he earned it in the first place. You really don't have a grasp of what your talking about. You're trying to wish a solution and assign blame without understanding the basic rules of tax.

My grasp of tax related matters is limited as you observe but were the purses necisarily Louis's income if the bouts were billed as being to raise money for the Army and Navy releif funds and he did not personaly receive a cut.

Could he not have simply arranged for the purse to be paid directly to them rather than to him?

One again it simply doesn't work like this. The best he could have hoped for was to have part of the purse held back for taxes and donated the difference. He can't simply pretend he didn't earn the money. Here and now, they have credits for donations which generally would have offset a fair amount of this tax.

You have to ask why this was not made clear to him by his advisors and promotors. It seems that they were either verry inept or worse.

[Illmatic]

Look at what this country did to a minority that did whatever the apartheid government wanted of him, only to chew him up and spit him out.

No wonder Ali didnt buy into the same bullshit.

[cuchulain]

Originally Posted by Rumsfeld

So you don't believe tax dollars spent on national defense constitue a 'good cause'?

Attacking Iraq was not an act of 'national defence'.


Even those who cheered the move should see that now. The only reason that the administration got away with it and even had a good measure of support was because a great many ill-informed Americans assumed there was some connection between Iraq and 9/11. Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with that travesty.

In fact Bush has much more in common theologically with Osama than either had with Sadaam. Sadaam was a ruthless psychopathic mass murderer, but he was an atheist. He spent much of his political career on Uncle Sam's leash as a proxy, till he misheard the ambassador's words on the wisdom of attacking Kuwait, which led to the same fate as many an other 'useful' lackey (notably Noriega) and got discarded.

Both George and Osama believe that God speaks directly to them and directs and approves their every action. (Given how the Iraq debacle is unfolding, George must be having second thoughts about now--- (Say Dick, do you think that's a Q or an N ? God's cursive script is a bit obscure!)

At any rate, the Iraq file is being managed by the 'defence' department when it is clearly a matter of offence. That branch should be renamed the department of war or offence. Then the department of Homeland Security would not be such an absurdity, ( A defence department AND a homeland security department ?

But this has fuck all to do with boxing so I'll stop here.

Lounge?