[T]he Texas Supreme Court on Friday gave state officials the go-ahead to continue collecting a special $5-per-customer tax on strip clubs. The so-called “pole” tax, collected upon entrance to any club that features nude dancing and alcohol consumption, was ruled unconstitutional by a state district judge in Austin and the 3rd Court of Appeals. The law was passed by the Texas Legislature in 2007, and so far about $15 million has been collected. The money has not been disbursed because of the earlier court rulings. [HC via DMWT, Earlier]
Related Posts
Tim Geithner Hated His Old Accountant
It’s probably the same one that Doug Shulman’s been “[using] for years.”
[HuffPo]
Would the IRS Take the Heisman Trophy as Payment for Back Taxes?
Maybe! But we’ll get back to that in a minute.
There was a fair amount schadenfreude aimed at the University of Southern California when the school was slapped with sanctions a couple weeks back and at Reggie Bush for his role in the whole sitch.
How Bush really feels about it seems to be a mystery since he’s been quoted saying, “[This] is the closest thing to death without dying” but also a less passionate response, “Whatever happens, happens.”
Borderline schizophrenia aside, Fox News reports that Reg might have to pay some back taxes on the estimated $300,000 in luxury gifts he allegedly received:
“If the entire $300,000 is determined to be taxable,” Los Angeles-based CPA Mark Greenberg said, “about 50 percent of that would go to the IRS and Franchise Tax Board. And with penalties and interest, it could go up to 60 percent since it’s going back a few years.”
Greenberg estimates that Bush, now the star running back for the New Orleans Saints, “ultimately will wind up paying about $150,000,” but “it could be up to $200,000” if his financial team can’t get the penalties and interest waived.
We’re sure Bush would never have to give up his trophy a la the Juice since A) he didn’t kill anyone and B) his sponsors are still firmly in his corner, so the money shouldn’t be a problem. That being said, having the IRS snooping around your financial situation is about annoying as a Keeping Up with the Kardashians marathon.
What Is the Most Difficult Sentence to Understand in the Tax Code?
[caption id="attachment_19691" align="alignright" width="260" caption="It\'s in there somewhere"]
[/caption]
[/caption]
The IRC is probably the last thing many of you want to think about right now but, yes, I’m going there.
David Foster Wallace’s posthumous novel, “The Pale King“, is set in an IRS office in Peoria, Illinois and you’ll be shocked – SHOCKED! – to learn that the protagonist is fighting extreme boredom at his job. Wallace did extensive research prior to writing his final book including taking accounting classes at Illinois State University and carrying on “lively correspondence with tax lawyers and C.P.A.’s, peppering them with questions about the Tax Reform Act of 1986, compliance studies, I.R.S. office furniture, and an exotic tax shelter called ‘the Silver Butterfly,'” the Times reports.
One of the accountants Wallace corresponded with was Stephen Lacy who wrote this about Section 509(a):
“[L]egendary as the most difficult sentence to understand in the tax code,” adding: “I find that although I can never quite understand what it says, after I read it several times and concentrate, I can actually get into a kind of weird Zen-type meditation high! (Then again sometimes it provokes a profound anxiety attack.)”
“Legendary,” not only because its Mr Lacy’s drug of choice, but because Ronald Reagan quoted this passage back in June of 1986 when he set forth on his divine mission of reforming the tax code. A mission he ultimately achieved and thereby canonizing himself in the hearts and minds of many (can’t you picture the shrine in Grover Norquist’s house?). Anyhoo, here it is, in all its glory:
For purposes of Paragraph (3), an organization described in Paragraph (2) shall be deemed to include an organization described in Section 501(c) (4), (5), or (6) which would be described in Paragraph (2) if it were an organization described in Section 509(a)(3)
Not exactly Stieg Larsson is it? Anyway, if any portion of the code is still haunting your dreams and you feel as though it tops 509(a), you’re invited to exorcise it out now and your conscience will finally be clear.