Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 22, 2017, 4:45 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

GREAT DAD: Gives $400K lottery ticket to daughter

Topic closed. 19 replies. Last post 6 years ago by KY Floyd.

Page 2 of 2
52
PrintE-mailLink
dk1421's avatar - Lottery-024.jpg
North Carolina
United States
Member #64582
September 1, 2008
347 Posts
Offline
Posted: May 1, 2011, 9:11 am - IP Logged

I hope she gives him some of the cash!

"Don't be a schmuck, always take the cash." -Coin Toss

    ressuccess's avatar - Lottery-043.jpg

    United States
    Member #93164
    June 23, 2010
    1431 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: May 2, 2011, 4:55 pm - IP Logged

    That was a great gift right there.

      Avatar
      NY
      United States
      Member #23835
      October 16, 2005
      3501 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: May 3, 2011, 1:48 am - IP Logged

      The ticket had no value till redemed.  Can't imagne it would be a problem.

      The ticket very definitely has a value before it's redeemed, and in theory it could cost the father between 110k and 140k, depending on his other income and his filing status. Assuming the father scratched it and knew it was a winner before giving it to the daughter he had constructive receipt of the 400k under IRS rules, so his taxable income for 2011 increases by 400k. Applying the rules strictly, he owes over 100k in taxes, even though he gave the ticket away.

      Since the IRS doesn't seem to be as strict about the rules when families share lottery prizes they may be happy enough if the daughter claims the prize as her own taxable income. The article says nothing about the father's finances or the tax implications, but it probably won't make a big difference in how much tax they collect.

        Avatar
        NH
        United States
        Member #83352
        December 5, 2009
        223 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: May 3, 2011, 3:47 pm - IP Logged

        KY Floyd

        So if the father got drunk and ripped up the winning ticket on camera(youtube) and said to himself " the hell with it-no one is going to claim this winning prize" ---are you saying he would still owe taxes on that winning ticket?

          Avatar
          NY
          United States
          Member #23835
          October 16, 2005
          3501 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: May 4, 2011, 1:57 am - IP Logged

          He didn't tear up the ticket so that nobody collected. He gave it to somebody who did collect. I trust you see a clear difference between the two.  The ticket was worth 400k and he was entitled to that income. He was free to give it away, but nobody had the right to take it from him. It's being entitled  to the money without "substantial limitations" that constitutes constructive receipt. Simply put, it's yours now if you want to pick it up. You probably already understand constructive receipt as it applies to a paycheck you get on 12/30 and cash in January. Your employer paid you by check in December, so it's part of your income for that year even when you wait until January to cash it.  It doesn't matter whether he gave the daughter the ticket or collected the cash and gave that to her.

          As for actually tearing up a winning ticket, it raises an interesting question. According to the letter of the law, once you have constructive receipt you've also got the tax obligation, whether you choose to cash it in or not. If you accidentally destroyed it you should have taxable income, but you'd also have a casualty loss that's deductible, so most of the income would be offset. There's no deduction allowed for deliberately destroying your property, so according to the letter of the law the income was available to you, so you had constructive receipt.

          Wikipedia has a good basic article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_receipt
          It recounts four cases in which the IRS claimed income tax was due in one year and a taxpayer claimed it wasn't due until the following year. Courts agreed with taxpayers in all four cases, but only because the taxpayers didn't have access to the money without "substantial limitations" beyond their control. Deliberately destroying a ticket you're entitled to cash in certainly doesn't mean there was a limitation beyond your control preventing you from taking actual receipt of the income. There's always a chance a court would rule that having destroyed the ticket there would  then be a substantial limitation, but I don't know if that theory has ever been tested. At the least, I'm sure you'd have to try to collect without the ticket in order to establish that there was a limitation.