Luck runs out for N.Y. lottery winners

Comment #8

CASH Only — Wed, 01 Oct 2003 11:54:09 GMT

F Annuities:I should have chosen that handle...

Comment #7

Blotto — Tue, 30 Sep 2003 23:37:23 GMT

They should have never paid Capital Gains on the lump sum, THAT IS NOT A GAIN! It's their money to begin with, it's not profit!They DO have to pay individual INCOME TAX, but never was there a gain.I can't see fault with the IRS. Thru the courts I'd bet they get the Capital Gains tax back and will pay the Income Tax as usual.That or the company did indeed rip them off, knowing it IS counted as a GAIN by govt. and telling the family what they wanted to hear. And you're right... The Dems whine and... [ More ]

Comment #6

dvdiva — Tue, 30 Sep 2003 23:08:25 GMT

after reading crap like this and the dem's whine that people dont pay enough to the govt it almost makes me want the cash option and normally i would have gone for the annuity. to bad the u.s. isnt as smart as europe and canada in that both of them dont tax income from lotteries. it makes you want to play more at lower jackpots - why bother for smaller amounts if you know the govt is just going to steal it all.

Comment #5

Littleoldlady — Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:19:25 GMT

Of course the company assured them they would not have to pay any more taxes ...The company was looking out for its bottom line. Be wary when selling annual payments to those companies for a lump sum of cash..many of them are down right disreputable. they will no doubtably wind up paying the extra in taxes because when they got the lump sum, it changed their income drastically for the year in which they received it.

Comment #4

pegleg — Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:15:39 GMT

This group should have consulted a tax attorney before taking the word of the company that purchased their annuity. In any dvent, one should take the lump sum and get the tax burden out of the way, and then plan your life on the money that is left.Taking the advice of a someone that does not have your interest first in not a smart idea.pegleg

Comment #3

CASH Only — Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:23:48 GMT

secret:In effect, they did-only after they received several of their annuity payments.

Comment #2

rundown99 — Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:19:39 GMT

Another reason why someone should choose the lump sum.

Comment #1

CASH Only — Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:16:30 GMT

Again, whoever wrote the story didn't use their head. The annuity option wasn't an option; the NY Lottery didn't make the lump sum choice available until 1996.

Luck runs out for N.Y. lottery winners

Lottery Post — Mon, 29 Sep 2003 07:37:57 GMT

When members of the Lucky Lotto Lady Partnership won $23 million in 1994, they thought their money woes were over for good. But nearly a decade later, the group is battling a formidable foe over its winnings: the Internal Revenue Service. This time, the Lucky Lotto Lady Partnership is going to need more than luck -- it'll need a change in federal law in order to win.The dispute is over taxes. Not whether the group should pay them, but how much of its lottery winnings should go to the IRS. And Un... [ More ]