No 1099's under $10 - how can this possibly make sense?

Somebody please explain to me how it can possibly make sense that the Bank of New York is not required to send me

1099-OID's for Israel Bonds for which the OID amount is under $10, but I'm still required to report these OID amounts on my taxes.

Presumably, the point of not requiring institutions to send

1099's for amounts under $10 is allowing those institutions to save the expense of printing and sending out the forms.

However, if people who would otherwise have received those forms still have to report the income, and the only way for them to find out how much to report is to contact the bank on the phone or in writing, then surely the expense to the bank of employing enough staff to respond in a timely fashion to those thousands and thousands of inquiries far exceeds what it would have cost them to just send out the 1099-OID's in the first place.

Unless, of course, the vast majority of people in this situation aren't actually contacting the bank and therefore aren't actually reporting the income to the IRS.

(Please note: I'm not talking about 1099-INT's, where I can figure out how much the bank paid me by looking at my bank statements and/or the interest payments recorded in GnuCash. Rather, I am talking about 1099-OID's, for which the values each year are calculated using some magical formula unknown to mere mortals like myself.)

Does everybody (the banks, the IRS, etc.) just tacitly acknowledge and live with the fact that these amounts aren't actually being reported by most people, and therefore taxes aren't being paid on them?

Am I a sucker for reporting and paying taxes on these amounts?

(Oh, and while we're at it, why did the Bank of New York agent to whom I just spoke on the phone tell me that since the bank didn't report these amounts to the IRS, I'm not required to report them on my taxes? That's just wrong, isn't it?)

Reply to
Jonathan Kamens
Loading thread data ...

Well, since the IRS documents how to do the calculations (see IRS Pub 1212), presumably they (and the tax law) expect you to do the calculations yourself if the financial institution doesn't do it. (And I note that for the longest time you were *required* to recalculate OID for zero-coupon bonds even if you got a 1099-OID for them).

The IRS publishes the "magical formula".

That's probably true, but it doesn't mean you're not supposed to report it.

Only if you think that obeying the law is being a "sucker".

Yes, that's wrong. (And is Part 46723 of why you should never take tax advice from a broker/bank rep/realtor/etc.).

-- aRich Carreiro snipped-for-privacy@rlcarr.com

Reply to
Rich Carreiro

There's a scene in The Frisco Kid where the Indian Chief holds up the Torah scroll he has confiscated from the rabbi and announces to his tribe, "I have read this Torah..." and then whispers to the rabbi, "... and I didn't understand a single word of it!"

This is how I felt after perusing Pub. 1212. Perhaps if I spent hours or even days poring over it, I might be able to reach some approximation of a correct calculation of the OID for these bonds. But I suspect I'd get it wrong even then.

I think it is very, very, very unlikely that people like me are going to the effort of calculating OID amounts that are so small that the bank isn't bothering to send a 1099-OID. Rather, as I noted before, I think it is more likely that the vast majority of these amounts are not being reported. One cannot help but wonder how much the government is losing as a result in taxes that should have been paid but weren't.

I don't, and I dutifully called the bank and made them give me the relevant amounts, and I reported them on my return and paid taxes on them.

But despite the fact that the amounts are small and the taxes on them even smaller, it galls me to know for a fact that I'm doing the right thing and paying taxes on something that the vast majority of people aren't when they should.

Laws and regulations which set up systems in which honest people pay more than slackers, and there's no enforcment mechanism in place to give the slackers their comeuppance, are offensive.

Reply to
Jonathan Kamens

If you really want to rant about something.. why deal with such small potatoes. How about all those independent contractors getting paid less than $600 and not reporting it as there is no

1099-MISC? Or all those awards and prizes valued at under $600 that go unreported because there is no 1099-MISC?

Those are the ones that upset me. I can live with the under reporting of small amounts of OID as it is a pain in the tuchis for taxpayers (or should that be non-taxpayers).

Reply to
Alan

Well, if you're on a rant, how about all the people who win a jackpot under $1200 at a slot machine? No W-2G is issued, and these folks are certain that they don't need to pay taxes. And this is on a per- payout basis, so if you have multiple under-$1200 wins on any given day, so long as you take the payout before reaching the magical number, you're not going to get the amount reported.

Trust me, this happens all the time. While most people lose lots of money at casinos, many people walk away with lots of cash on which they choose not to pay taxes because the income hasn't been reported.

By the way, I'm one of those people who wins lots of stuff from radio and TV stations and the like. I report ALL my income, even when I don't get a 1099-MISC.

Reply to
Russ in San Diego

Probably not on the radar due to relatively few states with legalized casino gambling. Might also have something to do with your statement, "while most people lose lots of money at casinos", no?

What are the characteristics of "one of those people who wins lots of stuff", in case you are my next client? ;-)

Next rant: giftees who think they get a stepped-up basis on gifts (such as stock)?

-Mark Bole

Reply to
Mark Bole

I was under the impression that if the OID was small enough then it didn't have to be reported each year, but could be considered a gain at maturity.

Seth

Reply to
Seth

Yes, there is a stated de minimus rule that excepts a discount less than

0.25% x No of Years from IPO to first call date.
Reply to
Arthur Kamlet

There are lots of people who enter into broadcast station promotions as a hobby. On rare occasion, I've won significant items by sweepstakes, such as an iPhone. Most of the time, I get stuff through "points programs", where you hear broadcast codes, enter them on the computer, get points, and then trade points for prizes.

There are actually some (relatively) interesting tax issues associated with winning stuff.

For instance, I win a lot of passes to free preview screenings of movies. The radio stations routinely attribute a value of $20 or so to each pass for 2 people, since regular admission price is around $10. The trouble is that these passes are definitely not worth the price of a regular admission ticket, since:

1) A regular admission ticket can be used whenever YOU want to see the movie. At a preview screening, you have to show up 90+ minutes before a specified screening date and time if you want to have a chance of getting in, as they usually distribute passes covering far more seats than exist in the theater (by a factor of 2 or 3). 2) Even if you do show up 90 minutes before the screening, you may still get turned away after having waited all that time.

I assert that the radio stations are reporting excessive value on these passes. In fact, one NEVER sees these passes showing up for sale on, e.g., CraigsList. It's not that they're hard to get. It's that they have little or no value. Nobody would pay cash for one.

So, what's the proper procedure for adjusting the value from a station's essentially suggested retail price to the more realistic Fair Market Value?

Reply to
Russ in San Diego

Put out an offer of $2 for one, and when several people respond offering to sell, that sets (an upper limit on) the market price.

Seth

Reply to
Seth

That would be an interesting experiment, but I think at $2, they are still overvalued!

Reply to
Russ in San Diego

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.