Federal Tax Law Gambling

1. Federal Tax Law Gambling Rules
2. Federal Tax Law Gambling Laws
3. Federal Tax Law Gambling Winnings
4. Federal Tax Law Gambling Statute Of Limitations

Gambling winnings are subject to withholding for federal income tax at a rate of 24% as of 2020 if you win more than $5,000 from sweepstakes, wagering pools, lotteries, or other wagering transactions, or anytime the winnings are at least 300 times the amount wagered. Casino winnings count as gambling income and gambling income is always taxed at the federal level. That includes cash from slot machines, poker tournaments, baccarat, roulette, keno, bingo.

In the United States, both the Federal government and individual state governments are responsible for regulating gaming within their jurisdiction. The Federal government has designated some forms of gambling as prohibited within the US and has created laws that are non-negotiable in the regulation of such prohibited activities. On this subject, the Federal government may outlaw any form of gambling and states must abide by their law as Federal regulation will always trump state laws. It is important to any country’s gambling laws in order to stay within the country’s legal guidelines.

States, however, are permitted to maintain their own regulations and prohibitions on acceptable forms of gambling as dictated by Federal regulations. So long as state laws align and do not challenge or disobey Federal gaming laws they are free to control, oversee, and manage to gamble within their state. Usually, states create and employ gaming control boards or special gaming commissions to supervise gambling activities within their state borders. State laws are subject to their specific state and do not have jurisdiction or power to control laws in other states. Therefore, gambling laws can differ greatly between states.

1. For example, in Harbin, T.C. 1958-190, the owner and operator of an illegal lottery business was allowed to deduct gambling losses, business expenses, and the federal excise tax on gambling against his income from the gambling operations.
2. The United States maintains several significant federal gambling laws that greatly affect how gambling is regulated and permitted throughout the nation. Each law provides its own in-depth explanation, reasoning, and history behind its creation and implementation. On this page we summarize the laws, however, to gain a comprehensive understanding.

Active Federal Laws And Regulations In The United States That Affect Online Gambling

The United States maintains several significant federal gambling laws that greatly affect how gambling is regulated and permitted throughout the nation. Each law provides its own in-depth explanation, reasoning, and history behind its creation and implementation. On this page we summarize the laws, however, to gain a comprehensive understanding of the background of each federal law simply follow the highlighted links to resource guide that provides a greater depth of explanation.

Federal Wire Act – To combat prolific organized crime surrounding illegal bookmaking, then President John F. Kennedy enacted this law which effectively outlawed betting businesses from using phones to accept, place, or transmit interstate or foreign wagers on sports. At the time, this federal law greatly minimized domestic mafia bookmaking operations. The law has recently been interpreted by the US Department of Justice as effectively prohibiting U.S. based online sportsbooks from operating within the nation’s borders. Therefore it is a crime to operate an online sportsbook on US soil. The law does not prohibit USA residents from engaging in online sports betting at a legitimately licensed and regulated sportsbook that is legally operating outside of the United States.

DOJ Formal Opinion – In 2011, the DOJ and the Office of Legal Counsel released a memo that explained their formal interpretation of the Federal Wire Act that countered against the previous position the Criminal Division of the DOJ had taken. The memo stated that their prohibition on US-based Internet gaming only applied to online sports wagering. This clarification effectively allowed U.S. states to determine their destiny regarding online gambling as long as it doesn’t entail betting on sports. Therefore online casinos and poker sites are now legally permissible should a state decide to legalize these forms of betting entertainment.

UIGEA – This federal law is specifically aimed at online gaming operators and online gaming payment processors to curb illegal financial crimes, fraud, and money laundering through internet gaming activities. Financial institutions were thus barred from permitting direct transactions to online gaming service providers and given specific regulations on how they may process such transactions. In essence, the law provides regulatory oversight regarding how the online gambling transactions of USA residents are processed. The law does not make online gambling illegal.

PASPA – Once acted as the governing law over the prohibition of brick and mortar sports wagering throughout the US, with the exception of four exempted states. These four states had already implemented some type of active sports wagering or had pending sports legislation in place by a specified deadline and therefore were deemed exempt from the restrictions enacted by PASPA. The exemption was also offered to New Jersey due to their thriving Atlantic City gambling entertainment market, however, the state failed to take advantage of this option and allowed the deadline to pass. However, in 2018 SCOTUS reviewed PASPA and on May 14th ruled it unconstitutional and void. This law is no longer effctive in the land of the free.

RAWA – A preemptive bill yet decided upon intends to rewrite the Federal Wire Act of 1961 to extend prohibitions to include all forms of online gaming. If passed, this law would violently impact the current and future USA online gambling market as it does not include carve-outs for existing state-regulated online gambling platforms such as those initiated in Delaware, New Jersey, and Nevada – effectively making all online gaming in the USA illegal immediately.

State Gambling Laws

Individual states maintain the authority to allow or prohibit any form of gambling within their borders that are not expressly prohibited by US federal gambling laws. Due to the differing climate of states and their individual positions regarding legal forms of gambling entertainment, it is crucial to provide up to date information on what each US state permits and forbids in order to deliver the most accurate information for our readers. Therefore, we have specialized state focused pages to deliver the most current information on gaming laws and permissible gaming entertainment within their borders. Not only that, we provide here a state-specific gambling entertainment bill tracker to keep Americans updated on upcoming legal forms of betting entertainment in their state and inform them of newly enacted or retracted gambling laws.

Who Regulates Gambling in The United States?

At the federal level, there are multiple agencies that have a say in the regulation of U.S.A. gambling, these figures include the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the US Supreme Court, the House of Representatives, Congress, and even the President. All of whom communicate with one another and utilize the US constitution and precedent laws to determine the eligibility and legality of pending gambling legislation and regulations. At the state level, senators and congressmen in government positions lobby, direct, and discuss possible gaming legislation to either generate, permit, and regulate various legal forms of gaming entertainment in their state.

However, state governments often create sanctioned oversight boards such as Gaming Control Boards or Gaming Commissions to authorize, supervise and regulate legalized gambling activities within their state. Certain states in the USA may only have limited forms of legal gaming and therefore consolidate administrative power to existing commissions such as Lottery Commissions that are then tasked to regulate lotteries and limited forms of gambling such as charitable gaming in this case.

Forms of Legal Gambling in The United States

There are a variety of legal forms of gambling within the United States, however, these permitted venues are not uniform across state lines and players interested in engaging in these activities should check with local state laws to ensure lawful participation. As identified by the American Gaming Association the following forms of gaming entertainment are legal in the US: brick and mortar commercial casinos, tribal-run casinos, public and private poker rooms, bingo halls, various charitable gambling venues offering games such as raffles, pull-tabs, paddlewheel, punchboards, and casino nights, table games, on-track and off-track pari-mutuel wagering on horse racing, exotic wagering, bookmaking, daily fantasy sports tournaments, skill-based tournaments such as billiards, darts, and fishing, and lotteries.

Forms of Legal Online Gambling in The United States

Within the U.S.A. there are legal forms of online gambling that citizens may participate in, however again, the permissibility of online wagering is not equal across state borders as individual states hold the authority to allow or prohibit various types of online gambling for their state residents. With this being said, a number of US states have permitted the legalization of online gaming platforms through the use of iGaming services providing online casino, poker and lottery initiatives that are thriving. As of this writing, Delaware, New Jersey, and Nevada all have state-based online poker available, and both Delaware and New Jersey also offer state-regulated online casino gambling as well.

At this moment in time, individual states are not eligible to provide state-regulated sports betting online due to current federal legislation blocking such access. Regardless, nearly all USA residents may participate in legally licensed and regulated offshore online sports betting sites that remain a legal online avenue for USA players.

What Is The Legal U.S. Gambling Age?

Generally, gambling is legally accessible to individuals above the age of eighteen. However, every state has its own laws on the minimum legal age for gambling within their borders and often it can vary by game type. Normally, lottery gambling, charitable gambling, parimutuel wagering and bingo are available to young adults who are at least eighteen. Often times poker and casino gambling impose a requirement for individuals to be at least twenty-one in order to participate. These norms vary by state.

What Happens If I Violate A US Gambling Law?

Nearly all states criminalize gambling in some form and contain various penalties and punishments set for engaging in illegal forms of gambling. Violations of any US gambling laws, whether federal or state, can lead to imprisonment, hefty fines, and/or probation. Each violation case is different, and penalties vastly change based on the state or jurisdiction the violation took place in and circumstance. Imprisonment can vary based on a misdemeanor or felony offense in which case can result in up to a year in county or local jail for misdemeanors and a year or more in prison for felony offenses.

Criminal cases involving organized crime and professional gambling can result in up to a 10-year sentence in federal prison or more. Fines can vary on a state by state basis, generally, misdemeanor fines can range from $100 up to a $1,000 or more. Felony fees are relatively handled the same way and they can reach up to $20,000 or more. Fines can be separate punishments or in addition to jail or prison sentences. Probation sentences often ask offenders to serve 12 or more months either in a gambling addiction treatment facility or refraining from participating in gambling activities alongside with judge recommendations for community service or similar.

Is Illegal Gambling a Problem in the United States?

In the past, illegal gambling rings were run by threatening mobster figures who would often commit violent crimes against individuals and families of persons with unpaid debts. Today, the seedy dark figures of the past are no longer so prevalent but that is not to say that there are no underground gambling activities taking place in the US. In fact, several cases of violent threats and acts occur to this day due to gamblers placing wagers and falling into debt with the wrong type of individuals.

Illegal gaming remains a huge black-market business in the U.S. and every day individuals can place illicit wagers through bookies, backdoor casinos, and illegal online portals while operators, owners, and bookmakers take their cut of this lucrative business. No one is sure how much money is exactly wagered illegally but some estimate that the numbers are close to $88 billion a year. Other than the issue of states being unable to tax this money and legal venues losing money to illegal platforms, the greater issue of possible gambling addiction remains the most threating as addiction can lead to serious problems concerning an individual’s financial welfare, home-life, and possible crimes committed.

Which States Consider Gambling Illegal?

Gambling is wholeheartedly illegal in Utah and Hawaii, as they are well-known for their gaming prohibitions and strict anti-gambling laws. These two states have often reasoned that gambling would destroy their religious values, moral family structures, and harm their communities. Certain states that do not oppose gambling on moral grounds still limit gaming within their borders and only provide minimal gaming entertainment access; a move that often forces interested bettors into illegal gambling activities. One state in particular that engages in this type of limitations is Alaska, however, other states employ similar limitation tactics. These types of restrictions have driven the legal online gambling industry to gain momentum.

How Do I Know If I’m Gambling At An Illegal Destination?

Often a red flag for any gambler is the location of the said gaming site. Look around: is the setting of the business in a rundown location hidden from legal oversight? Do you have to enter through a special backdoor? Is the lighting poor, hygiene of the venue dissatisfactory, and do the patrons and staff give off a suspicious feeling? The one sure fire way to determine the legitimacy of any type of gambling business either offline or online is through their credentials. Legally sanctioned gambling businesses have no problem being transparent regarding their licensing, regulatory oversight and compliance certifications.

All licensing credentials should reflect the name of the agency or gaming commission that issues licensing for any given jurisdiction, and can easily be verified through the relevant regulatory body. If you find yourself in contact with a gambling business of any kind that acts defensive or is elusive when you attempt to question their credentials, you can speculate that their legitimacy is questionable. Illegitimate gambling businesses, which in turn are illegally operating, are usually focused on predatory acts, such as theft and fraud. We strongly caution against sharing any information with any gambling business that you are not sure is operating legally within the industry.

Who Do I Contact About Illegal Gambling Operations?

Once you have come in contact with an illegal gambling operation that attempted to entice you to wager on or participate in illicit activities, contact a lawyer, report the illegal operation at ic3.org, and follow up with filing a report with the FBI, local law enforcement, the American Gaming Associations Illegal Gambling Advisory Board, and/or Internal Revenue Criminal Investigation Department.

Help With Gambling Addiction In The United States

The ability to deduct expenses was curtailed by last year’s tax overhaul.

Professional gamblers' decadelong streak of being able to deduct a net loss from gambling as a trade or business was ended this year by P.L. 115-97, known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA). Although a relatively minor facet of the wide-ranging tax reform package, the TCJA's amendment to Sec. 165 overturning a 2011 Tax Court decision and 2008 IRS memo is momentous for taxpayers who claim to be engaged in the trade or business of gambling by virtue of their participation at card tables, racetracks, or other wagering venues, real or virtual.

CHANGING FORTUNES

While all taxpayers are required to report gambling winnings in gross income, what related deductions they can claim and in what way depends on whether their gambling rises to the level of a trade or business. A gambler not in the trade or business of gambling (a 'casual gambler') can deduct wagering losses as a deduction not subject to the 2%-of-adjusted-gross-income threshold (i.e., not among miscellaneous itemized deductions the TCJA suspended for tax years 2018 through 2025) on Schedule A, Itemized Deductions, but only to the extent of the winnings. On the other hand, a gambler engaged in the trade or business of gambling ('professional gambler') can net gambling winnings against losses and business expenses on Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business.

Before amendment by the TCJA, Sec. 165(d) stated only, 'Losses from wagering transactions shall be allowed only to the extent of the gains from such transactions.' For many years before 2008, the IRS interpreted 'losses from wagering transactions' to include professional gamblers' business expenses, so that they were deductible, along with wagering losses, only to the extent of gambling winnings. Consequently, professional gamblers were not allowed to generate a net operating loss (NOL) from gambling activities. The Tax Court in Offutt, 16 T.C. 1214 (1951), sustained the IRS's perspective and followed this ruling in subsequent cases.

But the Tax Court did not do so consistently, as discussed below. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court in Sullivan, 356 U.S. 27 (1958), allowed business deductions of an illegal gambling enterprise (generally denied previously on public policy grounds). Then, in Groetzinger, 480 U.S. 23 (1987), the Supreme Court distinguished between Sec. 165(d) wagering losses and Sec. 162(a) business expenses of a taxpayer in the trade or business of gambling.

In 2008, the IRS in Chief Counsel Advice Memorandum AM 2008-013 concluded that the IRS should no longer follow Offutt. The Tax Court in Mayo, 136 T.C. 81 (2011), then likewise abandoned its Offutt holding, allowing a professional gambler to deduct business expenses in excess of net gambling winnings (while maintaining that direct wagering losses could still be deducted only to the extent of wagering gains under Sec. 165(d)). Therefore, professional gamblers were able to generate an NOL from gambling activities — until the TCJA amended Sec. 165(d). (For more on Mayo and factors by which courts determine whether gambling is a trade or business, see 'Better Odds for Pro Gamblers' Business Deductions,' JofA, April 2012.)

TAX REFORM RESETS THE RULES

The TCJA, however, put an end to professional gamblers' ability to deduct nonwagering business expenses in excess of net wagering income. It amended Sec. 165(d) by inserting the following sentence after the original one:

For purposes of the preceding sentence, in the case of taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026, the term 'losses from wagering transactions' includes any deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter incurred in carrying on any wagering transaction.

The House of Representatives described this provision in its committee report (H.R. Rep't No. 115-409, 115th Cong., 1st Sess. 167 (Nov. 13, 2017)):

The provision is intended to clarify that the limitation on losses from wagering transactions applies not only to the actual costs of wagers incurred by an individual, but to other expenses incurred by the individual in connection with the conduct of that individual's gambling activity. The provision clarifies, for instance, an individual's otherwise deductible expenses in traveling to or from a casino are subject to the limitation under section 165(d). [footnote omitted]

The report further noted that the provision was intended to reverse Mayo (id., fn. 135). Consequently, the deduction of professional gamblers' nonwagering business expenses is limited by Sec. 165(d) under the new law. The following example and the chart, 'Before and After the TCJA,' illustrate the amendment's effects.

Before and after the TCJA

Example

Assume that G had the following expenses related to his gambling activities in both tax years 2017 and 2018:

Gambling winnings: $10,000

Losing wagers: $12,000

Transportation: $3,000

Meals and entertainment: $1,500

Legal and professional services: $1,000

Lodging: $2,500

Subscriptions and books: $900

Telephone and online charges: $600

Depending on whether G is a professional or casual gambler, either of two tax treatments could result for each year. If G is a casual gambler, the amendment of Sec. 165(d) has no effect on him. He should report his gambling income of $10,000 on Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, and $10,000 of his wagering losses on Schedule A in both 2017 and 2018. If G is a professional gambler, he could claim an NOL of $9,500 from gambling activities in 2017, as shown in the chart. However, under the amended Sec. 165(d), G may deduct his wagering losses and nonwagering gambling-related business expenses only to the extent of his gambling winnings, for a net zero income from gambling activities in 2018.

GAINS FROM WAGERING TRANSACTIONS

Amended Sec. 165(d) changes the definition of 'losses from wagering transactions' but not the meaning of 'gains from wagering transactions,' which may not always be clear. Courts generally have held that 'gains from wagering transactions' within the meaning of Sec. 165(d) must be the actual product of wagers entered by the taxpayer.

Gross income does not include the return of capital (Doyle v.Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U.S. 179 (1918)). A gambler thus would be entitled to exclude the cost of a winning ticket from its associated gross winnings. Nevertheless, such recovery of capital could not include the cost of tickets that did not win (Hochman, T.C. Memo. 1986-24). In the past, courts have considered various items as gains from wagering transactions. The annual payments lottery winners receive are treated as their gambling winnings in the year the payments are received (Rusnak, T.C. Memo. 1987-249). However, an excess gambling gain in one year cannot be offset by an excess gambling loss in another year (Skeeles, 118 Ct. Cl. 362 (1951)).

The Fifth Circuit in Humphrey,162 F.2d 853 (5th Cir. 1947), held that wagering transactions include all gambling activities, regardless of whether they are legal or illegal, or whether they are business or personal. As long as the losses derive from wagering transactions, they could be used to offset gains from any such transaction.

It is not necessary for the wagering gains to be related in any way to the losses (Scott-Nickels Bus Co., T.C. Memo. 1956-120). For example, the taxpayer in Presley, T.C. Memo. 1979-339, an owner of an illegal casino, was allowed to use the losses from his other personal gambling activities to offset his gains from the casino (see also Jennings, 110 F.2d 945 (5th Cir. 1940), and Joseph, 43 B.T.A. 273 (1941)).

Gamblers could use gambling losses to offset the value of complimentary goods and services ('comps') they receive from a casino. Comps constitute gains from wagering transactions because the relation between the comps and the gambler's wagering is 'close, direct, evident, and strong' (Libutti, T.C. Memo. 1996-108).

INCOME THAT IS NOT GAINS FROM WAGERING TRANSACTIONS

In addition, courts have considered the following income sources to not be gains from wagering transactions:

Tokes

Traditionally, casino dealers receive 'tokes' from patrons who play at their tables, in the form of bets the patron places for the dealer's benefit. Tokes are considered compensation for the recipient's services and, thus, should be treated as ordinary income rather than either wagering gains or gifts (Bevers, 26 T.C. 1218 (1956); Allen, 976 F.2d 975 (5th Cir. 1992); Olk, 536 F.2d 876 (9th Cir. 1976); and Williams, T.C. Memo. 1980-494).

Take-offs

A take-off is the fee that the house charges card players to play poker at the casino. Because take-offs serve as seat rental charges, those the house receives are not gains from wagering transactions and cannot be used to offset the house's losses from such transactions (Nitzberg, 580 F.2d 357 (9th Cir. 1978)). Similarly, the taxpayer in Boyd, 762 F.2d 1369 (9th Cir. 1985), ran the poker room in a casino that awarded him a portion of the take-off collected in the card room. The contractual share of take-offs the taxpayer received was not his gains from wagering transactions and could not be offset by his losses from those transactions.

Theft income from stolen betting tickets

The taxpayer in Collins, T.C. Memo. 1992-478, aff'd,3 F.3d 625 (2d Cir. 1993), worked as a ticket seller at an off-track betting station. Without making any payment, he placed several personal bets that had a fair market value of $80,280 and resulted in winnings of $42,175 (for a net loss of $38,105). He returned the entire winnings to his employer and turned himself in at the end of the day. The Tax Court ruled that the taxpayer should recognize net theft income of $38,105. Further, the court held that the theft income from the stolen tickets was ordinary income and not gain from a wagering transaction. Therefore, the taxpayer could not use his losses from wagering transactions to offset his theft income.

LOSSES FROM WAGERING TRANSACTIONS

Professional gamblers can deduct business expenses against their gains from wagering transactions (again, subject now to limitation under the TCJA) even if illegal gambling activities are involved. For example, in Harbin, T.C. Memo. 1958-190, the owner and operator of an illegal lottery business was allowed to deduct gambling losses, business expenses, and the federal excise tax on gambling against his income from the gambling operations. When the losses from wagering transactions exceed the gains, the excess losses cannot be carried back to previous years (Estate of Todisco, T.C. Memo. 1983-247). Casual gamblers cannot claim a gambling loss deduction for nonwagering expenses, such as transportation, meals, and lodging (Whitten, T.C. Memo. 1995-508).

Courts have considered the following items losses from wagering transactions, such that their deduction is limited to wagering gains:

Unsold tickets

The taxpayer in Miller, 792 F.2d 392 (3d Cir. 1986), was a lottery dealer in the Virgin Islands, where the lottery distribution system did not allow dealers to return unsold tickets. The Third Circuit noted that the taxpayer retained the tickets and continued to buy more tickets than he could sell, indicating that he was betting that one or more of the unsold tickets would be drawn. Therefore, the cost of these unsold tickets should be treated as gambling losses rather than ordinary business expenses, the court held.

Losses by shills

Typically, casinos engage persons referred to as 'shills' to whom they agree to provide a certain sum of money or chips to play. The casino will absorb any loss, but gains are split between the shill and the casino. The Tax Court in Nitzberg, T.C. Memo. 1975-228, held that when shills' losses were greater than their winnings, the net loss was deductible as the casino's ordinary and necessary business expense under Sec. 162. However, on appeal, the Ninth Circuit (Nitzberg, 580 F.2d 357 (9th Cir. 1978)) reversed the ruling, noting that shills acted on the casino's behalf when placing bets and, therefore, the casino's losses were losses from wagering transactions.

State tax assessment

A state income tax assessment on gambling income of an individual in the trade or business of gambling is tied directly to a taxpayer's gambling activities and, hence, is subject to the limitation of Sec. 165(d) (Estate of Todisco, 757 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1985)).

Buy-in and rake

Tournament poker players are required to pay the tournament organizer a 'buy-in,' or entrance fee. The casino retains a portion of this amount as an administrative fee, and the remainder goes directly into the prize fund 'pot' that will be paid out to the tournament's winners. The Tax Court in Tschetschot, T.C. Memo. 2007-38, considered tournament poker a wagering activity and treated poker players' loss of the buy-in as losses from wagering transactions. However, the IRS in Hom, T.C. Memo. 2013-163, conceded that poker entry fees and rake fees (charged per hand to play poker online) were business expenses of a professional gambler. While the Tschetschot and Hom cases are inconsistent, this inconsistency is irrelevant under amended Sec. 165(d). Regardless of the nature of buy-in and rake fees, both are subject to the Sec. 165(d) limitation under the TCJA.

Takeout

In horse-race betting, 'takeout' refers to the share of the entire betting pool that the event manager (the track) is specified to receive. The track uses the takeout to pay its expenses, such as purse money for the horse owners, taxes, license fees, and other state-mandated amounts, and keeps any remaining amount as its profit. As a professional gambler, the taxpayer in Lakhani, 142 T.C. 151 (2014), aff'd, Nos. 14-72576, 14-72577 (9th Cir. 5/10/18), argued that his pro rata share of the takeout the track remitted to the state and local tax authorities constituted his business expense and was not a loss from wagering transactions. The Tax Court noted that the taxes, license fees, and other expenses discharged from the takeout were expenses imposed upon the track, not the bettors. Therefore, the taxpayer was not allowed to deduct his share of the takeout.

Federal Tax Law Gambling Rules

POTENTIAL ISSUES

Taxpayers should be aware of the following potential issues, some of which may require more clarification by either courts or the IRS:

Treatment of 'fee to play'

The courts treat the 'fee to play' inconsistently, as it may be referred to as take-off, buy-in, or rake. The Ninth Circuit in Boyd held that take-offs the casino received or awarded to a contract player were not gains from wagering transactions. The Tax Court in Mayo implied that take-offs gamblers paid were nonwagering business expenses. On the other hand, the Tax Court in Tschetschot considered poker players' losses of the buy-in as losses from wagering transactions, while in Hom, rake was treated as a business expense.

This inconsistency raises two issues. First, there is no statute or theory to support the different tax treatments of the entry fees based simply on whether the taxpayer is the recipient or the payer. Second, for professional gamblers, the inconsistency between the Tschetschot and Hom cases does not matter under Sec. 165(d) as amended by the TCJA. For casual gamblers, however, this inconsistency has created chaos. Naturally, casual gamblers prefer to follow the Tschetschot case and treat their fees to play as losses from wagering transactions, as they are not allowed to deduct any gambling-related nonwagering expense.

Treatment of tokes

Are tokes that dealers receive considered the giver's winnings and losses? The courts have held that tokes are not dealers' gains from wagering transactions, as noted above. However, there is no precedential ruling with respect to the giver's treatment of the toke. As a toke belongs to the giver until the bet is won (Bevers, 26 T.C. at 1219), theoretically, the loss or winning of the toke should be considered the giver's gambling loss or winning.

Reportable gambling winnings

In Regs. Sec. 1.6041-10, the definition of 'reportable gambling winnings' for information-reporting purposes depends on the type of game. In bingo and slot machines, the amount of the reportable gambling winnings includes the amount wagered. Conversely, it is reduced by the amount wagered for keno. Taxpayers should be aware of this difference when they receive Form W-2G, Certain Gambling Winnings.

AN END TO NOLs

Before the TCJA, under the Tax Court's holding in Mayo, professional gamblers were allowed to fully deduct their nonwagering business expenses beyond wagering gains. By amending Sec. 165(d) in the TCJA, Congress reversed Mayo, allowing professional gamblers to deduct their wagering losses and nonwagering business expenses only to the extent of their gambling winnings, and no longer allowing them to generate an NOL from their gambling activities. Although, under the TCJA, the amendment to Sec. 165(d) is scheduled to expire at the end of 2025 along with most of its other provisions affecting individual taxpayers, Congress may extend it further. In the meantime, professional gamblers' winning streak apparently has come to an end.

About the authors

Wei-Chih Chiang, CPA, DBA; Yingxu Kuang, DBA; and Xiaobo Dong, Ph.D., are all associate professors of accounting in the School of Business Administration, University of Houston—Victoria at Katy, Texas.

To comment on this article or to suggest an idea for another article, contact Paul Bonner, a JofA senior editor, at Paul.Bonner@aicpa-cima.com or 919-402-4434.

AICPA resources

Federal Tax Law Gambling Laws

CPE self-study

Federal Tax Law Gambling Winnings

• Getting to the Heart of Tax Reform: Individual Tax and Estate Planning Strategies (#166350, online access; #GT-CL4RIND, group pricing)
• Intermediate Individual Taxation — Tax Staff Essentials (#158282, online access; #GT-TSE.IIT, group pricing)
• Tax Reform Bundle (#165490, online access; #GT-CL4TRBUND, group pricing)

Federal Tax Law Gambling Statute Of Limitations

For more information or to make a purchase, go to aicpastore.com or call the Institute at 888-777-7077.

Webpage

• Tax Reform Resource Center, aicpa.org/taxreform

The Tax Adviser and Tax Section

The Tax Adviser is available at a reduced subscription price to members of the Tax Section, which provides tools, technologies, and peer interaction to CPAs with tax practices. More than 23,000 CPAs are Tax Section members. The Section keeps members up to date on tax legislative and regulatory developments. Visit the Tax Center at aicpa.org/interestareas/tax. The current issue of The Tax Adviser is available at thetaxadviser.com.