Dick Adams wrote:
- quote -

The Rules Of Baseball
"7.05
Each runner including the batter-runner may, without liability
to be put out, advance --
(a) To home base, scoring a run, if a fair ball goes out of
the playing field in flight and he touched all bases
legally; or if a fair ball which, in the umpire's judgment,
would have gone out of the playing field in flight, is
deflected by the act of a fielder in throwing his glove,
cap, or any article of his apparel"

An unlikely exception to the above is described in Rule 7.08:
"This rule also covers the following and similar plays: Less
than two out, score tied last of ninth inning, runner on
first, batter hits a ball out of park for winning run, the
runner on first passes second and thinking the home run
automatically wins the game, cuts across diamond toward his
bench as batter-runner circles bases. In this case, the base
runner would be called out "for abandoning his effort to
touch the next base" and batter-runner permitted to continue
around bases to make his home run valid. If there are two
out, home run would not count (see Rule 7.12). This is not
an appeal play."

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info...s/foreword.jsp

Bill

Moderator:
A home run under Rule 705(a) is subject to discussion by
the umpiring crew when an appeal is made that the ball
was foul, did not actually leave the field of play, or
there was fan interference. Such appeals are rarely
upheld. However, if the batter batted out of turn, that
appeal is almost always upheld.

Rule 708 came into effect in response to Joe Adcock's
home run that broke up Harvey Haddix's no-hitter in
the 13th inning vs Milwaukee in 1959. Henry Aaron had
walked and left the base path causing Adcock to pass him
and be declared out.

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Stuart Bronstein <spamtrap[at]lexregia.com> wrote:
- quote -

Alas I know much more about Baseball than I do about taxes.
A ball is a home run when an umpire signals it as such. It
is then subject to appeal

- quote -

The "significant chance" of the on-field ruling being
overturned is far less the standard for "reasonable doubt".

- quote -

The seminal authority on MLB home runs since 1876 is a
gentleman by the name of David Vincent with whom I have
spoken on several ocassions. Until I contact him for the
precise answer, my guess is in the neighborhood one tenth
of one percent.

Dick

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Stuart Bronstein wrote:
- quote -

The general rule is that in a well-advertised auction with
informed buyers and an absence of collusion, the seller is
expected to receive FMV. Unless the seller is under a time
deadline to sell (as in a December 31st auction), this will
remain true.

Dick

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The above is intended for educational purposes only. > << It does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << It cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of > << the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed > << upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

dpb <none[at]non.net> wrote:
- quote -

Sure, which means the actual value may be higher. But I
doubt the IRS would go after him for tax on anything more
than he actually received.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

sethb[at]panix.com (Seth) wrote:
- quote -

Exactly, and that was the point with your observation that,
just because the ball goes over the fence, that doesn't mean
it will necessarily be a home run.

Legally, of course, for the person who catches the ball to
get the value it had before the batter actually rounds the
bases, he will have had to catch it before that time, and
also there would have to be a significant chance that the
home run would be ruled illegitimate.

How many home runs are there every year? And how many are
ruled ineffective? If it's not a significant number (I'd
guess in the neighborhood of five percent) then for tax
purposes it would have its home run value the moment it goes
over the fence.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Stuart Bronstein <spamtrap[at]lexregia.com> wrote:

- quote -

However, it has a market value at any time.

Suppose a typical homerun ball is worth $50. A ball is
caught right at the foul line, so it's either a homerun or a
foul ball. It's probably worth around $25 market value
while its status remains unknown.

A lot of financial instruments will have their values
determined at some future date; until then, it's unknown
what the value will be. But they have market values today.

Seth

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Stuart Bronstein wrote:
....
- quote -

But since the catcher is apparently being forced to sell to
pay taxes threatened to be owed anyway, isn't that a
compulsion to sell???

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

An arms-length transaction between unrelated parties would
trump an appraisal.

Ira Smilovitz

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

But it could still be an enforceable contract implied in
law, based on promissory estoppel. In any case it wouldn't
be a gift, because whether the team demanded the ball back
from someone who caught the ball but hadn't paid for a
ticket would be a business decision. Like Oprah's cars.

- quote -

It's Schrodinger's ball. Once it goes over the fence, it
will be either be a home run or not. But we won't know for
sure until any final rulings have been made. It doesn't
become a home run ball when the umpire rules, that's just
when we discover which it is.

- quote -

He'll owe tax on the actual value, which the courts define
as what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller, neither
under a compulsion to buy or sell. The actual sale price
within a short time after acquisition is generally
considered a better indication of value than an appraisal,
which is just an educated guess.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Ernie Klein <ecklein[at]pacbell.net> wrote:

- quote -

He owes tax on the actual selling price, which is the true
market value. The fact that some "expert" was wrong doesn't
affect anything.

Seth

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

And, if the ball was hit out of the park - into McCoveys(sp)
cove - as often happens, which could have happened with the
ball in question. In that case no ticket would have been
purchased.

- quote -

So the catcher could use the same receipt to prove that he
caught a $5 ball. I don't see how the same ball can have
two different simultaneous values.

BTW - As of the 11:00PM news last night: the catcher has
placed the ball up for auction with a minimum bid of
$100,000. So far NO bids.

Perhaps with all of the drug controversy surrounding Bonds,
the real value of the ball is not even in the same ball park
[pun intended] that the appraisers have placed on it.

If the ball ends up selling for only $50,000 (or less), does
he owe tax on the actual selling price or the $500K
appraised value?

--
-Ernie-

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

Or perhaps an explicit promise on the team's website (which
could be deemed part of the contract when a ticket is
purchased, or at least advertising to induce the purchase of
a ticket).

- quote -

Quite easily. The ball club says "We paid $5 for that ball.
Here's the receipt."

Seth

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Dick Adams <rdadams[at]panix.com> wrote:

- quote -

I heard an interview with him in NPR today. He said that,
in part, he is selling the ball because he has been advised
that he'd have taxable income even if he doesn't sell. But,
in part, it's because he can't afford the kind of security
he thinks would be needed to keep it properly. He hopes
someone will buy it and lend it to the Hall of Fame.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

kamlet[at]panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) wrote:

- quote -

Even though it lacks a well-defined legal definition,
treasure trove is essentially a form of unearned income,
i.e., found wealth that does not appropriately fit into
another income category, e.g., earned, investment, tax
exempt, excluded, etc.

However, since Mr. Murphy has announced he is selling the
ball at auction, this point is moot.

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

kamlet[at]panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) wrote:

- quote -

That may be based on the dictionary definition. But there
are several things you neglect when you try to draw the line
there.

First of all, there is no definition of treasure trove in
the IRC - it's not referred to at all there. It is referred
to once in the Regulations, but just as an example of income
that is taxable even though it isn't specifically referred
to in the Code. As an example you can't say that other
similar kinds of accessions to wealth would not be taxable.

I looked at Supreme Court decisions using the phrase, but
there was no definition. But two of the cases referred to
treasure trove as property that had simply been abandoned.
In any case, the simple fact that where property came from
is known would not detract from its taxability, because
there is no such distinction in the code, or even in the
regulations.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Mark Bole <fad873$d1l$1[at]panix1.panix.com> wrote:

- quote -

Tangible person property, since it has physical being.
(There are probably special tax rules about lottery tickets,
which I'm not familiar with.)

- quote -

It isn't. They're not the same thing.

- quote -

No. But then, there's the issue of tranferrability. If I
buy a lottery ticket, I can sell it to you, and the lottery
has no say in that transaction. If I have a bet with you,
you can't transfer it to your friend without me agreeing to
the transfer.

- quote -

I think there was a purchase (of the intagible "right to
receive what one pull of the lever gets") and then a return
for refund. A return for refund isn't a sale (consider
sales taxes).

- quote -

I agree it was $1,000 of earned income, just like anybody
else who bought $1,000 of anything for the purpose of resale
and sold it for $2,000.

- quote -

But all sorts of gamblers paid $2 for them.

The fact that some people didn't want them at all has
nothing to do with their value.

Seth

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Mark Bole <fa8dda$f7v$1[at]panix1.panix.com> wrote:
- quote -

Treasure trove requires that the ownership be unknown.

The ball club is known to be the owner, even placed
special identifying marks on the ball. If the ball
club allowed the fan to keep the ball, that could be
a gift or could be compensation, but is not treasure
trove.

--
ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

[Hmm, maybe we should be back in the "professional gambling"
thread.]

We were on the thread of the baseball changing value in the
very short time between being caught and some official
determination of home run status. In principle this sounds
reasonable, after all stocks and many other assets change
value suddenly due to an external change or previously
unknown information becoming known.

But I still can't see the lottery ticket example. Are you
saying that your lottery ticket is intangible personal
property, probably a capital asset? I see it as more of a
contract, a written statement of your agreement with the
state to each hold opposite ends of a wager.

I still don't see how putting up a deposit against possible
betting loss is the same as creating an asset. If you and I
agree to bet against each other and seal our agreement with
a handshake only, does our wager have some tax-related
impact for either one of us prior to the outcome of the bet?
If I put a dollar in a slot machine and then decide to hit
the "cash out" button instead of pulling the lever, did I
buy and then sell something for one dollar? I don't think
so.

- quote -

I say that he had $1,000 of earned income in the form of
convenience fees charged, not $1,000 of capital gain income.
The tickets were "worth" $1 to a gambler, nothing to a
non-gambler.

-Mark Bole

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Harlan Lunsford wrote:

[...]
- quote -

The official Cubs web site (and most other MLB teams I
suspect) does explicitly state that fans can keep balls hit
into the stands. This probably makes it easier to disclaim
any liability for injuries caused by hit balls -- "Dear Fan:
sorry about your concussion, by the way we want our ball
back".

What about balls hit onto Sheffield or Waveland avenues in
Chicago, or into San Francisco Bay? It seems much clearer
to me that these are truly abandoned, thus leading to the
"treasure trove" application.

-Mark Bole

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

No, that's what appraisers are for.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >