Agree, thanks for the interesting thoughts illumination, they are are, shall I say, illuminating.Interesting aside. +1Tough to state in court with a straight face that one’s intent wasn’t nefarious. We used to call it the “red face test” when working on EPA emissions complaint diesel engines. “Can you pass the red face test in court with that?”
OT: American Gold Eagles are actually legal tender in the US, so seemingly you could spend a 1oz coin as $50. Then what would happen if someone tried to avoid estate/gift tax this way, eg $1m would be just $14.3k face value as a hoard of 1/4oz Gold Eagles (~$700 each now with $10 face value), which is below the annual gift limit - no forms to file or using up the lifetime exclusion!
I remember reading someone tried something similar and it went to court, with the IRS prevailing. I personally think it was a good loophole since it's legal US currency, but I believe a judge said otherwise.
I've always thought it was so silly to have a dollar denomination that was so under the market value, it never made sense to me.
Is legal tax avoidance "nefarious"? I can point to a few (hundred?) techniques here that comply with the law but are clearly done as a tax dodge.
I actually think in this case, the government should have the red face. The Treasury produced legal tender that states the value of the currency and someone used it in a way that complied with the dollar limits. The coins should just not be legal tender at all if they want to play a game of just pretending it's actual money. Just make a gold coin and say "1 oz".
I have often wondered about a similar phenomenon where someone builds a wall in their home out of cash, maybe to divide the dining room and kitchen. Way off topic of this thread, and starts to get into areas that need to be moved to another message board.
As yet another aside, it reminds me a bit of when Brewster sends a postcard using a rare stamp in Brewster's Millions.
Statistics: Posted by Silverado — Mon Aug 19, 2024 6:33 am