Taxing Olympians' medals may be outlawed, because why not

Taxing Olympians’ Medals May Soon Be Outlawed, Because Why Not

All, Legal, Olympics, Taxes Sam Eifling August 2nd. 2012, 4:23pm

Given the robust disagreements over the tax code happening now — how to tax estates and investment income, whether to tax Warren Buffett at a rate at least equal to his secretary — it’s nice to find a piece of tax law we can all agree is totally warped.

Marco Rubio, the Florida Senator, and Blake Farenthold, the Representative from Texas, have introduced bills (.pdfs here and here) that would repeal the taxes that U.S. Olympians are required to pay when they medal, including taxes on their medals. Currently athletes are on the hook for taxes on the bonuses they receive for medaling (right now that’s $25,000 for gold, $15k for silver and 10 large for bronze, presumably rendered in nickel rollers) and conceivably for the value of the medal itself.

The Washington Post aptly compares this arrangement to “any winning game show contestant [having] to pay taxes on a new car or toaster oven.” A few outlets have taken to suggesting the value of medals by multiplying the value of their constituent metals to arrive at approximate market value prices for them: $644 for gold (which is made mostly of silver), $330 for silver (ditto), and $4.70 for the copper sandwich that is a bronze. This is a preposterous calculation that ignores the not-insignificant detail that it’s an Olympic medal, but certainly if the world financial system melts down and we’re back to bartering ammunition and sexual favors for protection from roving warlords, that metallurgic calculation will seem like more than an afterthought. Till then a medal remains a priceless object, barring a desperate eBay auction.

It’s not clear that anyone has ever actually paid taxes on medals, because athletes aren’t idiots, and neither are their accountants, and neither are IRS enforcement agents. The lack of any obvious victims suggests that Messrs. Rubio and Farenthold may be doing what alert Republican lawmakers do in an election year; namely, aligning themselves with something unassailably American (Olympic medalists!) in the name of prying another shingle off the tax code. In this case, there hardly seems to be any great harm in doing so. We discourage the things we tax, so let it be said that no one should decline to invest decades of his life into pursuing Olympic medals for fear that Uncle Sam will take his wet bite of the spoils at day’s end.

aroundtheweb

55 Responses to “Taxing Olympians’ Medals May Soon Be Outlawed, Because Why Not”

1
sousedbergin Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:29 PM
We discourage the things we tax
GDP disagrees.
2
Razor Shines Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:32 PM
We discourage the things we tax, so let it be said that no one should decline to invest decades of his life into pursuing Olympic medals for fear that Uncle Sam will take his wet bite of the spoils at day’s end.
I have not problem with NOT taxing medals. I could see requiring that the sale of a medal be taxed using a zero cost basis, and deal with it there.
However, this statement fails through analogy. Millions of people invest decades into building businesses, and the system requires them to pay their share. Entrepreneurs also try to hit home runs all the time without a thought as to how they may be taxed. No one ever said, I have a business plan for a billion dollar internet business…but, screw it, then I’d have to pay a lot of taxes. Also, no one would not pursue an Olympic medal due to taxes unless the tax was insanely onerous.
3
QueeferSutherland Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:33 PM
We discourage the things we tax, so let it be said that no one should decline to invest decades of his life into pursuing Olympic medals for fear that Uncle Sam will take his wet bite of the spoils at day’s end.
You…..you don’t really believe this, right? It was just a nice close to the piece, right? There’s no chance you’d put forth the notion that someone wouldn’t want to be an Olympian because of taxes on their medals, right? Ok, cool.
I had no idea they were taxed though.
4
kaiserwilhelmreems is commenting too quickly Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:35 PM
cool, let’s not tax olympic athletes and continue to tax active members of the military. this way the real heroes get to keep more cash from their olympic journey.
/smh
5
Mike NYC Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:35 PM
The beast must be fed at all times. Michael Phelps didn’t build that Olympic gold medal, you know.
The, er, roads & teachers & bureaucrats did.
6
TK Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:36 PM
it’s nice to find a piece of tax law we can all agree is totally warped.
So, is there any evidence that Uncle Sam has actually ever collected a tax on a medal itself? Sounds like there isn’t. The “bonuses” are income. I pay taxes on my income. I’d expect that they pay taxes on their’s.
7
Jason McIntyre Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:36 PM
felt bad for some of you, so come on down! you know, until you act like yourselves
Pageviews!!
the voice of a person who has zero concept of pageviews.
8
QueeferSutherland Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 PM
So, is there any evidence that Uncle Sam has actually ever collected a tax on a medal itself? Sounds like there isn’t. The “bonuses” are income.
This is a fair point. They’re not taxing the gold. They’re taxing the cash they get for winning the gold. I’d rather Olympians don’t get taxed, but I’m not going to pretend it’s unfair, either.
9
QueeferSutherland Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:38 PM
the voice of a person who has zero concept of pageviews.
What thread am I in?
10
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:40 PM
The, er, roads & teachers & bureaucrats did.
I would actually think his swim coaches played a rather large role in his development.
11
Wide Word of Sport (?) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:41 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/post/someone-hacked-the-nats-facebook-page/2012/08/02/gJQAbZ4USX_blog.html
Here you go, SROD.
I couldn’t get through this sham of a post, but what I’m gathering is that the Shamburglar is of the mind that taxes discourage income, which is why all the rich people in America give up all their money to avoid paying taxes?
12
ThatsSoTaguchi (Now With Zip) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:41 PM

The, er, roads & teachers & bureaucrats did.
I would actually think his swim coaches played a rather large role in his development.

what are you insinuating?
13
phillymantis915 Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:41 PM
The, er, roads & teachers & bureaucrats did.
Can’t wait for this conservative paradies where private companies invest money on building interstate highway systems.
14
Wide Word of Sport (?) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:42 PM
Oh it’s an Eifling joint. That explains a lot.
15
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:42 PM
@TheBigLead not surprisingly, @SamEifling’s post on taxing olympic medals is rapidly becoming a gop/dem debate:
WHOA SLOW THAT PARTISAN DEBATE DOWN GUYS
16
ThatsSoTaguchi (Now With Zip) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:43 PM
What’s a Sam Eifling?
17
QueeferSutherland Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:46 PM
Can’t wait for this conservative paradies where private companies invest money on building interstate highway systems.
“Which way to Texaco Route 70 presented by Coca-Cola?”
“Oh, it’s easy, just bang a left on Bank of America Boulevard. That turns into the GoDaddy.com expressway, which will take you right to 70.”
18
Wide Word of Sport (?) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:47 PM
What’s a Sam-ei fling?
His poop, usually. Only he calls it a ‘blog post’.
19
ohheelyeah Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:49 PM
the voice of a person who has zero concept of pageviews.
Well since you challenged me on what was admittedly lazy and half-hearted joke:
As someone who analyzes pageviews every month, I know the value of having users who frequent your site, click around on your site, and ultimately buy something from your site. I also know the value of having someone click an ad banner, reference another portion of your site via links, and refresh a page over and over. Lastly, I understand the value of the quantity of unique IP addresses that visit, the time duration the stay on a site, the places they click, etc (i.e. everything involved on the “analytic” side). Now, seeing as the “freedom” of formerly-banned users would inevitably increase all of the aforementioned things in some capacity, then yes, you will ultimately see more clicks, more refreshes, and more users returning who were previously banned from commenting (see the return of Ben, who heard through twitter DM that the gates were opened). Now thats out of the way, I would like for you to tell me where my lazy and half-hearted joke is wrong. I’ll hang up and answer.
20
QueeferSutherland Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:49 PM
Craig James thinks he built his business without any help from anyone.
21
ThatsSoTaguchi (Now With Zip) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:49 PM
Can’t wait for this conservative paradies where private companies invest money on building interstate highway systems.
Snow Crash is a great book.
22
kaiserwilhelmreems is commenting too quickly Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:50 PM
@TheBigLead not surprisingly, @SamEifling’s post on taxing olympic medals is rapidly becoming a gop/dem debate:
it is?
23
spencer096 Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:51 PM
tax em if they sell it. boom.
24
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:52 PM
it is?
It certainly isn’t on here. He might have meant into people replying to him on twitter but I just found that hilarious.
25
QueeferSutherland Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 PM
Snow Crash is a great book.
I can’t get into Stephenson’s stuff.
That said, I’m reading Cloud Atlas now and damn if that thing isn’t a slog.
26
ohheelyeah Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 PM
Snow Crash is a great book.
+1 for Neal Stephenson. I actually JUST started listening to that on audiobook over the 4th of July holidays.
/already forgot everything
//need to start over after I finish a few other books
27
Tim Ryan Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 PM
As someone who analyzes pageviews every month
Ha. Wow, do you have your own office too?
28
St. Bear Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 PM
it is?
It certainly isn’t on here. He might have meant into people replying to him on twitter but I just found that hilarious.
I think TBL automatically assumes it’s a political debate when Mike comments.
29
ButtersBC Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 PM
The inventor of chlorine has helped Phelps hone his craft while not having to worry about contracting parasites
30
ohheelyeah Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:55 PM
@TheBigLead not surprisingly, @SamEifling’s post on taxing olympic medals is rapidly becoming a gop/dem debate:
lol. i think TBL was just getting ahead of the curve on what he thought he saw coming. i think it has now become quite clear that we are just hammering on Sam for his coup de grâce to an otherwise informative post.
31
ohheelyeah Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:56 PM
Ha. Wow, do you have your own office too?
Sure do. And it has my own desk, my own lamp, my own computer, and my own window. So THERE!
32
spencer096 Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 4:59 PM
golf-fice > office
33
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:01 PM
This Chick Fil A bullshit is pissing me off. Just got into a big argument with s friend and I wanna punch him in the face!
34
Hopboy Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:01 PM
Well since you challenged me on what was admittedly lazy and half-hearted joke:
As someone who analyzes pageviews every month, I know the value of having users who frequent your site, click around on your site, and ultimately buy something from your site. I also know the value of having someone click an ad banner, reference another portion of your site via links, and refresh a page over and over. Lastly, I understand the value of the quantity of unique IP addresses that visit, the time duration the stay on a site, the places they click, etc (i.e. everything involved on the “analytic” side). Now, seeing as the “freedom” of formerly-banned users would inevitably increase all of the aforementioned things in some capacity, then yes, you will ultimately see more clicks, more refreshes, and more users returning who were previously banned from commenting (see the return of Ben, who heard through twitter DM that the gates were opened). Now thats out of the way, I would like for you to tell me where my lazy and half-hearted joke is wrong. I’ll hang up and answer.
This was a like a really boring version of Dennis Hopper’s scene with Christopher Walken in “True Romance.”
35
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:01 PM
Ooooops, wrong thread…
36
spencer096 Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:03 PM
This Chick Fil A bullshit is pissing me off. Just got into a big argument with s friend and I wanna punch him in the face!
YEA FUCK POLYNESIAN SAUCE TOO.
37
arkbadger Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:05 PM
ohheelyeah just gave the EIC a Stonecold Stunner
38
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:07 PM
I found this on FB from someone and it seemed pretty awesome:
In the 1940′segregation was “in” and people felt free to speak up for it like they do Dan Cathy’s gay and lesbian views. But I drove all around Orlando yesterday trying to find a good “whites only” restaurant, and I found that it’s not so socially acceptable to stick up for it now. Dan Cathy is trying to hold on to views that in a few years will be outdated.
I promise you that if this was the 1940′s, Chick-Fil-A would have a main entrance, and another in the back that had a sign saying “colored only.” And black people would have to use a latrine out back in the parking lot somewhere.
Remember who fought against desegregation? Thats right, the same restaurant owners forced to desegregate.
39
A.P. Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:09 PM
*insert condescending political stance/argument here*
/mikenyc’d
40
Wide Word of Sport (?) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:20 PM
I promise you that if this was the 1940′s, Chick-Fil-A would have a main entrance, and another in the back that had a sign saying “colored only.” And black people would have to use a latrine out back in the parking lot somewhere.
This is just fucking stupid. Racism and homophobia, while both bad, aren’t the same, and don’t come from the same line of reasoning.
41
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:25 PM
This is just fucking stupid. Racism and homophobia, while both bad, aren’t the same, and don’t come from the same line of reasoning.
I disagree. Hate is hate. And many years down the road the intolerance to gays and lesbians may be looked at in the same way as the intolerance of someone due to skin color, sex, etc.
Now was the hate regarding racism much worse? Yes Id say so, but when you single out a group of people, how is it not similar?
42
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:30 PM
And many years down the road the intolerance to gays and lesbians may be looked at in the same way as the intolerance of someone due to skin color, sex, etc.
Some courts have already made that leap. In a legal sense, it’s getting closer to being the same thing.
Also you guys are fucking racist for talking about blacks and chicken.
43
A.P. Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:31 PM
There are similarities but I still have a hard time agreeing with people that say the gay rights movement is just like the civil rights movement back in the 50s and 60s. Maybe I’m still a bit ignorant of some things…
44
A.P. Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:32 PM
Also you guys are fucking racist for talking about blacks and chicken
I like black women and chicken.
45
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:34 PM
There are similarities but I still have a hard time agreeing with people that say the gay rights movement is just like the civil rights movement back in the 50s and 60s. Maybe I’m still a bit ignorant of some things…
The thing to me is being gay/lesbian is not as easy to tell someones skin color.
Its easy to hate on skin color where it cannot be hidden in a crowd. How many gay and lesbians are/were afraid to come out due to society looking down on them?
I mean if black people in the 1940′s could have just said, no Im not black, it would be more similar.
I dunno what Im trying to say.
46
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:34 PM
There are similarities but I still have a hard time agreeing with people that say the gay rights movement is just like the civil rights movement back in the 50s and 60s. Maybe I’m still a bit ignorant of some things…
Government denying a group of people something that they see as their rights due to them identifying as a group which they were born into and that the government has decided is not worthy of equality.
On a base level it is outstandingly similar.
47
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:35 PM
Not that I don’t get the uneasiness with drawing the comparison.
48
Faulkner Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:35 PM
Some courts have already made that leap. In a legal sense, it’s getting closer to being the same thing.
Sure, but comparing Chick Fil A to the whites only lunch counter or Irish need not apply is false equivalency. They haven’t discriminated against employees or denied service to anyone. Clouding the issue like that doesn’t help anything.
49
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:36 PM
The thing to me is being gay/lesbian is not as easy to tell someones skin color.
Its easy to hate on skin color where it cannot be hidden in a crowd. How many gay and lesbians are/were afraid to come out due to society looking down on them?
I mean if black people in the 1940′s could have just said, no Im not black, it would be more similar.
I dunno what Im trying to say.
Well the point could be made that people having to hide who they truly are is a far worse way to live.
50
molemaninthemorning Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:36 PM
Sure, but comparing Chick Fil A to the whites only lunch counter or Irish need not apply is false equivalency. They haven’t discriminated against employees or denied service to anyone. Clouding the issue like that doesn’t help anything.
Agreed.
On that point and that we should be denying the Irish things.
51
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:37 PM
It wasnt meant to be 100% similar from my comment though.
The comment was, that if this was the 1940′s Chick Fil A would be one of the restaurants with segregation.
Disagree?
52
rondoman Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:38 PM
Well the point could be made that people having to hide who they truly are is a far worse way to live.
Very true.
53
Nada Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 5:44 PM
I still have a hard time agreeing with people that say the gay rights movement is just like the civil rights movement
Someday they’ll be reminiscing about the March on Chick-Fil-A like the March on Selma …
Also, why not tax the bonuses for medaling? Athletes are taxed on the bonuses they get for winning a Super Bowl, a World Series, etc. Olympians are pro athletes just like the rest.
54
Wide Word of Sport (?) Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 6:08 PM
The comment was, that if this was the 1940′s Chick Fil A would be one of the restaurants with segregation.
I disagree. It seems almost overly concrete of me, but until Chick-Fil-A shows they are racist, I only attribute the homophobia to them. For all you know, Chick-Fil-A would be progressive in racial equality.
I’m not defending them, I just really don’t like the analogy, and think it’s insulting to Black people, as I’d be offended if you compared it to antisemitism or anything else.
Let Chick Fil A’s policies and actions speak for themselves, and let’s all stop trying to place a historical context on it. Can’t we just say they are clinging to an antiquated view of the American family, and promoting a point of view which inhibits other human beings from living their lives as they see fit.
I’m not sure how much they say “don’t eat here” or “we hate gays” vs. more of a misguided “we want to protect the family” statement they are making, so maybe my view would change if that was the case. Right now the story is just an easy way for the people to put a (rich, famous, corporate) face out there to either attack or support, on the basis of a view that far too many people hold.
55
A.P. Says:
August 2nd, 2012 at 6:11 PM
I only attribute the homophobia to them
I think homophobia is used incorrectly here and throughout many gay rights issues. I don’t think they are afraid of gay people. They just don’t believe they deserve the same marriage rights. Prejudice? yes. a phobia? not so sure about it. Not singling you out, WWoS; I just see it inaccurately used all the time