- 7 - Congress has made a policy decision such that, while section 165 generally allows losses to be deducted from gross income, “[l]osses from wagering transactions shall be allowed only to the extent of the gains from such transactions.”7 Sec. 165(d); see also sec. 165(a). However, neither the Internal Revenue Code nor the regulations define what constitutes a wagering activity. When a term is not defined, we must apply the term’s “plain, obvious, and rational meaning.” Liddle v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 285, 293 n.4 (1994), affd. 65 F.3d 329 (3d Cir. 1995); see also Boyd v. United States, 762 F.2d 1369, 1373 (9th Cir. 1985). According to the dictionary, a “wager” is defined as “something risked or staked on an uncertain event” or “a bet”. Random House College Dictionary (1968). Similarly, “to wager” is 6(...continued) redesignated sec. 23(h) by the Revenue Act of 1938, ch. 289, 52 Stat. 461 and then continued as such in the 1939 Code until enacted as sec. 165(d) in the 1954 Code) uses the terms “wagering” and “gambling” interchangeably. 7 Sec. 165(d) applies to both professional and recreational gamblers. See, e.g., Boyd v. United States, 762 F.2d 1369 (9th Cir. 1985); Offutt v. Commissioner, 16 T.C. 1214 (1951); Heidelberg v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1977-133. One of the consequences to professional gamblers is that the loss carryover provisions of sec. 172 are unavailable for amounts attributable to wagering activity. That is not an issue in this case as Mrs. Tschetschot had other income to absorb her expenses properly deductible as a professional. One of the consequences to nonprofessionals is that they may only deduct gambling losses if they itemize deductions on their tax returns. Sec. 62(a); see also Heidelberg v. Commissioner, supra.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011