Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will Roosevelt (Brown) bring down Giants and Eli Manning in uniform lawsuit?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Roosevelt View Post

    I'd agree except that every attempt by the NY Football Giants to have this lawsuit thrown out have failed.
    True. Whether that means anything or not remains to be seen.

    But I'm not conflating the suit with Manning. The suit may have merit, it also might have virtually nothing to do with him. There appears to be clear impropriety around this issue, it's just not clear by whom.
    Last edited by Sarcasman; 07-15-2017, 02:08 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sarcasman View Post


      I don't get the relevance of this.

      I'd need more specific context around this photo to have any kind of opinion about what it might or might not mean.
      You said you "doubt that designation (game used) is on any item he signs" and I simply provided you evidence that he does write it.

      Why do you need more info?

      Here's another.



      The descriptions speak for themselves as far as I'm concerned although I realize YA has stated none of them are legit. So why would anyone write it then?

      Torque it till it breaks, then back off a 1/4 turn.

      Comment


      • Another game worn item.

        G image_1430.jpg
        Last edited by Roosevelt; 07-15-2017, 09:44 PM.
        Torque it till it breaks, then back off a 1/4 turn.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by giants8493 View Post

          This doesn't clear it up that much. What do you mean by picks up the income?

          The way I'm interpretating this is it's only a tax deduction if they let the charity get the money but report it as income anyway?

          But if they report it as income how can you claim you let the charity get the money? And if you let the charity get the money how can you say that the player got the money?
          Your second sentence is correct. That's why it's a wash. As to your third sentence the money goes to the charity but they can't get a deduction unless they also report it as income.

          edit: To make it clearer if you have a salary of 100k and you tell your employer to give 10k out of that salary to xyz charity you report a 100k salary and get a 10k charitable deduction. You never really got the 10k but you still have to report it as income.
          Last edited by speedman; 07-15-2017, 08:32 PM.
          Engage brain before speaking.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by speedman View Post

            Your second sentence is correct. That's why it's a wash. As to your third sentence the money goes to the charity but they can't get a deduction unless they also report it as income.

            edit: To make it clearer if you have a salary of 100k and you tell your employer to give 10k out of that salary to xyz charity you report a 100k salary and get a 10k charitable deduction. You never really got the 10k but you still have to report it as income.
            Let's look at a different scenario.

            A guy makes $100k and decides to donate to charity a game used Eli Manning helmet he originally purchased for $100.

            What is his tax obligation according to the IRS?
            Torque it till it breaks, then back off a 1/4 turn.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Roosevelt View Post

              Let's look at a different scenario.

              A guy makes $100k and decides to donate to charity a game used Eli Manning helmet he originally purchased for $100.

              What is his tax obligation according to the IRS?
              He gets a tax deduction for the market value of the helmet because he owned it and gave it to a charity. That's not the case in this scenario. He gave the helmet to someone to sell.
              Engage brain before speaking.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by speedman View Post

                Your second sentence is correct. That's why it's a wash. As to your third sentence the money goes to the charity but they can't get a deduction unless they also report it as income.

                edit: To make it clearer if you have a salary of 100k and you tell your employer to give 10k out of that salary to xyz charity you report a 100k salary and get a 10k charitable deduction. You never really got the 10k but you still have to report it as income.

                I see. Thanks.

                Sounds like the deduction is basically so that people can donate without that specific money being taxed.
                ​​​
                Sounds like it's almost easier to not have the employer donate that money and too just write a check yourself.

                But thanks for clearing that up for me. I think I get it now.
                Why the Giants will win the SuperBowl!!!

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QPvmhCcsnY&t=1s

                Interview With Darian Thompson: https://youtu.be/vvqLbM6emGE

                My YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSW...BrHBI_v2XKQb5A

                Comment


                • surprised this hasn't surfaced in here

                  http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2...n_eli_man.html

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Roosevelt View Post

                    You said you "doubt that designation (game used) is on any item he signs" and I simply provided you evidence that he does write it.

                    Why do you need more info?

                    Here's another.



                    The descriptions speak for themselves as far as I'm concerned although I realize YA has stated none of them are legit. So why would anyone write it then

                    I'm sorry that I wasn't clear. I meant to say, I see the signature but I have no idea when the words "game used" were written on the item.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sarcasman View Post


                      I'm sorry that I wasn't clear. I meant to say, I see the signature but I have no idea when the words "game used" were written on the item.
                      Gotcha. But the mere fact that we need to even consider that or what it's supposed to mean is a problem.


                      Torque it till it breaks, then back off a 1/4 turn.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by YATittle1962 View Post
                        surprised this hasn't surfaced in here

                        http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2...n_eli_man.html
                        It certainly doesn't help the Giants case.



                        Torque it till it breaks, then back off a 1/4 turn.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by speedman View Post

                          He gets a tax deduction for the market value of the helmet because he owned it and gave it to a charity. That's not the case in this scenario. He gave the helmet to someone to sell.
                          So doesn't that confirm my earlier suggestion that giving signed memorabilia to charity is deductible by law?
                          Torque it till it breaks, then back off a 1/4 turn.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Roosevelt View Post

                            Gotcha. But the mere fact that we need to even consider that or what it's supposed to mean is a problem.

                            I agree. I expect Goodell to make it the Giants problem.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Roosevelt View Post

                              So doesn't that confirm my earlier suggestion that giving signed memorabilia to charity is deductible by law?
                              If you own it and give it to a charity the answer is yes. In this lawsuit the item was given to someone to sell so that eliminates the deduction at that time. Does anyone know who owns the item when it is given to Inselberg or whatever his name is?
                              Engage brain before speaking.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Roosevelt View Post

                                It certainly doesn't help the Giants case.


                                You and I read that article and got something very different out of it.

                                Stray says he has his jersey, and he is willing to sign an an affidavit on the chain of custody proving what he has is the genuine article. He is also willing to let it be examined by experts.
                                Not the actions of a man who is even remotely unsure of what he has.
                                Heisenberg maintains that Stray does not have the original...he does. And that assertion is based not just on Skiba, but on experts he had examine the jersey and can prove that it is the original jersey.

                                Now...if Stray basically proves Heisenberg's expert is full of canal water in his case, what's his credibility of the rest of the stuff?
                                Last edited by Delicreep; 07-17-2017, 07:50 PM.
                                Every single day I log onto this message board thinking i've seen it all, every single day I am wrong...NYGiants2120

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X