[Newsbot]

Title: Taxman told to keep paws off stripper's 'gifts'
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: WDHIII
Date: 2009-08-21 08:34:36
Canadian

[ridenrain]

I don't see how this is different than waters tips, except for magnitude.

[BeaverFever]

how do you prove gift vs tip though? Especially when much of it was non-cash and little of it seems to be delivered in exchange for a specific service.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

If he didn't have the money to begin with, she wouldn't have given a damn about his "knowledge". Besides even he admitted he PAID her for the company. That ain't a gift.
There was no father-daughter dynamic there. IF you're someone's "friend" you don't get paid for it. The only monies she recieved from him that could be considered non-taxable would be the lottery winnings he gave her. Everything else was payment for services rendered whether it was sex, dances or companionship.
And of course the courts found in favour of her, we all know that judges NEVER frequent those kinds of places right?

[ridenrain]

I think tips are an honor system and I believe they have a rule of thumb that suggests that X amount of pay usually has Y amount of tips. Here someone noticed, probably a co-worker, that she was living way beyond her pay grade and ratted her out.
I'm seeing no reason why pretty people should pay less taxes than the rest of us.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

If you work at a job where tips are the norm and you don't declare ANY on your T4, the government will(or used to anyway) automatically calculate 10-15% of your T4 earnings and call that amount your income from tips.

[BeaverFever]

ya but what im saying is other than the $160k cash, the rest of it was jewelry, cars, etc, so its hard legally to set a precedent here that wouldn't interfere with legitimate gift-giving in the country. You have to set a standard that can be universally applied.

Also I'm sure the "gifts" weren't on a direct quid-pro-quo basis and the two had probably moved passed that to a more informal arrangement. It's not as if he called and offered "ill see you tomorrow for 3 hours in exchange for a diamond necklace" and she countered with "3 hours would have to include a bracelet" right? The time her "companionship" was delivered and the time her "gift" was received probably don't directly coincide. She probably saw him several times and got nothing more than a free dinner on those occasions and there were probably other times where he spontaneously showed up and gave her a car or a fur coat. Each one understands there is a give-and-take relationship but it is so informal it's tough to prove.

I'm not saying these things weren't payments for services, but again you have to prove it using a standard that can be universally applied. Unless they can find hard evidence of a business relationship where the two parties having an agreement like a fur coat being offered in exchange for a weekend together in the country or a promise of x dollars in goods in exchange for y amount of time together, I think they're screwed.

Obviously, she understood that as long as she made time for him he would shower her with expensive "gifts" from time to time and he understood that as long he did that she would make herself available.
We all know how strippers operate the question is how to close this loophole.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

The man said he PAID her. What could be more clear than his own admission?

[Canadian_Mind]

And I paid kids to mow my lawn in summer and shovel driveway in winter back home. Is mr. taxman about to come along and start stealing money from them?

[BeaverFever]

right, but my understanding is what's in dispute in court is not the actual'pay' for her companionship but all the extras, the lottery winnings, the car, furs etc that came ontop of that pay.

I inferred that the money she earned as actual pay for her companionship was declared and not in dispute.

[Wada]

Does he have receipts?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

And I paid kids to mow my lawn in summer and shovel driveway in winter back home. Is mr. taxman about to come along and start stealing money from them?

Not unless you pay them over 10K/yr to do those things. Income that's less than the basic personal amount is non-taxable.

And Beaver, one could easily consider the material goods simply as tips.

Whenever there is money around, a stripper is "on duty".

Maybe we can try and put a "real world" take on this. Let's say you work at a fine dining establishment. There's a woman that comes in as a regular customer and always sits in your section. Your professionalism and prompt, courteous service encourages her to tip you nicely every time. One day, she shows up, not to eat, but to drop off a nice Rolex for you in appreciation for your service. Is that a tip or a gift? IF she found out where you lived and brought it there, would it still be a tip, or a gift?

Even if you say, "but it wasn't just money she got, she got material goods and a house and a 'vette." Then that's more like a bonus, and, bonuses are taxable, unless things have changed

I dunno, I could very well be wrong, but something about this whole story smells bad, and when my bullshit detector starts screaming, it's usually right on the money.

[BeaverFever]

My point is that the court would have to prove theyre NOT gifts. If, after everytime she saw him, he paid her the $200 or whatever for her companionship and also gave her jewelery at the same time, its a tip.

But if the normal arrangement is just the $200 per visit and she randomly gets these presents in the mail, or without spending significant time together, than I guess it would be hard to prove in a court of law that the two are related. You would have to prove that the 'gift' is directly related to the delivery of a service and meant as a form of payment or reward. If the "gift" came in a paper envelope along with the payment for her services, then its definitely a tip IMHO.

In your example of the restaurant, I would say they're gifts. Especially if she came to my house where I'm obviously not waiting on her.

Also, I inferred from the article that most of the gifts came when she stopped stripping, in which case their relationship may have become so informal its really hard to tell if she was still providing him a service, or just taking advantage of a lonely old man, or if she genuinely had some kind of friendship.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

My point is that the court would have to prove theyre NOT gifts. If, after everytime she saw him, he paid her the $200 or whatever for her companionship and also gave her jewelery at the same time, its a tip.

But if the normal arrangement is just the $200 per visit and she randomly gets these presents in the mail, or without spending significant time together, than I guess it would be hard to prove in a court of law that the two are related. You would have to prove that the 'gift' is directly related to the delivery of a service and meant as a form of payment or reward. If the "gift" came in a paper envelope along with the payment for her services, then its definitely a tip IMHO.

In your example of the restaurant, I would say they're gifts. Especially if she came to my house where I'm obviously not waiting on her.

Also, I inferred from the article that most of the gifts came when she stopped stripping, in which case their relationship may have become so informal its really hard to tell if she was still providing him a service, or just taking advantage of a lonely old man, or if she genuinely had some kind of friendship.

Ok, I'll concede your point. I'm prolly just biased because I know a couple of peelers that don't strip anymore but still make money off a few of their old customers when they did strip.

[KorbenDeck]

What the hell? In BC gifts are taxed. If I was rich and wanted to give my friend 100 grand he would have to pay taxes on it.