Discussion:Disagreement At Work? Hobby Income.

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> Basic Tax Questions --> Disagreement At Work? Hobby Income.
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Disagreement At Work? Hobby Income.

Ddoshan (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
We're starting to go over things and get ready for the tax season. One of the topics that was discussed was Hobby Income. For example.. Sally goes out and buys 500 dollars worth of yarn from which she makes some sort of throw rug or whatever. Sally sells the rug for say 700 dollars. I maintain that Sally only has to report 200 dollars as Hobby Income on line 21. I was a minority of one. The situation assumes this is indeed a Hobby and not a Business.

I recall reading something about this somewhere at one time but have no idea where. The only thing I can think of, off hand right now, is that her cost of goods sold should not have to be included in figuring how much Sally has to report on her tax return.

What do you think is the proper amount to report as income the 700 or 200 dollars.

Blrgcpa (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Sched c ez

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
you are correct, Ddoshan. 200 on line 21.

of course, the yellow search box could always help someone find the correct answer Discussion:Hobby Income

Ddoshan (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Maybe, but for the sake of discussion the problem assumed and presented this as Hobby Income. If it would make it easier, assume she also had 500 other dollars in miscellaneous expenses. Now she has a loss and she says and admits this is a hobby of hers. The miscellaneous expenses would have to be deducted on Sch. A which may or may not be of any use.

Question then is, does she report 700 or 200 on line 21. I believe it is 200 dollars. But no one at work agreed.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
cogs of a hobby is properly deducted above the line, other expenses are deducted on Sch A as you write (limited to remaining gross hobby profit)

TexCPA (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
I agree / Kevin, beat me to the punch on the link

[1.183-1]

TexCPA 20:02, 20 October 2009 (CDT)

Ddoshan (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Thanks for the reminder and source.

EasternPA (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
I assume the 50% deduction on meals still applies to hobby expenses. For example, a hobby painter attending summer art fairs can deduct 50% of meals and 100% reasonable lodging.

EasternPA (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Let's flesh out an example.

Micasa has been taking painting classes for years and wants to turn professional. But he is not ready to quit his day job. He buys 50 canvasses for $10 each and oil paints for $250. The oils are used up painting the 50 canvasses, making his per canvas cost is $15.

He decides to do summer art fairs to show off his works and sell them. He buys a display tent (a 5 year property) for $1500. He enters 10 different weekend shows that charge $100 entrance fee each. He is pleasantly surprised that he averages one sale per show. His total sales are $5000 for 10 canvasses. His mileage is 3,000 miles. (Assume a standard mileage rate of $0.50/mile)

His meal expenses are $840 and his lodging comes to $960.

Gross Revenue……$5000

…Initial Inventory……………$0

…Supplies & Materials ……$750

…Ending Inventory……… ($600)

…Cost of Goods Sold………$150

Income…………….$4850


Category I (Schedule A- Mortgage, RE Taxes…)

…none


Category 2 (Schedule A, 2% Misc)

…Entry fees ……….$1000

…Meals……..………..420

…Lodging…….……...960

…Mileage…………$1500


Category 3 (Schedule A, 2% Misc)

…Depreciation of Tent……$150

Net Income………………$820


Any critiques of my analysis?

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Does 183 trump 263A(h).....an creative artist has an exemption from the 263A rules.

EasternPA (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
D&T,

I'd say yes. Since 263A excludes both hobby income and artists, this activity doubly exempted. The problem posed is sort of mute on UNICAP point, since the other expenses above are either related to direct costs or marketing and sales.

So let's bring the point home: the painter rented a studio for $1200 to paint his 50 canvasses.

A. Does he have to allocate on a per canvass basis of $24.

B. Or can he deduct the full amount?

C. Or can he choose which ever method works best for him?

In this case, is he better taking of increasing the cost basis of his canvasses to $39 ($15 direct + $24 indirect)? Which means he can deduct an additional $240 for the 10 canvasses sold.

If he deducts the full rental, he can only get $970 ($820 + $150 loss of tent depreciation).

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Micasa will make more as a 'plein air' artist

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Going back, the entry fees are akin to advertising or management fees in a vacation home scenario, something that is directly deductible from income. To be fair, I would find it difficult to categorize this person's activity as a hobby, since it sounds like he meets many of the precepts on that famous IRS list, and to rent a studio is even more of an indication of being serious about his work. But he does need a sales tax license!!!

I can relate Dan's example, or the 'I make jewelry' types more readily than someone who can see art. My late wife had a BFA in oil painting, and I don't think it was a hobby.

I had a client who did drawings and paintings of lockers for the police and fire personnel. Inside the locker was the uniform with proper badge number and the like. She rarely turned a profit, but his losses were minimal, less than $2,000 yet gross receipts were in the 20,000 range per year. She advertised in magazines, so tried to build business. My thought was that aside from the gross volume, this could be a hobby except for one matter. It was organized as a S Corp. Can a S Corp be a hobby?

EasternPA (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
While the IRS is more generous if the hobby/biz is profitable, they are less generous when faced with losses. It's a thin line. Often attitude: I'll make a business of this or bust.

But if one is doing it part-time, real life zaps one with priorities: job, family, community commitments... Those good intentions melt away. How many doctors and accountants have high-end cameras gathering dust in their closets.

In the case of Micasa, he has no BFA, just a desire. He'd not pass the expertise point. So he's looking to build a reputation to justify his 'expetise' as an artist.

Kevin, up north you can paint till the oils gel, then it's back to the studio, ooops, I mean the garage.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
I have a number of artists, sculptors etc as clients and never had IRS win the 183 argument, but many of these artists also teach art in colleges, or high school. Once the agent, a newbie, converted the expenses to Form 2106 since most art professors must keep active in their field as a condition of keeping their job, and as you note, making art part time is not a way to make money.

One man, a sculptor, used to spend a large percentage of his 30-40K salary on his avocation [his girlfriend basically supported him] and often gross next to nothing. He exhibited often, had great reviews, and was well known in both Philly and New York, but on setting up the date for the appointment, the agent launched himself into a 183 attack mode. "You'd better be able to prove this business can turn a profit" or words like that. Between the date of that call and the audit date, the client won a Pew Fellowship for 50K a year for two years! Case closed.

As I always note, google Stella Waitzkin today, then find her tax court case from 15+ years ago.

But I would have a very difficult time accepting a doctor or lawyer as a budding photographer, and I have little patience for those with sidelines like jewelry, knitting etc no matter their income.

Davidcpa (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
D&T - I just finished a similar situation. My client has a "normal" job and then the business. His business involves participating in hunting/fishing/outdoorsman type competitions. He will also go to trade shows, store openings for Bass Pro/Cabela type stores, endorse products, etc.. His income is from cash & in-kind sponsorships, speaking/personal appearances & prize money. When he does well, he gets bonuses and the sponsors will directly pay for more & more travel. He had done fairly well for 8-9 years and would have net income of $15k-25k/year. Not bad for a guy whose normal job pays him $50K.

Well in 2006 & 2007, he did not win any tournaments. Did not qualify for the really big ones. Sponsor did not pay bonuses or travel. He had a net loss of $15k-$20k in each year.

IRS decides to question those years as a business. I tried to explain that those were off years. Just look at 200/2003/2004/2005. And while we have not yet filed 2008, it will show a substantial profit in 2008 and again in 2009.

But he wanted to hear none of it. He started talking about opening prior years to move the business expenses to Schedule A....although in the good years that would have really benefited my client. Even mentions negligence & preparer penalties.

Well, in 2008 the guy won several competitions. Lots of cash, ATV's, truck, rods, reels, guns, etc. Sponsors paid for almost all travel and gave him bonuses. His total expenses were less than $2000. Net income was in excess of $100k. 2009 has been even better.

So, showed the agent the 2008 & YTD 2009 income statement and said...."you are absolutely correct...it is a hobby. Let's move the income (especially 2008 & 2009) to line 21, expenses to Sch A and no SE tax." Similar to your case, he changed his tune rather quickly.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
Great story, David!

The best thing about the Pew Grant is that it has been ruled non-taxable for SE tax, PA Income Tax & City of Philadelphia taxes! Line 21, but it was income from sculpting.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.