Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Murphy's Law: A New Twist

xsedrinam

xsedrinam

macrumors 601
Original poster
Oct 21, 2004
4,345
1
So Matt Murphy has a decision to make. Catching Barry Bond's record breaking 756th home run has put him in a precarious position. If he sells the ball at an estimated $500,000-600,000, based on current value, he'll owe the IRS one third ~$210,000 in taxes. If he elects to keep the ball, he's still liable for taxes based on the estimated value of the ball. What should Murphy do? What would you do? Maybe he'd been better off to have thrown it back.
 

Attachments

  • p1.matt.murphy.jpg
    p1.matt.murphy.jpg
    38.8 KB · Views: 110
Should've sold it since Bonds hit 757 the day after. Besides, it'll be the final HR that Bonds hits that'll be worth more. From what I understand he and his friends were on their way to Australia when on a whim they decided to attend the game.

Edit: I would've given the ball back to Barry.
 
What's confusing about it? Guy snags the homerun that broke the tie with Hank Aaron for the career homerun record. Now he's in a conundrum as to what he should do with it.
 
Gymnut said:
Should've sold it since Bonds hit 757 the day after. Besides, it'll be the final HR that Bonds hits that'll be worth more. From what I understand he and his friends were on their way to Australia when on a whim they decided to attend the game.

Edit: I would've given the ball back to Barry.
Click to expand...


If I caught a bonds HR ball I would hire that guy that Tonya Harding hired to knock out his knees. Then I'll have his final HR ball. :D
 
^ I think most Americans (me included) assume that everyone knows about the record, because it has been touted as the greatest record in all of sports in U.S. broadcasts, despite the fact that baseball isn't that big worldwide.

And he should sell the ball, I wouldn't want to keep a tainted piece of history :p
 
Abstract said:
Does the fact that not everyone here is American or follow American baseball confuse you?


Anyway, I'd sell the ball now. Get rid of it. That, or leave the country and sell it outside of the US. Would he still owe taxes then?
Click to expand...

To be fair the OP pretty much spelt it out with crayons and to top it off provided a link to Sports Illustrated's website. :rolleyes:
 
solvs said:
Google and Wiki are your friends:

Murphy's Law
Click to expand...

Google and wiki are not friends they are evil truth distorting, cyber criminals :p

We call it Sod's Law here

Why should he be taxed for being lucky enough for catching something valuable that is now his possesion? it's not a taxable income is it??? i find that really weird, i'd be on the next plane out of the country sell it and come back with the cash

Mind you, seeing as the only other place baseball has any sort of following is japan so it's probably not valuable in another country.
 
steamboat26 said:
^ I think most Americans (me included) assume that everyone knows about the record, because it has been touted as the greatest record in all of sports in U.S. broadcasts, despite the fact that baseball isn't that big worldwide.

And he should sell the ball, I wouldn't want to keep a tainted piece of history :p
Click to expand...
haha. i doubt that 90-95% of australians would not know what 'murphey's law' is.
solvs said:
Then why did you click on it?
Click to expand...

i thought it was one of those computer laws, such as the law how cpu power doubles every however long it is.
 
That's crappy. I understand being taxed if he sold it, (which sucks in its own right but that's how it goes) but to tax him just to KEEP it? WTF?
 
DoFoT9 said:
it could have been some wierd other law thats out. theres so many that we dont know about. i was intrigued.
Click to expand...

Ok. I'm just messing with you. I love it when someone posts something, and then someone else posts about how they don't know what they're talking about or don't want to hear anymore about it.

I always ask why they bothered to click on the link, let alone post, and I usually don't get a response.
 
solvs said:
Ok. I'm just messing with you. I love it when someone posts something, and then someone else posts about how they don't know what they're talking about or don't want to hear anymore about it.

I always ask why they bothered to click on the link, let alone post, and I usually don't get a response.
Click to expand...

hahaha yea i was like....."sugar is he being mean or just kidding around??"
at least i replied, must mean im something special :p
i literally had no idea tho lol, now i know.
i think youll find im not like ordinary people.
thats why i dont have many friends :p
kidding
 
He should sell it, pay the tax, and buy a brand new ball with the money that remains.
 
To clarify -

1) The plan is to sell the ball and keep 51% of the net, 49% goes to his friend with whom he was at the game

2) The reason that he might be required to pay taxes is that he has taken investment ownership of the ball and that money can be viewed as income of the fair market value of the ball. He could sell the ball at that FMV price and wouldn't owe taxes on it. But, if the ball sold for more or less, he would owe taxes or could take a write off against the difference. No different than getting stocks or whatnot. Think of it this way - when you buy stocks, you already paid taxes on your income. When you sell the stock, you either take a capital gain or capital loss (this last week it was more loss than gain;)). Same thing here. What really would irk people is that throwing it back wouldn't be a qualifying tax deduction - he could still owe taxes.

The problem is that memorabilia isn't always sold, so it is possible that it would hold no investment value to the owner - if it was held as a reminder of the game (think of autographs that kids get at ballgames), there is essentially no value difference between that ball and any other that could fly out of the park. But, as he plans to sell this ball, this is irrelevant.

While the this is fun and exciting, remember that logic is occasionally used by the IRS (see Mark McGwire, #62).
 
Sell the ball.

So what about the taxes. Stop looking at the $200K tax and look at the $400K gain. If he didn't catch the ball, gain and taxes = $0.

Plus perhaps he can claim the cost of the game ticket against the tax!
 
Flynnstone said:
Sell the ball.

So what about the taxes. Stop looking at the $200K tax and look at the $400K gain. If he didn't catch the ball, gain and taxes = $0.

Plus perhaps he can claim the cost of the game ticket against the tax!
Click to expand...

The frustrating part though, is that he probably doesn't have a choice. He couldn't keep it on his mantle if he wanted to, since there's a chance it would cost him $210k to do so.

That being said, I wouldn't be upset with $400k. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back