Gambling Losses Allowed To 90% of Winnings (?)

[BobKamman]

From the Senate version of the Brigitte Bardot Bill introduced at midnight Friday:

"(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 165 is amended by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
‘‘(d) WAGERING LOSSES.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of losses from wagering transactions, the amount allowed as a deduction for any taxable year—
‘‘(A) shall be equal to 90 percent of the amount of such losses during such taxable year, and
‘‘(B) shall be allowed only to the extent of the gains from such transactions during such taxable year."

Don't ask me what this means.  If a client has $1,000 of winnings and $1,000 of losses, (1)(A) limits the deduction to $900.  But if the client has $2,000 of losses, (1)(A) limits the deduction to $1,800, but (1)(B) limits it to $1,000.

Ask me at midnight and maybe I will have figured it out.  

[strong silence]

It is far past midnight so what is the answer?  This vague language with unknown meanings and disturbing consequences is an example of what Sen. Tillis has warned about.

IIRC, the 2017 TCJA text that was brought to vote was still incomplete; it had handwritten notes added to the it!

[BobKamman]

LAS VEGAS (KSNV) — A Nevada congresswoman says she's working to fix the reconciliation bill's changes to the tax code when it comes to gambling losses, which have drawn the ire of several professional players.

U.S. Rep. Dina Titus said the budget proposal contains a provision that harms professional gamblers by limiting loss deductions. "I'm working on a legislative fix that fairly treats gaming losses in the tax code," Titus wrote to X.

The U.S. Senate passed a version of what President Donald Trump dubbed the "Big, Beautiful Bill" that would limit deductions related to gambling winnings to 90% of losses. Under that change, if a player were to report winnings of $100,000 and losses of $100,000, the player would still owe taxes on $10,000.

Several professional poker players have slammed the provisions, including Beyond the Game founder Phil Galfond and FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver. Russell Fox, a tax professional with a Las Vegas-based firm and another poker pro, wrote in a blog post that the bill is "ugly towards gambling."

Most amateur gamblers would be okay, Fox said, but professionals who report wins and losses could suffer. If the Senate version of the bill becomes law, they'll have to keep a gambling log to ensure their actual winnings are accurately reported. "Second, this would be another big negative towards gambling and would definitely hurt tourism in areas like Nevada," Fox wrote.

[BobKamman]

Senator Schumer managed to get the title of this legislation removed from the bill before it was sent to the House because it violated Senate rules. Intuit doesn’t like Senator Schumer, so it continues to use the nonexistent title.  Intuit doesn't like political comments either, so if I'm not around the next 30 days, I nominate @IRonMaN to remind the faithful that if you give the liars enough rope, they will hang themselves.  

[IRonMaN]

I did a like kind exchange that wasn’t too much alike.  I swapped someone my warehouse full of unused torches and pitchforks for a warehouse full of rope.  I’ll try my best to help out.