Why not sell on 'e-bay'? - Dumpshock Forums

Why not sell on 'e-bay'?

FrankTrollman View Member Profile	Mar 3 2006, 09:49 PM Post #26
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665	Dude, whatever. This is Adiamor's yellow-gold diamond ring page. Notice how everything costs $200+ and This is Ebay's diamond rings section. Notice how everything costs less than $40? Yeah, if you can get 20% of the value of jewelry on Ebay, you're doing fantastic. Go ahead and let people sell shit on ebay, the turnover just isn't good. -Frank

chazuli View Member Profile	Mar 4 2006, 03:05 PM Post #27
Target Group: Members Posts: 28 Joined: 18-January 06 Member No.: 8,178	Thanks for the suggestions everyone. Part of the difficulty is that one of the characters is a Face with a mondo skill in negotiation. The rules as written don't really allow a negotiator to negotiate a better price. You can use negotiation to get things more quickly, or to find things to buy more readily but thats about it. Within the context of the rules, (barring an external factor like a supply shortage), the absolute best price you can get selling something is 30% whether you have 7 ranks in Negotiate or none. That doesn't seem right somehow. I think its from this that the players are wondering why can't they do the selling instead of going through a middleman. It's interesting that jewelry doesn't fare well on ebay. What do you think of this idea as a house rule: use the rules to find an item in reverse. So, the Face has to make an extended Negotiate Test (10) with an interval based on the value of the item. (In the instance of the jewelry which is worth more than 10,000, 1 week). For that they're able to find a buyer who will offer them 40% of the price listed (modified as per the chart, so if the item is used -10%, if it's stolen an additional -10% and a chance of getting busted). Finally, each success beyond the threshold will allow them to get 1% more, but no more than an additional 10%. Additionally, they have to have a SIN or face a detection test against their fake SIN with the whole deal going sour if that fails. Obviously, by using their SIN it means there's a trail leading to them, which might be undesirable, but that's a risk they can assume if they wish. Do you think that would be unbalancing? Best, Chazuli

Cain

Mar 5 2006, 09:22 AM

Post #28

Grand Master of Run-Fu

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,840
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Tir Tairngire
Member No.: 178

QUOTE

So 5% and another 40ish % for income tax and costs for setting up the offshore blind drop account applied to say 75% of sale...and that is really optimistic. So you are looking at somewhere near 40% of appraisal in cash that while it is now nice and legal which has it's upsides, is also linked to a real SIN so you need to be careful what you spend it on. So the choices are 30% now in underworld cash/goods or perhaps 40%-45% later in In The System cash. That is a real head scratcher, and likely comes down to their particular situation. Which seems fair, no?

No, it doesn't. It seems like screwing over the players for being creative.

If you use an offshore bank account, you're pretty much null and void on taxes. And in the BBB, setting up offshore accounts is much subsumed under lifestyles. There's no reason to make life more difficult for the players, if they've done their homework and have covered themselves well.

If the extra cash is going to be a problem, you can always bleed it out of the game in a lot of different ways. Having them do a lot of personal missions is always good: they spend money on lifestyles, ammo, and wear-and-tear on gear, but aren't earning any income, since everything is done for personal reasons instead of cash. A clever GM can always work it into the storylines, instead of tossing massive obstacles in their path.

QUOTE

What do you think of this idea as a house rule: use the rules to find an item in reverse. So, the Face has to make an extended Negotiate Test (10) with an interval based on the value of the item. (In the instance of the jewelry which is worth more than 10,000, 1 week). For that they're able to find a buyer who will offer them 40% of the price listed (modified as per the chart, so if the item is used -10%, if it's stolen an additional -10% and a chance of getting busted). Finally, each success beyond the threshold will allow them to get 1% more, but no more than an additional 10%.

That might work. I'd make sure that you add extra dice for appropriate things, such as knowing the right people, extra homework on their part, and so on. You can also penalize them for things like: small market, oddity of item, etc.

tisoz

Mar 5 2006, 08:01 PM

Post #29

Free Spirit

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,950
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920

QUOTE (chazuli)

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. Part of the difficulty is that one of the characters is a Face with a mondo skill in negotiation. The rules as written don't really allow a negotiator to negotiate a better price.

You can use negotiation to get things more quickly, or to find things to buy more readily but thats about it. Within the context of the rules, (barring an external factor like a supply shortage), the absolute best price you can get selling something is 30% whether you have 7 ranks in Negotiate or none.

We always played the price started at 30% and got negotiated from there.

Brahm

Mar 5 2006, 08:20 PM

Post #30

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 5 2006, 04:22 AM)

No, it doesn't. It seems like screwing over the players for being creative.

:?
I must say you have a very bizzare concept of screwing over players. Their thinking has been rewarded by:
1) Allowing them to choose the standard way or another way.
2) Possibility of clean money.
3) Possibility of between 30% to 50% more money than the GM originally projected.

News flash. Not all creative ideas pan out. They just don't. I tend to also evaluate the idea on its merit and soundness. In this case it works out that it indeed is a reward, if the results happen to suit their needs. Modest income tax and handling fees are fairly natural barriers to their plan.

QUOTE

If you use an offshore bank account, you're pretty much null and void on taxes.

That sir is called tax evasion. They could indeed try that, but now we are talking smuggling. Cyberpirates ahoy!

QUOTE

If the extra cash is going to be a problem, you can always bleed it out of the game in a lot of different ways. Having them do a lot of personal missions is always good: they spend money on lifestyles, ammo, and wear-and-tear on gear, but aren't earning any income, since everything is done for personal reasons instead of cash. A clever GM can always work it into the storylines, instead of tossing massive obstacles in their path.

Oh, I see. So how exactly is tossing personal problems their way and drying up paying work not screwing them in your books? :wobble:

hyzmarca View Member Profile	Mar 5 2006, 10:42 PM Post #31
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456	I suspect "blood diamonds" has a whole new meaning post awakening and that their value to those who would be interested is porportional to the number of people who you can prove were killed over them. Anyway, if you want to get big bucks on Ebay you have too sell something rare like an Insect Shaman or a booger that looks like Elvis and/or Jesus.

Cain

Mar 6 2006, 04:24 PM

Post #32

Grand Master of Run-Fu

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,840
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Tir Tairngire
Member No.: 178

QUOTE

I must say you have a very bizzare concept of screwing over players.

If they've covered themselves well, they get rewarded. Tossing additional barriers in their path is screwing them over.

QUOTE

In this case it works out that it indeed is a reward, if the results happen to suit their needs. Modest income tax and handling fees are fairly natural barriers to their plan.

Barriers which they've overcome. Next!

QUOTE

That sir is called tax evasion. They could indeed try that, but now we are talking smuggling. Cyberpirates ahoy!

Just by virtue of being SINless, they're forced into using offshore bank accounts and the like. Many shadowrunners break multiple laws by existing. Heck, since when does a SINless shadowrunner pay taxes on his shadowrunning income?

Sending the IRS after the players for business as usual, especially when they've been careful about things, is definitely screwing them over.

QUOTE

So how exactly is tossing personal problems their way and drying up paying work not screwing them in your books?

You don't "dry up" paying work. Instead, you offer them missions that have a personal, rather than monentary reward. A longtime faithful contact suddently gets into trouble, and can't afford to pay the players to bail him out, for example. Or give them a chance to have revenge on the Johnson who double-crossed them early in their careers. The important thing is that players can say "no" to a scenario, and the problems offer personal rewards. There's lots of things a good GM can do along these lines.

Brahm

Mar 6 2006, 07:23 PM

Post #33

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 6 2006, 11:24 AM)

Barriers which they've overcome. Next!
....
Just by virtue of being SINless, they're forced into using offshore bank accounts and the like. Many shadowrunners break multiple laws by existing. Heck, since when does a SINless shadowrunner pay taxes on his shadowrunning income?

I think you need to go back and check this discussion. You see to have forgotten the whole underpinning is that there are teammembers with a valid, real SIN that were going to try sell on a legal market.

If it is on a legal market the government is going to be watching and they'll be showing up to take their cut. They just do that sort of thing when there is lots of money at stake. Good chance of sliding a few flee market priced sales past them. But a 6 figure sale? Very doubtful.

Cain

Mar 7 2006, 09:04 AM

Post #34

Grand Master of Run-Fu

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,840
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Tir Tairngire
Member No.: 178

QUOTE

If it is on a legal market the government is going to be watching and they'll be showing up to take their cut. They just do that sort of thing when there is lots of money at stake. Good chance of sliding a few flee market priced sales past them. But a 6 figure sale? Very doubtful.

It happens all the time in the real world. If they're selling legally, then most governments will apply a sales tax or VAT to the buyer, not the seller. In fact, I've yet to see a tax that applies to the seller. Business taxes, yes, but that assumes that the team is using a front business, instead of selling directly on Christies.

Dranem View Member Profile	Mar 7 2006, 10:08 AM Post #35
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,000 Joined: 17-November 05 From: Halifax, Canada Member No.: 7,975	I don't see too much problem in legally selling salvage. It's a centuries old trade, and - as you mentioned - two of your runners are legit. Facts that may affect the total profit from the run: - Salvage operating costs. Maintaining your salvage gear is more than lifestyle cost. - Lifestyle cost for each team member associated with the time it may require to find appropriate buyers - Paying contacts/fixers/fence/etc to locate buyers or advertising to sell your goods and act as your middleman/contact for time/place of sale. Cost may vary depending how how much legwork the face character wants to do themselves, and what contacts they may have to acheive their goal. - Runners may need to register their salvage operation with guilds/governement to benefit for higher payback - Cost of secure storage of goods till buyers are found Over all you're probably looking at a max of +/- 50-60% of the retail price of goods. The team will never acheive full retail price of goods unless they actually plan to open a retail business (which will incur addtional costs for storefront, business registration, tax numbers, etc) to sell them through. All depends on how much you want to mico-manage this process.

Oracle

Mar 7 2006, 10:36 AM

Post #36

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 934
Joined: 26-August 05
From: Earth - Europe - AGS - Norddeutscher Bund - Hannover
Member No.: 7,624

QUOTE (Cain)

If they're selling legally, then most governments will apply a sales tax or VAT to the buyer, not the seller.

I don't know how that works in the US. But in Germany retailers have to pay a tax of 16% on their turnover. The retailer of course then passes this tax on to the customers as VAT.

tisoz

Mar 7 2006, 11:33 AM

Post #37

Free Spirit

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,950
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920

QUOTE (Cain)

QUOTE

If it is on a legal market the government is going to be watching and they'll be showing up to take their cut. They just do that sort of thing when there is lots of money at stake. Good chance of sliding a few flee market priced sales past them. But a 6 figure sale? Very doubtful.

It happens all the time in the real world. If they're selling legally, then most governments will apply a sales tax or VAT to the buyer, not the seller. In fact, I've yet to see a tax that applies to the seller. Business taxes, yes, but that assumes that the team is using a front business, instead of selling directly on Christies.

Looking at it your way, the VAT to the seller is what they sold it for minus the retrieval cost. Otherwise called a profit for a business, and usually taxed.

IAmMarauder

Mar 7 2006, 12:10 PM

Post #38

Target

Group: Members
Posts: 28
Joined: 28-May 02
Member No.: 2,792

QUOTE (Cain)

[QUOTE][QUOTE]What do you think of this idea as a house rule: use the rules to find an item in reverse. So, the Face has to make an extended Negotiate Test (10) with an interval based on the value of the item. (In the instance of the jewelry which is worth more than 10,000, 1 week). For that they're able to find a buyer who will offer them 40% of the price listed (modified as per the chart, so if the item is used -10%, if it's stolen an additional -10% and a chance of getting busted). Finally, each success beyond the threshold will allow them to get 1% more, but no more than an additional 10%. [/QUOTE]
That might work. I'd make sure that you add extra dice for appropriate things, such as knowing the right people, extra homework on their part, and so on. You can also penalize them for things like: small market, oddity of item, etc.

I was going to recommend something similar; using an extended test using Negotiations, and having a threshold based on various factors (legality, rarity, etc as mentioned by Cain). Set a base Value of 10%, and a base time of 6 months (or something similar). For every success over threshold, they can add 5% (or 10% if you want) to value or drop the time by 2 weeks (or a month). This then puts the choice back on the players; Quick Cash, or Good Cash...

I have no problem with the player getting lucky and getting 60-70% of an items value, as long as the is the negative side of waiting 6 months to get the money. They still have to pay the rent, upkeep equipment, etc in the intervening time. And if something goes sour with the deal, it might liven things up :) I would only use it as a one-off, something to put aside for that time there is a bit of extra play time to fill. I would "reward" them with the item back, with a few extras to fill out the lost value; eg, maybe they find another item (or two) identical to one they were selling, or they managed to stumble across something of equal value. This might even give you another hook (why was he collecting a set of ordinary looking rings?).

Brahm

Mar 7 2006, 02:58 PM

Post #39

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (Cain)

QUOTE

If it is on a legal market the government is going to be watching and they'll be showing up to take their cut. They just do that sort of thing when there is lots of money at stake. Good chance of sliding a few flee market priced sales past them. But a 6 figure sale? Very doubtful.

It happens all the time in the real world. If they're selling legally, then most governments will apply a sales tax or VAT to the buyer, not the seller. In fact, I've yet to see a tax that applies to the seller. Business taxes, yes, but that assumes that the team is using a front business, instead of selling directly on Christies.

What, you don't think you'd have to pay income tax on that as long as you aren't a business? Now I see the disjoint, you don't understand what is taxable income. :rotfl:

tisoz

Mar 7 2006, 05:50 PM

Post #40

Free Spirit

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,950
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920

QUOTE (Brahm)

What, you don't think you'd have to pay income tax on that as long as you aren't a business? Now I see the disjoint, you don't understand what is taxable income. :rotfl:

Every time I sell something for a profit, I deduct all the recent (unclaimed) times I've sold something similar for a loss. Kind of like the lottery, save all those losing tickets to offset the income. Funny how the government likes to tax windfall income, but won't let people claim associated losses until they offset such a gain.

Brahm

Mar 7 2006, 06:01 PM

Post #41

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (tisoz @ Mar 7 2006, 12:50 PM)

QUOTE (Brahm @ Mar 7 2006, 08:58 AM)

What, you don't think you'd have to pay income tax on that as long as you aren't a business? Now I see the disjoint, you don't understand what is taxable income. :rotfl:

Every time I sell something for a profit, I deduct all the recent (unclaimed) times I've sold something similar for a loss. Kind of like the lottery, save all those losing tickets to offset the income. Funny how the government likes to tax windfall income, but won't let people claim associated losses until they offset such a gain.

You mean like IRS agents hanging around the casinos and lotteries taking a cut from the big winners? I'm curious if anyone has ever even tried to declare losing lottery tickets as a loss on their income tax forms? :P

I'm not sure how it works in the US, but in Canada a while back the courts ruled that you could declare a loss as long as their was a resonable expectation of a profit. I doubt gambling would count there. Of course Canada Customs and Revenue doesn't tax gambling and lottery winnings. They really haven't had the need to because they've got their fingers so far in the backside of the gambling in the country they get their money that way.

tisoz

Mar 7 2006, 06:59 PM

Post #42

Free Spirit

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,950
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920

QUOTE (Brahm)

I'm curious if anyone has ever even tried to declare losing lottery tickets as a loss on their income tax forms? :P

It wasn't on the tax form because they withold the taxes when you claim the prize. But there was a news story a few years ago where a winner took in all kinds of losing tickets to offset the taxes. Would have worked, the lottery commission said, if he had actually purchased them in trying to win. His problem was buying known losing tickets for pennies on the dollar after winning just to present to offset the tax.

Brahm

Mar 7 2006, 07:02 PM

Post #43

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (tisoz @ Mar 7 2006, 01:59 PM)

QUOTE (Brahm @ Mar 7 2006, 12:01 PM)

I'm curious if anyone has ever even tried to declare losing lottery tickets as a loss on their income tax forms? :P

It wasn't on the tax form because they withold the taxes when you claim the prize. But there was a news story a few years ago where a winner took in all kinds of losing tickets to offset the taxes. Would have worked, the lottery commission said, if he had actually purchased them in trying to win. His problem was buying known losing tickets for pennies on the dollar after winning just to present to offset the tax.

That's kinda funny. :)

I mean you bought the tickets but don't win. Trying to deduct that from your other income. So declaring a net loss on your lottery 'business'.

tisoz

Mar 7 2006, 07:19 PM

Post #44

Free Spirit

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,950
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920

QUOTE

I mean you bought the tickets but don't win. Trying to deduct that from your other income. So declaring a net loss on your lottery 'business'.

I've heard it tried and denied. Over and over. Losing is entertainment, winning is profit.

I have heard of professional gamblers, full time guys that have no other source of income, getting gambling loss deductions, even having a net loss for the year.

Brahm

Mar 7 2006, 07:22 PM

Post #45

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (tisoz)

I have heard of professional gamblers, full time guys that have no other source of income, getting gambling loss deductions, even having a net loss for the year.

Not having any other significant income would certainly help make the case that it was truely a business.

Cain

Mar 8 2006, 09:58 AM

Post #46

Grand Master of Run-Fu

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,840
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Tir Tairngire
Member No.: 178

QUOTE (Brahm)

What, you don't think you'd have to pay income tax on that as long as you aren't a business?

You're one of the people who find the EZ forms to be too hard, aren't you?

First of all, let me educate you on the concept of a "sales tax". The tax is added to the purchase price of an item, and given to the government. So, the seller doesn't pay any of it out of his pocket.

Second, not all places have income tax. If they're selling in a locale that doesn't have an income tax-- like Seattle-- then they won't be paying an income tax, will they? A complicated enough overseas transaction can also do the same thing, especially if the PC's have safehouses in anoother country, like the NAN. They can then be eligible for the overseas tax credit, which currently is $80,000. Since that's more than what they'd gain indivdually on the sale, they're scot-free.

Third, if you've ever read the tax laws on capital gains, you'd realize that the net gain is calculated based on the Fair Market Value at the time it was obtained. If the PC's claim the jewelry was an inheritance or a gift, they can have it appraised at 350,000, sell it for 349,999, and claim a tax rebate. Don't believe me? Look it up at the IRS site and see for yourself. It's not taxable if you're smart about it, which the players apparently are.

So, next time, try doing a little bit of research on tax laws before you go shooting yourself in the foot, mmkay?

Brahm

Mar 8 2006, 07:18 PM

Post #47

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,635
Joined: 27-November 05
Member No.: 8,006

QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 8 2006, 04:58 AM)

QUOTE (Brahm)

What, you don't think you'd have to pay income tax on that as long as you aren't a business?

You're one of the people who find the EZ forms to be too hard, aren't you?

First of all, let me educate you on the concept of a "sales tax". The tax is added to the purchase price of an item, and given to the government. So, the seller doesn't pay any of it out of his pocket.

FMV

Well I didn't include a sales tax in my figure. However I believe the point that others were raising about the sales tax is that the buyer paying it would tend to drive down the price they are willing to pay to the seller. But thanks for the education. ;)

QUOTE

Second, not all places have income tax. If they're selling in a locale that doesn't have an income tax-- like Seattle-- then they won't be paying an income tax, will they? A complicated enough overseas transaction can also do the same thing, especially if the PC's have safehouses in anoother country, like the NAN. They can then be eligible for the overseas tax credit, which currently is $80,000. Since that's more than what they'd gain indivdually on the sale, they're scot-free.

Tax credit? You mean this one?

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/intern...d=97060,00.html

You should read that through. The gist of it is that it gives you relief from your US taxes for having paid your taxes somewhere else. But you had to have paid somewhere else!

EDIT If the runners are not LA residents then something like this is likely to apply. http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/intern...d=96414,00.html

Now onto transfering wealth.

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/intern...=154207,00.html

Usually transfers out are not free. Although historically there have been loopholes most of these have closed in the US (but not before most of the really rich old-money families got their stash out of Dodge). Right now the schemes for transfering wealth to outside the country generally involve giving the wealth away, and if the intent is to transfer to outside the country but retain the wealth that is infact tax evasion.

Even then the transfer could require settling of the taxes due first. Which brings us to your biggested misconception.

QUOTE

Third, if you've ever read the tax laws on capital gains, you'd realize that the net gain is calculated based on the Fair Market Value at the time it was obtained. If the PC's claim the jewelry was an inheritance or a gift, they can have it appraised at 350,000, sell it for 349,999, and claim a tax rebate. Don't believe me? Look it up at the IRS site and see for yourself.

Indeed you would be assessed capital gains based on the difference between the FMV of when you aquired the jewels and when they were sold. Of course given that the jewels are unlikely to appreciate a significant amount between aquiring them and selling them this is likely near nil. Which is a bad thing because if anything capital gains rates are going to be lower than income rates.

However they are still on the tax hook for income of the difference between their [provable]expenses and FMV as that effectively the definition of their income from the salvaging.

Declaring your expenses does raise some other issues, as someone that tries to stay low profile starts giving a detailed reporting of their operation to The Man. ;)

QUOTE

So, next time, try doing a little bit of research on tax laws before you go shooting yourself in the foot, mmkay?

:rotfl: :rotfl: :dead:

Bira View Member Profile	Mar 9 2006, 03:11 AM Post #48
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 254 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,768	If their salvage operation was legal in the first place, I'd allow the characters to sell the loot at close to market value, provided they are willing to wait a few months for the money to come in. If they want to pocket the money earlier, they'll get less, but that's because they're rushing the legal sale, not selling it on the black market. The way I see it, the group already paid the "cost" of that money by going through the "adventure" of salvaging the jewels in the first place. And, in the context of the game, stuff such as government taxes and fees for auction houses and whatnot are nothing more than niggling details. I'd say taxes are part of your lifestyle costs if you have a SIN, and the auction/escrow fees are part of what reduces the profit from selling the jewels to less than 350.000. Getting 75% of that (or 50% + negotiation successes) in six months sounds perfectly reasonable.

Brahm View Member Profile	Mar 9 2006, 05:14 AM Post #49
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006	Niggling details? You mean like players niggling on the detail of selling it legally instead of on the blackmarket? Niggles go both ways. :D

Cain

Mar 9 2006, 06:09 AM

Post #50

Grand Master of Run-Fu

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,840
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Tir Tairngire
Member No.: 178

QUOTE

You should read that through. The gist of it is that it gives you relief from your US taxes for having paid your taxes somewhere else. But you had to have paid somewhere else!

I have, but apparently you haven't. If the money has been taxed via a sales tax, then it counts against the limit.

QUOTE

Indeed you would be assessed capital gains based on the difference between the FMV of when you aquired the jewels and when they were sold. Of course given that the jewels are unlikely to appreciate a significant amount between aquiring them and selling them this is likely near nil. Which is a bad thing because if anything capital gains rates are going to be lower than income rates.

However they are still on the tax hook for income of the difference between their [provable]expenses and FMV as that effectively the definition of their income from the salvaging.

Not really. It works something like this:
1. One PC claims the jewelry as salvage. This does not count as income, since he hasn't sold it or gained anything from it yet.
2. The PC "gives" it to the rest of the party, who then has it appraised. Since it was obtained as a gift, the FMV is automatically equal to the appraised price. First PC is off the hook tax-wise, and the rest of the team still hasn't earned any money.
3. The team has the jewelry sold for less than the appraised value. They can now claim a tax break, and still take in a lot of money.
4. Each member of the team converts a portion of their take into certified cred, which is then given to the first PC. Certified cred is untraceable, and so it never shows up on your taxes unless you declare it.

So, if you've actually read the tax codes, or anything pertinent to the discussion, it's perfectly clear and easy.

« Next Oldest · Shadowrun · Next Newest »