Secondhand, not from a storefront.

Depends on the type of jewelry. Whether it lots of pedestrian pieces or a few highend ones. Because if it is pedestrian you are pretty much guaranteed to be selling to a middleman anyway that is looking to buy low and sell at something closer to market. No way he'll pay a premium on something that means lots of small sales for him. That puts you way back down the scale.

There is a lot of stuff that has changed in 65 years. Like Dragons being elected President. There is absolutely no reason why a special law, tax or otherwise, couldn't be brought into place because of the LA destruction. Or a corp got a salvage contract. Or a criminal org has declared it their turf and actively discourages salvage operations or sells kneecap insurance to salvage operations.

Even now would you not be paying income taxes? Runners normally don't report their income , but these guys are going through legal channels. The Taxman cometh!

This can easily be reflected in negotiation rolls. Potential buys call them with an offer and they with an offer. Maybe they talk them up, maybe they don't. However the will from start to finish be getting calls from bottom feeder traders that are trying to lowball them and get a deal. Also if it is lots of smaller pieces they will likely have to break up into lot sales themselves.

Income tax isn't the GM screwing the player, it is the government screwing the PC in the same old song and dance we both know so well.

The big boys staking a claim on a chunck of known huge wealth isn't the GM screwing the players. It is SR.

Using unexpected loot and unexpected PC decisions as a plot hook isn't the GM screwing the player. It is the GM taking advantage of an opportunity. If the GM used the hook as an excuse to just take an abirtary amount without playing it all out and giving the PCs a real chance of even gaining from the adventure that isn't using it as a plot hook.

Death and taxes....and thieves

Heavy handed is a Firewatch platoon or a GD silently dropping out of the sky while they sleep. Setting up a opposition that the PCs can deal with using reasonably priced and straightforward tactics is fair game, and frankly a great change of pace "run". Especially if they have an opportunity to maybe even turn the tables and corpse loot some extra gear or pick up a contact by impressing the J that sent the guys to rob them. They want to put up a target that they would take a swipe at themselves? They aren't the only criminals in town!

EDIT

I guess I wasn't as clear about that as I should have been. Yes, do not bring in the theives just to take cash away. If the PCs hold the day let them have that extra cash. It is only a doubling of what you budgeted for, and it is getting divided 7 ways. That should'nt be enough to break your game.

This is also a great opportunity to create an advisary that the players can really loath, if they don't have it already. Emotionally engaging the players towards a goal that will give them a sense of accomplishment when they reach it. The tricky part is doing that with out pulling out the deus hammer. I suggest the best way to go about it is set up an opposition that has a 50/50 or slightly higher chance defeat the team, but will tends to do so in a none lethal manner and even if they fail are likely to survive. So either way the PCs and the NPC(s) are still around, and it was a memorable experience either way. It also doesn't cheat the players, and hopefully they don't feel directly cheated, because victory was there to be won fair and square. Their PCs though of course will feel either cheated or vidicated, and in a way the players are likely to experience themselves.

Players engaged!

They are publicly saying we got us some jewels we think are worth 1/3 of million . That pretty much covers both off there. Now if they take extra precautions to mitigate this, then they are indeed covered. Until the taxman comes.

If they're using an online auction house, they're going to be well-protected the whole way through; EBay, for example, doesn't require that you tell all potential buyers your name and home address. You're allowed to use a User ID that protects you somewhat. Combine that with a blind email drop, a certified offshore account, and having the jewels held by the auction house, the players aren't going to be in any trouble at all. The auction house might be robbed, but their insurance will pay the PC's off.

There are many problems with it, the most basic being that I don't think most insurance companies cover most of the cost of jewelry (unless you bought special insurance just for it), the second being that insurance companies don't sell their services to the SINless.

Two of the runners have a SIN.

Ret-conning income tax? I better get hold of my accountant. The bastard apparently has been getting me to cut huge cheques to the government for no apparent reason!

The insanity of LA may or may not be covered by the Maritime Law. What is the precidence of a enormous city dropping below sea level and that is expected to pop up again in a couple of years?

EDIT More importantly how does this interact with whatever new laws allow extra-territorality that apparently can now occur underwater? Oceanic Arcologies have extra-territorality right?

Probably not, but then again, the cut isn't going to be that painful, either. Auction houses like Christies of London will likely only charge 5% or so. Also note that you can use a blind email with them, nowadays; in 2070 an offshore numbered account shouldn't be a problem, either.

Best of all, Christies has insurance. If the jewelry is stolen, then Christies's insurance will reimburse the team for something approaching their full value.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?).

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.

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?

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.

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'.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.