|
Post by John Winston Lennon O'Boogie on Jul 17, 2014 20:32:34 GMT -5
that is why deli got had. he didnt give the irs their cut I wonder if everyone else got their cut.. I guess he was the fall guy..
|
|
141fe
Dr. Of Diamonds
Posts: 104
|
Post by 141fe on Jul 17, 2014 20:34:21 GMT -5
that is why deli got had. he didnt give the irs their cut He was not "had" as PR indicated. He sold stock at a profit which is considered income, not capital gains. Different tax rate AND breaking the law. How does one get caught doing this totally offline? Perhaps he is yet another mule for the sting? 141fe
|
|
|
Post by portrush on Jul 17, 2014 21:13:59 GMT -5
that is why deli got had. he didnt give the irs their cut He was not "had" as PR indicated. He sold stock at a profit which is considered income, not capital gains. Different tax rate AND breaking the law. How does one get caught doing this totally offline? Perhaps he is yet another mule for the sting? 141fe Just a point of clarification--I am not, did not, suggest he was "had." To the contrary, as made obvious by the various recounts of the court documents surrounding this...the law is the law and he broke it. pr
|
|
141fe
Dr. Of Diamonds
Posts: 104
|
Post by 141fe on Jul 17, 2014 22:27:36 GMT -5
He was not "had" as PR indicated. He sold stock at a profit which is considered income, not capital gains. Different tax rate AND breaking the law. How does one get caught doing this totally offline? Perhaps he is yet another mule for the sting? 141fe Just a point of clarification--I am not, did not, suggest he was "had." To the contrary, as made obvious by the various recounts of the court documents surrounding this...the law is the law and he broke it. pr Port, Read my post, please... Ok? It says "he was NOT had as PR indicated". I didn't quote you, I simply indicated your position that Deli broke the law. This exemplifies the increasing bias developing on this board. Your bias blinded you of my support for YOU. No response necessary. (Shakes head like Single). 141fe
|
|
|
Post by portrush on Jul 18, 2014 8:52:43 GMT -5
Just a point of clarification--I am not, did not, suggest he was "had." To the contrary, as made obvious by the various recounts of the court documents surrounding this...the law is the law and he broke it. pr Port, Read my post, please... Ok? It says "he was NOT had as PR indicated". I didn't quote you, I simply indicated your position that Deli broke the law. This exemplifies the increasing bias developing on this board. Your bias blinded you of my support for YOU. No response necessary. (Shakes head like Single). 141fe Oh the power of a [missing] comma! Haha! Thank you 141. I appreciate your response. Truly. Thank you. pr
|
|