58 comments

[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 115 ms ] thread
More accurately: winner chose lump sum, which was then taxed

That the government can tax their own money they give away is disgusting

Lump sum is probably the right call but it’s kind of false advertising to call it 1.3b but that’s not actually the net present value
Agreed, still free money
No, it's appropriate to call it 1.3 billion since that is the amount she would have gotten paid if she had elected to receive it installments.
The installments would have been subject to tax, too.
would they have been a lower overall tax %?
doubtful - each payment'd still put you in that upper bracket for "winnings"
I wonder if they could move to a no income tax state and get back some %
ok say I owe you 100$ I’ll pay you 100$ and I’ll pay you in installments for 100 years. That’s actually way less than 100 in value that I’ll pay you.
Tbf this is a state lottery (with pooling across states) being taxed by the federal government, right? Different entities.
But it's not "fair" - when government hands-out funds, they should be tax exempt

I also have a problem with government employees (who, by definition, are paid with tax dollars) being taxed on their pay

It's beyond ridiculous!

Why isn't it fair for the government to tax income?

Creating an exception for income received from the government would lead to all sorts of crazy fraud, and would necessitate long and complex codes for determining what is an exempt government agency and what isn't.

For example: is a community college a government agency for purposes of "tax exempt" income? What about a utility district? What about private-public partnerships?

> Why isn't it fair for the government to tax income?

Why is it fair for any entity to demand your personal property at gunpoint?

>lead to all sorts of crazy fraud, and would necessitate long and complex codes for determining what is an exempt government agency and what isn't

Let me introduce you to the US tax code ...

> Why isn't it fair for the government to tax income?

Until the passage of the 16th amendment, it wasn't.

Only if it's more efficient than the alternative.

It may be that having special cases and extra complexity has a higher overhead than just getting everyone to use the same path, even if that looks like "more" work from a distance.

I dread to think how this may work if an individual has multiple income streams, some possibly for the public sector (so would be tax exempt), and how that may affect the total used to calculate tax brackets and similar. And the politics of defining that - no doubt whatever rules you use for this they'll be some situations that people consider unfair.

It also makes it easier to compare income against the private sector, as each dollar income means exactly the same if both then go through the same tax system.

The US tax system is already designed to put as much burden on the individual as possible (for whatever reason - possibly mostly lobbying from the industry that has grown up around this complexity) - more complexity feels pretty bad to me.

Want to talk about disgusting: The governments hold the lotteries! More disgusting: People actually play them!
Gambling in general is a loser's game, but the games people TYPICALLY play in gambling isn't generational wealth.

What makes the lottery slightly different is "YOLO": yeah on average it is not a good play, but someone presumably wins, and for their one shot in life it gets transformed with generational wealth.

That is: go big or go home.

... well, except that most lottery winners lose it all, but that's a different issue.

To emphasize, I'm not advocating playing the lottery, just that odds don't really account for the biological reality of only getting one life to live.

Some quick back of the envelope calculations suggests that powerball becomes positive estimated value at about 650mil for jackpot or above (though if we want to discount for taxes, lump sum etc, high than that) but obviously that EV is massively weighted towards one very very very rare event
I've got no qualms with folks who can afford it playing the big jackpots from time to time, especially because the money coming in is typically earmarked for positive social programs.
>because the money coming in is typically earmarked for positive social programs

Ostensibly it's "earmarked" ... but by supposed earmarking, legislatures think they can otherwise defund said "positive social programs" from the general budget

What do you mean by "positive value"? Isn't any winnings positive, regardless how taxed?
Positive expected value.

You start negative because you have to pay for the ticket

Right - the $1.28B is a figment. Really the number is like $750M for lump sum. Getting $433M after a $750M windfall seems reasonable with what I know about tax rates.
Since I learned of them in my childhood, it always seemed obvious that lotteries are a government-approved scam, but I never imagined they were a scam on so many levels.
Yeah scam on scam on scam is like the inception of scams
Rare for a scam to lay out the odds pretty readily for you. Governments run lotteries exactly because you can trust them. Bob pulling numbers out of a hat for his local lottery will probably be tempted to cheat.
And then they front-load all of the impossibly, stupidly, comedically overoptimistic numbers in the marketing (eg. pre-tax winnings), and have a fine print from which you can barely determine the odds of success (and if you're capable of that you most likely aren't participating either way), and then the whole game is designed so that you feel like you have some sort of superstitious influence over whether you win...

Please, let's not pretend this isn't about extracting money from people who are poor at decision-making.

I understand the odds and play the lottery. I don't think I'm a bad decision maker. I'm sure you waste far more than $2/week on what others might view as a waste.
If it were any one other than the government doing it the lottery would be illegal.

And in fact it is illegal for anyone other than the government to run a lottery.

in a sarcastic tone I like the lottery, it is a tax on the stupid.

I want to be pedantic about this, because words matter.

No one is forcing anyone to buy a lottery ticket.

No one's being threatened with jail time if they don't buy a lottery ticket.

No one's being dragged into a legal process where they are presumed guilty until proven innocent if they don't buy a lottery ticket.

There are not tens of thousands of enforcers out there looking for people who didn't buy their lottery ticket.

There are no hotlines to anonymously report those who didn't buy a lottery ticket.

Politicians do not regularly buy voter approval by messing around at the margins with lottery ticket payouts.

There is no organized industry - hundreds of thousands of people - lobbying Congress to keep the purchase of lottery tickets as complicated as possible so they can keep their jobs.

You may not like the lottery. You may never play the lottery. But don't mistake it for a tax. That makes it too easy to forget the sheer tonnage of force, coercion and political strongarming a real tax involves.

People regularly call gambling and especially the lottery a tax on the stupid because the odds are so bad it’s like paying a tax for being stupid enough to play. It’s just a saying people have, you don’t have to be pedantic, it’s not literal.

The OPs point is that it’s gross the government participates in taking money from people through the lottery, many of whom likely have a gambling addiction.

Would you rather have organized crime run the lotteries and reap the profits? That was the de facto situation before state lotteries.
I would bet the payout and the odds would be better...

What is organized crime but another alternate government(small g government), no no wait, hear me out. You pay them and they make sure your business operates without trouble, exactly the same set of services the government offers, organized crime is illegal because the government(big G government) hates the competition.

Joking aside, organized crime sucks for the same reason that all dictatorships suck.

The other point to note, where private owned gambling exist(nevada etc) it regulates(self and government oversight) to make about the same profit margin as the insurance industry. The margin on the lottery is unethical.

Congrats to the winner!
The IRS
The IRS collects taxes enacted by Congress. We all benefit (very broadly speaking) from taxes collected via government programs and public spending; the winner has $400M they didn’t have before. No one lost except those who didn’t win the lotto.
The people that bought a 10$ lotto ticket paid 6$ of taxes.

How is that not a robbery?

Makes me wonder if paying taxes should be a lottery too. One out of every million will get 1000x their payed taxes back.
Taxes are theft... Nobody pays them voluntarily, and if you don't, well you go to jail.
Think of taxes as your SaaS (society as a service) bill. Don't want to pay the costs? Then don't reap the benefits.
(comment deleted)
> Don't want to pay the costs? Then don't reap the benefits.

That's literally not an option.

It is just don’t purchase property use roads or make an income. You think the homeless pay anything other than sales tax?
For two reasons:

* the vast majority of your seized money is transferred to the 1%

* if it it weren’t, you can’t opt out anyway

I pay my taxes voluntarily.

I can walk around outside and see the officers patrolling the streets because my tax dollars paid for them to be there, and the thousands of cars driving on those streets daily because my tax dollars paid for the maintenance on those roads.

I can look up in the sky and see blue, and I can see the mountains dozens (or in some cases, hundreds) of miles away, because local air quality agencies have been cracking down on polluters. I can swim in the ocean because multiple agencies have been regulating polluters, and cleaning the water, so that it is safe for human activity.

I can visit 3 national parks and dozens of state parks within a 4 hour drive, all paid for by my tax dollars.

And, oddly enough, in all my years as a tax professional, I've only seen one person go to jail for not paying taxes: Wesley Snipes. Everyone else just pays the penalties and fines and moves on with their lives.

Interestingly, TSMC spends about the same amount on their yearly equipment upgrades as the federal government on all roads in the U.S.

Really puts things in perspective…

I have to say I can't really imagine what difference it would make to me if I got $433M instead of $1.28B or vice versa. I just find it unimaginable either way.
> can't really imagine what difference it would make

With $1.28B, you'd be able to commission a superyacht and crew and operate it for years. With $433M, you'd really need another $200M just to launch, let alone crew and operate.

Thanks, that puts it in a bit more perspective. Luckily I have never enjoyed being at sea!
433.7M dollars is still pretty good. Depending on age, it might also be the smart way to do it. A guy in his 20s winning the lottery and a guy in his mid 60s is two very different use cases for money.
I posted this comment a few days ago, but it is worth repeating: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32278994

In Canada, the Canada Revenue Agency considers gambling winnings to be windfalls that are not subject tax, so any winners receive the full value of the advertised prizes [0]. [0]

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/technic...

A possible reason as to why this is also the case is that most/all of the lotteries are run by the provinces themselves, so you could think of them removing the taxable amount continuously in an accumulative fashion as the total pot grows and then only advertising what the winner would take home.

(comment deleted)
National lotteries worldwide are really nothing but a punitive scam to tax the poor by selling them on an illusionary idea of a shortcut to their materialistic dreams. Also I bought $60 worth of Megamillions tickets for the draw.
I think it's quite telling (and depressing) that the vast majority of the comments on this are "taxes are bad" and "wow, they took away that much money?" instead of "he now has enough money to live three lifetimes in luxury and still have millions left over, he's set for life and more".

Our societies are obsessed with having as much as possible, instead of with having as much as needed, which are two very different concepts. Economists have a concept of a utility curve; most people, it seems, ignore that concept.

Well, the winner can now waste $1.18M each day and will be left with nothing in 365 days :)