To all,
When I use to teach tax law to young agents one of the first things I would have them do is pay attention to the little words like:
and, or, but etc. that connect sections of a specific law.

If you have been following the discussion involving the issuance of W2-G's for poker tournaments you are aware of one of the arguements against issuing them is the infamous
300 to 1 rule.

Now if you read what I have said you will see that the 300 to 1 rule NEVER comes into play for wagering pools. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO if the goverment finds that a poker tournament is a wagering pool the issue will have to be decided in a court of law. The following is a portion of IRC Section 3402(q). Look at the word - OR - between paragraphs. here it is:

"(C) SWEEPSTAKES, WAGERING POOLS, CERTAIN PARIMUTUEL POOLS, JAI ALAI, AND LOTTERIES

Proceeds of more than $5,000 from--

(i) a wager placed in a sweepstakes, wagering pool, or

lottery (other than a wager described in subparagraph (B)),

or

(ii) a wagering transaction in a parimutuel pool with respect to horse races, dog races, or jai alai if the amount of such proceeds is at least 300 times as large as the amount wagered."

You see 300 to 1 does NOT come into play for wagering pools. Why casinos hang on to this arguement is beyond me. They are doing a tremendous dis-service to poker players but more importantly they are hurting their entity. Enough said - stick the fork - I'm done with it!

Best, Mr."P"