Bringing an old thread back to life - tomorrow it will be a year since the post that precedes this one - the topic of tax liability on significant game-used baseballs came to mind again.
Am I correct in presuming that the fan who caught Derek Jeter's 3000th hit was immediately subject to taxes based on the presumed value of the ball in the secondary market? Even if he wanted to keep it, he'd still have to pay taxes on it.
I can't help but wonder... if Jeter's 3000th hit was an actual hit and not a home run - that is, the ball had stayed on the field, and was immediately put aside for Jeter - would Jeter have been subject to the same tax liability?
__________________
The GIF of me making the gesture seen 'round the world has been viewed over 444 million times! 
If only I had one cent-- make it half a cent-- for each view... 😭
|