# Tax deductible expenses



## markrmau (6 November 2004)

Hi, Does anyone have any guidelines for tax deductible expenses if share trading were your sole source of income (I tried looking at ATO web site but didn't find much). 

Are internet expenses, computer hardware purchases deductible? (Of course your answer will not be construed as tax advice.)

Thanks, Mark.


----------



## tech/a (6 November 2004)

Mark Im no accountant.

but pretty well anything that can be seen as an aid to creating an income.

Software,Hardware,Books,datafeeds,seminars,Brokerage fees,an office or room in the house.Any losses.% of Car (to see your broker daily).

I claim most of these (well my accountant does) and Im not trading fulltime but it does derive an income and as such is taxed.So Ill claim what I can legitimately.

tech


----------



## GreatPig (6 November 2004)

Mark,

I'm not an accountant either, but note that some things are not deductible but rather depreciable (like computer hardware and software). They are considered assets rather than expenses.

Also be aware that what's deductible, and how gains and losses are treated, depends on how the ATO classes you - either as an investor or a professional trader. While number of trades per year and the fact it's your only income are significant, they're not the only criteria.

See the attached ATO documents from their legal database.

Cheers,
GP


----------



## RichKid (6 November 2004)

I have no idea if this is true as I don't have any expertise in tax but because costs associated with attending AGM's are deductible I was told by one guy who runs investment seminars that they often have them (the seminars) in New Zealand and people claim air fares (or part of it?) because it's related to deriving income or is educational or something like that. People must be doing this for overseas AGM's too?? Sounds a bit far fetched but it it's true I might just plan my next holiday around it....


----------



## Mofra (6 November 2004)

markrmau,

It could be worth meeting with an accountant with a list of questions for an hour to discuss your own arrangements, whether to is more tax-effective to trade under a company structure, etc. The meeting could be be a deduction itself. "If education sounds expensive, try ignorance".

Good luck, whatever you find out will certainly be of interest to more than a few here at a guess.


----------



## GreatPig (6 November 2004)

RichKid,

In theory you are only supposed to claim travel expenses for that sort of thing on a pro-rata basis for the time spent on business matters. So if you went to an AGM for one day and then spent four days at the beach, you can only really claim about 20% of the costs.

It can get tricky though, like if you go somewhere on business but stay with family or friends. This might be deemed a combination of business and private affairs, even though if you stayed in a hotel instead it would be all business. Likewise if you went to check up on your investment properties at Airlie Beach and decided to stay the night on Hamilton Island. Again, even though you have to stay somewhere, it might be deemed that the stint on Hamilton Island was more holiday than business, so you might not be able to claim those costs as expenses (or perhaps not the component above the cost of a normal hotel).

You'd really need to check with an accountant or tax adviser before relying on claiming anything like this.

GP


----------



## roofus (11 November 2004)

well, where do I start??  Im a full time day trader with a turnover of $25m plus per year and am currently in a legal battle with the ATO in regards to CGT. anyone here interested?


----------



## GreatPig (11 November 2004)

roofus said:
			
		

> anyone here interested?



Interested in what - joining you in your battle or starting their own?

What don't the ATO agree with? If you are a full time day trader, I wouldn't have thought you'd have any CGT at all as it would all be classed as normal income.

Cheers,
GP


----------



## roofus (11 November 2004)

income vs CGT is all determined by what that ATO declare you to be, ie. a business=income, or, a trader=CGT. However if you analyze the tax act and do as much research into case law as I have, you will realise that essentially trading (or gambling) on the stock market should not attract any taxation as reciepts gained from any form of gambling are not taxable, unless you are in that profession so to speak. ( eg.a horse trainer betting on his own horse would attract tax, but a general member of the public is merely indulging in a pastime, therefore they are not a business,hence no taxation)


----------



## markrmau (11 November 2004)

Thanks for all the tips posted in this discussion (yes I will sit down with an accountant, but just wanted to get a general feel so I would know what questions to ask).

Also, if your a day trader turning over 25M I assume you don't keep much stock for 1 year. Then it doesn't matter if it CGT or income. Taxed at same amount. Right?

Cheers,Mark.


----------



## GreatPig (11 November 2004)

roofus said:
			
		

> trading (or gambling) on the stock market should not attract any taxation as reciepts gained from any form of gambling are not taxable



I think you might be hard pressed to convince the ATO that share trading is gambling. Gambling is not supposed to have any element of skill, although some forms do have some. And if you succeeded, that would immediately bar all those mega-rich super funds from buying shares. I think the stock market might then collapse .

And as for not being considered a business, those two attachments I posted up-thread have some info on that. While number of transactions, turnover, and sole employment are significant components, there are other things they talk about there.

Cheers,
GP


----------



## GreatPig (11 November 2004)

markrmau said:
			
		

> I assume you don't keep much stock for 1 year. Then it doesn't matter if it CGT or income. Taxed at same amount. Right?



As I understand it, that's correct - same as if the trading was done in a company structure - but there's more to it than just the amount of tax.

When it's not classed as a business, income and capital gains (or losses) are treated separately. Capital losses cannot be offset by income and vice-versa.

So for example if you have a pile of income from dividends and other sources, but make a capital loss on trades, you end up having to pay tax on the income and just carrying the capital loss forward. You can't offset them against each other.

GP


----------



## roofus (11 November 2004)

markrmau- no I dont keep a stock for more than 24hrs,period.
GreatPig -skill doesnt come into the question of whether something is a gamble or not, can check any dictionary you like, and to confirm those definitions, there are a multitude of decisions in The Supreme Court, aswell as The Federal Court that back them up.

This crusade that I have embarked on is for the benefit of all "investors" that have been taxed "illegally". Just think about it for a moment, wouldnt you or anyone else for that matter prefer to relinquish the allowable "deductables"
(ie. losses,brokerage,fees,etc) for a tax free environment?

You cant be serious in saying that there is no risk involved with share trading? If that were the case all charts would simply go straight up, and anything that you "purchased" today would be worth more tommorrow. Risk is a fundamental part of whether something is considered a gamble or not.


----------



## GreatPig (11 November 2004)

roofus said:
			
		

> skill doesnt come into the question of whether something is a gamble or not



That depends on who's defining it. The NSW Liquor Administration Board, which controls gaming in NSW, uses that as one of the criteria in determining if something is gambling or not. There's an amusement machine around called "Skill Tester" specifically to highlight that it does have skill (not that you'd notice ) and thus is not a gambling machine that needs a gaming licence.

However, I don't know exactly what definition the ATO uses for tax purposes.




> You cant be serious in saying that there is no risk involved with share trading?



I didn't say that. I didn't mention risk at all. All I was implying is that there's at least some skill involved in share trading, and thus it would not likely be considered gambling.

And good luck with your crusade. If you're taking on the tax office, I hope you have deep pockets .

Cheers,
GP


----------



## roofus (11 November 2004)

GreatPig-GAMBLE- to play games of chance for money,to take risk for some advantage, to risk in gambling ie. bet, an undertaking involving risk. Websters.


----------



## baglimit (11 November 2004)

oh my dear god - so much info - so much of it wrong. most of you need to consult a tax expert if you consider true the things you have stated, and are yet to be audited. realistic claims for pc depreciation, loan interest, net fees, real assoc costs etc are claimable, whether hobby or pro trader. if hobby (not primary source of income) you need to be as careful as any normal wage earner in what you claim. if a pro, a whole new world opens up, and i'm sorry to say the CGT info here was oh so wrong. i'm not going to go into the complexities of it all now, but lets just say if any of you get audited soon, pray they are sympathetic - AND LENIENT - but i doubt it.

why not one of you open up a forum on tax, and we'll see what questions & answers can be made. but please, only answer it IF YOU KNOW IT TO BE TRUE, NOT WHAT YA MATE RECKONED, OR EVEN YA DODGY ACCOUNTANT.
be careful out the folk - it is dangerous.


----------



## GreatPig (11 November 2004)

Roofus,

Dictionary definitions are irrelevant. The only important thing in your case is how the ATO defines it for tax purposes.

GP


----------



## GreatPig (11 November 2004)

baglimit said:
			
		

> i'm sorry to say the CGT info here was oh so wrong. i'm not going to go into the complexities of it all now



I doubt anyone wants the complexities, but a summary of your view of how it really is would probably be appreciated.




> you need to consult a tax expert



Absolutely.

GP


----------



## roofus (11 November 2004)

baglimit- you sound like you know what your talking about, I wonder what your take is on CGT or taxation in general for that matter when it comes to share trading? Do you believe that share trading should attract tax when gambling doesnt? There is  a direct correlation between gambling and share trading. I have over 3 dozen cases from The Supreme Court, aswell as cases from The Federal Court in which either the ATO has challenged individuals, or vice versa, and have succeded. The ATO change their defence to make it suit themselves (more tax).
You only have to pick up the paper and read any article in the finance section and the writer frequently refers to risk,gamble,bet, etc.


----------



## baglimit (11 November 2004)

roofus - read my post (4) in CGT this pm. on gambling. and as i said in regards to other matters, pose a question and lets see what answers you get. but people, pls only answer IF YOU KNOW IT TO BE TRUE. keep your wannabes to another forum.


----------



## phoenixrising (11 November 2004)

The ATO is drafting legislation on CFD's

http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find=((spread)%20and%20(betting))&docid=dtr/tr2004d17/nat/ato/00001

Hope that link works

Basically talks about horse racing type betting and futures comparison

Cheers


----------



## roofus (12 November 2004)

eys your link works. People follwing this thread should read it as its another example of the tax office making the rules up as they go.


----------



## RichKid (12 November 2004)

roofus said:
			
		

> GreatPig-GAMBLE- to play games of chance for money,to take risk for some advantage, to risk in gambling ie. bet, an undertaking involving risk. Websters.




There's a small section in another thread (I started it but no one else is interested) on Spread Betting- it has a brief blurb on 'skill' and gambling
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=537

Looks like the ATO is still ahead on that one as I haven't heard of any updates where IG Markets have been found to be correct.

I'd be interested to have the citations for the higher level court decisions if you have them roofus. BTW, are you a qualified lawyer or accountant? Don't be offended if you aren't just thought you may be litigating yourself otherwise.


----------



## roofus (12 November 2004)

RichKid- i read your post on spread betting and although there is a slight connectin , it really falls under a contract category, vs a straight out gamble..
citations- how many do you want??


----------



## RichKid (23 November 2004)

roofus said:
			
		

> citations- how many do you want??




Just the major ones, say the top six 'must reads'.
Thanks!


----------



## mvander (28 December 2004)

You can claim any expenses incurred that are directly related to earning assessable income. In some cases you may need to apportion expenses that have a private component. Eg computer expenses will usually have some private use.

Items to claim include, brokerage, calls to your broker, internet access for share trading ( may need to apportion), Tax advice related your share trading.

The ato has some specific rulings relating to deductions for share traders, when share trading is not the primary source of income. It may pay to review these.

My advice is to contact a specialist tax accountant and get yourself set up from day one. It will save you a lot of tax, will get you a few deductions and it is deductible.


----------



## RichKid (4 February 2005)

Hey Roofus,

Are you the person featured in the Personal Investor, January 2005 edition re tax classification of traders (ex-soldier, now multimillionaire 'gambler' fighting the tax office?).

The issues raised seem to be similar to what Roofus has discussed here, the article says the tax office won that battle.

BTW, do you have the citations to the cases you said you'd send me (see posts above)? Just asked out of curiosity so we can all have a look, you can post it on this thread. 

Thanks!


----------



## roofus (4 February 2005)

richkid- yes that is me. I cant see anywhere where it says that the tax office won that battle?anyway.
If you want something to read, here you go
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gamble"&docid=JUD/33ATR1190/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="aat case 4847"&docid=JUD/20ATR3182/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="AAT CASE 6286"&docid=JUD/21ATR3728/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="AAT Case 6297"&docid=JUD/21ATR3747/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="share trading"&docid=AID/AID2001745/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="babka"&docid=JUD/20ATR1251/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="babka"&docid=JUD/20ATR1570/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="carbolic"&docid=JUD/*1892*2QBD484/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="CDS10036"&docid=ato/cds10036


----------



## roofus (4 February 2005)

cont.
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?locid='JUD/37ATR167'
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gamble"&docid=JUD/*1925*2KB753/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gamble"&docid=JUD/12ATR796/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?locid='JUD/20ATR922'
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?locid='JUD/18ATR693'
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?locid='JUD/9ATR873'
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gambling"&docid=JUD/*1925*2KB37/00002
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="IT 2228"&docid=ITR/IT2228/NAT/ATO/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?docid=ITR/IT2655/NAT/ATO/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="babka"&docid=JUD/*1999*AATA1016/00002
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gamble"&docid=JUD/*1991*2AC548/00003
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gamble"&docid=JUD/49ATR1184/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="41 ATR 1042"&docid=JUD/42ATR504/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="TR 92/3"&docid=TXR/TR923/NAT/ATO/00001
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/print.... (betting))&docid=dtr/tr2004d17/nat/ato/00001
- http://www.directly2u.co.uk/carbolic/case.htm


----------



## roofus (4 February 2005)

cont.
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1999/34.html
- http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v2n2/kee222.html
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/d...999/22.html?query=^+carbolic+smoke+ball#fnB10
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/high_ct/140clr533.html?query=~+bidencope
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/HCA/1982/8.html?query=~+ordinary+concept
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/HCA/1972/31.html?query=~+ordinary+concepts
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/82clr372.html
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="hobby"&docid=CLR/CR200417/NAT/ATO/00001
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/aat/unrep4103.html?query=^+21+atr+3747
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s124.390.html
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/ato/itr/it2228.html
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/d...=~+martin+v+ federal+commissioner+of+taxation
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/high_ct/120clr487.html?query=~+mcclelland
- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="21 ATR 3747"&docid=AID/AID2001746/00001#HIT5
-


----------



## roofus (4 February 2005)

- http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?find="gambling"&docid=PAC/19360027/26AJ
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/d..._ct/unrep3725.html?query=^+gambling+addiction
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/81clr188.html
- http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/d...M86/2.html?query=^+capital+gains+tax+gambling


yell out when your finished, there's a couple hundred more...


----------



## RichKid (4 February 2005)

Hi Roofus,

So it is you! Congratulations on being a successful (VERY successful, judging by the article) day trader- a rare species.

Also my humble apologies for saying the ATO won, I've looked at the article again and it looks like they withdrew their earlier ruling. Hope you win the next round, and the next .....

It's good that you are able to afford to take on the ATO as most people don't have the resources. (BTW, I'm not suggesting people shouldn't pay tax, but that it should be fair). Let's hope this helps to improve the clarity of our tax laws. 

Thanks too for the references, I'll have trawl through them, let me know if there are one or two that are more important than the rest.


----------



## roofus (4 February 2005)

richkid- there isn't really any that stand out, you need to put them all together in the scheme of things. It is a true labyrinth once you start, its nearly like someone (ATO) designed it that way on purpose. But overall if you read the original submission that I sent the people that asked  (cant remember if you got one,) it summarises things.

On that article, John did a good job but I was miss quoted in a few places, the $8million turnover is wrong, its more like 30. And I wasn't a battalion commander, I was 4th Battalion Commando. i think his shorthand let him down...


----------



## roofus (10 February 2005)

richkid- hows the reading going?


----------



## RichKid (11 February 2005)

Very slow! so much stuff, I'm no tax lawyer so it's taking time but it's good material, must have taken you years to get it all together. I'll keep you posted. Thanks again.


----------



## roofus (12 February 2005)

richkid-the above are only a selection of the cases Ive used, as I said there is about 100 odd more. It took me about 9 months to compile. Out of the 150 odd cases that total my defence, Ive had to read probably 6,7 times that amount to actually get the above citations, alot of the other 500 were really not of any use to me..
Anyway, I had my day in court yesterday, and the hard part now is waiting for a result. It will be atleast 2 weeks away. 

In the meantime, does anyone that has followed this thread want to play Judge for a bit and give a decision on want the outcome will be?? Just for fun.


----------



## doctorj (12 February 2005)

Should the results be in your favour, it may serve as some benefit to many of us.

Good luck!


----------



## RichKid (15 February 2005)

roofus said:
			
		

> richkid-the above are only a selection of the cases Ive used, as I said there is about 100 odd more. It took me about 9 months to compile. Out of the 150 odd cases that total my defence, Ive had to read probably 6,7 times that amount to actually get the above citations, alot of the other 500 were really not of any use to me..
> Anyway, I had my day in court yesterday, and the hard part now is waiting for a result. It will be atleast 2 weeks away.
> 
> In the meantime, does anyone that has followed this thread want to play Judge for a bit and give a decision on want the outcome will be?? Just for fun.




As for a decision it depends on the evidence you've presented about your personal activities, ie how you trade, details of your trades etc. That'll have to be matched to the case law and prinicple, no decision without both those elements being compared. 

I hope you do well as we do deal with randomness in the markets, did you use those theories to support your argument that what you are doing is betting on a mere chance? No matter how organised you are, if the markets are random you are just betting, as in roulette. you may win in this court case but they may restrict the decision to your case and not apply it as a precedent so we may not all benefit.

Keep us posted about the outcome, I suppose you may be able to appeal if it's not in your favour. Good luck and happy trading! 

PS I don't think I'll ever get through all the links you've sent!


----------



## markrmau (15 February 2005)

Yes, please let us know how you get on.

The whole reason I asked this question is a little involved:

I was completing a PhD so not getting large taxable income. Partner was working. Partner gets pregnent with our 2nd child and gets morning sickness so bad that has to stop working. Partner had only earned $8k last year. Our total taxable income was in the reduction stage for family tax A.

So, if you know your family tax law, my partner was taxed: 16% for money over $6000 (threshold) 30% FTA, 30%FTB -> total 76% marginal tax rate (>$6k), 60% (<$6k).

Markrmau thinks that is rediculous and so gets partner to take out $75k margin loan, interest pre-paid.

So it is actually my partner who is calling the shots in these trades, and she is a very good trader it seems. So good that we may want to say that she is gambling...


----------



## roofus (18 February 2005)

richkid- I wont go into the actual evidence that I presented, (it took over 2 hrs)  but you are on one of the paths. 
markrmau- ah, that magic word gambling, I think we have something in common. I will let everyone know the outcome, as Im sure everyone will benefit if it is positive.


----------



## Warren Buffet II (18 February 2005)

Hi roofus,

I guess you are in some way gambling but I can think of one way I consider you are not:

1) if you buy a company after they announce its results and you receive dividends that is not gambling as that is a fact you will receive the didvs if you keep the shares after the XD day.

It is a very fine line between investment and gambling.

Regards,


----------



## Warren Buffet II (18 February 2005)

Hi roofus,

Check the next website, it has a very interesting discussion about the differences between investing and gambling.

http://www.tomments.com/tomments3a.htm

regards,

WBII


----------



## Warren Buffet II (18 February 2005)

Hi Roofus,

For those who do not want to read the whole thing, this is the definition that the author concluded it is the correct:

Investing - "Any activity in which money is put at risk for the purpose of making a profit, and which is characterized by some or most of the following (in approximately descending order of importance): sufficient research has been conducted; the odds are favorable; the behavior is risk-averse; a systematic approach is being taken; emotions such as greed and fear play no role; the activity is ongoing and done as part of a long-term plan; the activity is not motivated solely by entertainment or compulsion; ownership of something tangible is involved; a net positive economic effect results." 

Gambling - "Any activity in which money is put at risk for the purpose of making a profit, and which is characterized by some or most of the following (in approximately descending order of importance): little or no research has been conducted; the odds are unfavorable; the behavior is risk-seeking; an unsystematic approach is being taken; emotions such as greed and fear play a role; the activity is a discrete event or series of discrete events not done as part of a long-term plan; the activity is significantly motivated by entertainment or compulsion; ownership of something tangible is not involved; no net economic effect results." (These definitions have been added to our InvestorWords.com glossary, replacing the old definitions, which were admittedly no better than the ones offered by other dictionaries.) 

Regards,

WBII


----------



## roofus (18 February 2005)

WB2- Gday, If i only hold stock(s) for 24 hrs, Im a bit confused how I would obtain a dividend? Anyway, even if I did hold the stock long enough to get the dividend, its still a gamble as the price of the stock might fall greater than what the div. was. 
I think Ive read that quote before, it might have been from a book called The Luck Business


----------



## Warren Buffet II (18 February 2005)

roofus said:
			
		

> WB2- Gday, If i only hold stock(s) for 24 hrs, Im a bit confused how I would obtain a dividend? Anyway, even if I did hold the stock long enough to get the dividend, its still a gamble as the price of the stock might fall greater than what the div. was.
> I think Ive read that quote before, it might have been from a book called The Luck Business




Hi Roofus,

You can get the divds in 24 hours buying one day before the XD day (when the company is trading CD) and selling on the XD day. 

It doesn't matter if you loose or make a profit but you are sure you are getting that divds money.

Regards,

WBII


----------



## roofus (18 February 2005)

WB2-sorry my mistake,ur right. Ive got 5 conversations going at once


----------



## RichKid (18 February 2005)

Any chance of an electronic copy of the transcript (I assume your counsel would have got one by now)? You can private msg me about it if you prefer. Or just a reference to the decision, but I have a feeling it'll take a few months for the result to be released.


----------



## RichKid (18 March 2005)

Got more links Roofus?? Post em here if you do please.


----------



## markrmau (19 March 2005)

It has been raining over the last few days and the punters don't think bgf will go so well on a muddy track. However I think we are in for some clear weather and so I stuck a few more thousand on a horse called bgfo.

How can anyone say this is different from gambling?

Roofus, in the judge decision, was there any differentiation between blue chips and speculative stocks?


----------



## tech/a (19 March 2005)

If you trade like its a gamble and punt like its a gamble well thats what it will be.

I trade and make good $$s Im not gambling not even remotely!

If I take a short term trade however THEN Im gambling------Why because I have no idea of my expectancy and I dont have a methodology which has a proen long term profitability.
Ive taken a short term punt for a possible gain.

If my trading is structured with positive expectancy like any business plan showing cashflow and assets/liabilities and costs of business/expected return then thats not a gamble.

Could possibly be described as a quantified risk,I guess.

Mark YOU ARE gambling.(from what I can see).Doing pretty well I see in some.

Ask a Bookie if he thinks hes gambling!!


----------



## markrmau (19 March 2005)

Absolutely! I have done no back testing on my trading method so I have no idea if it is profitible in the long term. In fact, I will readily concede that I would probably be broke if this wasn't one of the best bull markets aus has seen (ever?).  I am basically gambling. 

I also note that if I took a net loss, I would not be able to offset it from my normal taxable income.


----------



## roofus (19 March 2005)

Morning all ill post shortly, just off to the races at the moment, email me for results if you like. 
Mark- yes the judge in the middle of the hearing disputed against the Commisioner and stated that he (the judge) believed that short term trading could be defined as gambling, its not all cut and dry. Be back soon.


----------



## roofus (19 March 2005)

Back again, got a 1st and a couple of placings.
Mark- yes the judge did realize that stocks are of different prices, and admitted that lower price stocks are riskier. really though, thats like saying that if you buy BHP, your less likely to lose money, so its not a gamble. I saw BHP went down the other day, anyway. He also found it interesting as to where the description "blue chip" came from.


----------

