Archive for 'News'

Dec 17

Congressional leaders unveiled a wide-ranging deal on tax extenders, making some items permanent.

The Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 is a culmination of recent work done in both chambers of Congress and renews and makes permanent important tax incentives that support both individuals and job creators. Among the provisions that would be made permanent are the enhanced Child Tax Credit, the enhanced American Opportunity Tax Credit, the enhanced Earned Income Tax Credit, the above-the-line deduction for teachers who buy school supplies, the charitable deduction of contributions of real property for conservation purposes, along with the Research & Development Tax Credit and Section 179 expensing.

The permanent R&D Tax Credit provision permanently extends the research & development tax credit and, for the first time, allows for eligible small businesses to claim the credit against the alternative minimum tax liability or against the employer’s payroll tax liability. The Section 179 provision permanently extends the small business expensing limitation and phase-out amounts in effect from 2010 to 2014; and sets a new threshold at $500,000 and $2 million, respectively, from the current amounts of $25,000 and $200,000, respectively.

In addition, the legislation suspends the 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices through 2017 and delays for two years the so-called “Cadillac tax” on high-priced health insurance plans that was supposed to begin in 2018. It also phases out bonus depreciation. Another provision permanently extends the exception from subpart F income for active financing income. The legislation also permanently extends the rule reducing to five years (rather than 10 years) the period for which an S corporation must hold its assets following conversion from a C corporation to avoid the tax on built-in gains.

Another provision permanently extends the ability of individuals at least 70½ years of age to exclude from gross income qualified charitable distributions from Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) of up to $100,000 per taxpayer in any tax year.

Congress is expected to vote by the end of the week on the tax legislation along with an omnibus spending bill that was also unveiled late Tuesday night (see Congress Reaches Deal on Tax Extenders).

“Santa came early this year with gifts for almost everyone in the form of numerous tax relief provisions, although the IRS may view its gift as a lump of coal,” said Peter Mills, managing editor of federal taxes for Bloomberg BNA. “Tax planners would gain more certainty because the bill would make permanent many important tax provisions, most notably the research and development credit, the expanded §179 expensing limitations, the enhanced child tax credit, and the earned income tax credit, as well as extending some popular temporary provisions, such as bonus depreciation. Foreign investors would gain advantages in increasing investment in U.S. real estate by increasing their ownership percentage of publicly traded REITs without being taxed on sales of the interests, and by exempting foreign retirement and pension funds from being taxed on sales of REITS holding U.S. real estate. It also would delay some of the taxes associated with the Affordable Care Act. The IRS fares less well under the bill with new restrictions, including a rule providing for the termination of any IRS employee who takes official actions for political purposes. Moreover, the IRS has the burden of processing these changes in time for the upcoming tax season.”

The Internal Revenue Service would receive $11.23 billion in fiscal year 2016, an increase of $290 million over the current level, specifically for customer service, identity theft and cybersecurity, according to the National Treasury Employees Union. While that figure is $1.7 billion less than the administration’s request of $12.9 billion, the NTWU noted, the final amount is an improvement over the House proposal to cut the IRS budget by almost $838 million compared to the current level.

The bill would make permanent a provision that allows retailers to depreciate remodeling and other improvements to their stores over 15 years rather than the previous standard of 39 years, the National Retail Federation pointed out. The provision, which also applies to restaurants, is important because retailers typically remodel every five to seven years. In addition to helping keep stores attractive to customers and profitable, the remodeling work creates tens of thousands of construction jobs each year.

A separate provision that allows 50 percent of the cost of improvements to be written off under “bonus deprecation” would be extended for five years, and would be expanded to cover stores and restaurants that are owned rather than just those that are leased.

Section 179 expensing, which determines the amount of an investment a small business is allowed to write off entirely in the first year rather than being depreciated over multiple years, would be made permanent and its level would be increased.

The Work Opportunity Tax Credit, which gives retailers a tax incentive to hire the disabled, welfare recipients and other economically challenged individuals, would be renewed for five years.

Paul Gevertzman, a tax partner at Anchin, Block & Anchin, sees benefits in having more certainty about the tax provisions. “The most positive aspect of this extender package is that many of the perennially expiring provisions are either made permanent, or at least pushed off beyond another New Year’s morning expiration,” he said. “What it means for businesses is that they can now plan properly. They can operate with the knowledge that if they follow the prescribed steps they can achieve the anticipated tax result. I had one client tell me just this morning how he’s been sweating it out because they spent $20+ million dollars on equipment purchases in 2015 not knowing for certain how much of that spend could be written off this year. This bill takes the guesswork out of the equation. This certainty allows tax incentives to actually incentivize businesses to spend, rather than to simply provide a benefit to businesses post facto for what they’ve already done.”

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wis., spoke of the advantages of the tax deal during a press briefing Wednesday. “I cannot tell you how many times I have visited with small businesses and farmers who tell me, ‘Give me some certainty in the tax code, and I can go create jobs.’ We are finally delivering on one of those tax policies we’ve been trying to—for years—to get certainty in the tax code so we can create more jobs,” he said. “I think this is one of the biggest steps toward a re-write of our tax code that we’ve made in many years. And it will help us start a pro-growth, bold tax reform agenda in 2016.”

The Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Committees have worked on efforts in Congress to overhaul the tax code through working groups, hearings, roundtables, issue papers and markups.

“Passing this legislation and making more tax policies permanent will provide significant tax relief for hard-working taxpayers in every walk of American life, from the middle class to military families to the working poor,” said Senate Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, in a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday. “It will do the same for businesses and job creators throughout our country, resulting in a healthier U.S. economy, increased growth, and more American jobs,” Hatch said. “Put simply, more permanence in the tax code will be a good thing for our country, and the PATH Act will provide just the kind of permanence we need.”

Earlier this year, the Senate Finance Committee reported out a bipartisan tax extenders package that extended provisions to help families, individuals and small businesses for two years. The House Ways and Means Committee advanced several tax bills that would make permanent a number of policies, like incentives for innovative research and development, among others.

The PATH Act includes a number of bipartisan legislative policies that were advanced by the two tax-writing committees.

“It makes absolutely no sense the way America handles its tax code,” said House Ways and Means Committee chairman Kevin Brady, R-Texas, in a statement. “How can families and local businesses count on tax relief each year as long as Congress can’t decide what’s permanent and what’s not? That confusion ends now, and our economy will be stronger for it.”

However, the bill will come at a cost of billions of dollars added to annual budget deficit, which may complicate passage in Congress.

“This bill highlights clear priorities for reforming our tax system,” said Wyden. “What does that mean?  Millions of working families with children will not find themselves suddenly taxed into poverty. Millions of college students won’t have the rug pulled out from under them when the tuition bill arrives. Charities can confidently plan and expand the good work they do. And small business and enterprises on the forefront of innovation now have the economic certainty they deserve. At the same time we are phasing out provisions like bonus depreciation which were always designed to be temporary. But now is not the time for Congress to slow down and pat itself on the back. Today is a down payment on tax reform and our work continues as we strive towards a complete overhaul of our broken tax system.”

The tax extenders package also includes a five-year extension of the wind energy production tax credit to lead to a phase-down of the industry-specific tax credit. The wind production tax credit will be 100 percent in 2015 and 2016, 80 percent in 2017, 60 percent in 2018 and 40 percent in 2019.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, had advocated for passage of this provision. “As the father of the first wind energy tax credit in 1992, I can say that the tax credit was never meant to be permanent,” Grassley said in a statement. “I also can say that the wind energy industry is the only energy industry that came forward with a phase-out plan. The oil and nuclear industries have benefited from tax incentives that have been permanently on the books for decades.  The five-year extension for wind energy brings about the best possible long-term outcome that provides certainty, predictability and a responsible phase-down of a tax incentive for a renewable energy source.”

The tax package includes an extension of the existing biodiesel fuel blenders credit, the small agri-biodiesel producer credit, the tax credit for cellulosic biofuels producers, the alternative fuel vehicle refueling tax credit, and bonus depreciation for cellulosic biofuel facilities.

Jul 31

little-boxes-624x236

Additional information on returns relating to mortgage interest.

Sec. 6050H is amended to require new information on the mortgage information statements that are required
to be sent to individuals who pay more than $600 in mortgage interest in a year. These statements will now be
required to report the outstanding principal on the mortgage at the beginning of the calendar year, the address
of the property securing the mortgage, and the mortgage origination date. This change applies to returns and
statements due after Dec. 31, 2016.

Jul 31

highway

The short-term highway funding extension passed by the Senate on Thursday contains several important tax
provisions. The bill modifies the due dates for several common tax returns, overrules the
Supreme Court’s Home Concrete decision, requires that additional information be reported on mortgage
information statements, and requires consistent basis reporting between estates and beneficiaries.

         

Due date modifications

For partnership returns -  the new due date is March 15 (for calendar-year partnerships) and the 15th day of the
third month following the close of the fiscal year (for fiscal-year partnerships).

For C corporations – the new due date is the 15th day of the fourth month following the close of the
corporation’s year.

The new due dates will apply to returns for tax years beginning after Dec. 31, 2015. However, for C
corporations with fiscal years ending on June 30, the new due dates will not apply until tax years beginning
after Dec. 31, 2025.

taxes-646511_640

Dec 19

The Internal Revenue Service has been doing business with nearly 1,200 vendors that owe back taxes, including one unnamed contractor that owes a whopping $525 million, the new inspector general’s report says.

 

The IRS’s 1,168 vendors owed back taxes totaling $589 million as of July 2012, according to the report released Tuesday.  Only 50 were in a payment plan to pay off their debt.

 

Apparently the IRS checks whether vendors owe back taxes when the agency awards contracts but it doesn’t continually monitor their tax bills after the contracts have been awarded.

 

The inspector general’s office is prohibited by law from revealing the name of any delinquent vendor, including the one that owed $525 million. The report says most of the back taxes, including the biggest, were delinquent for less than a year.

 

The report also excluded back taxes that were being contested, counting only those that either agreed to by the taxpayer or ordered by the court.

 

The IRS stated, “The vast majority of vendors that conduct business with the IRS meet their federal tax obligations.  We appreciate (the inspector general’s) acknowledgement that IRS has effective controls in place to prevent suspended and debarred vendors’ from receiving IRS contracts.”

 

Huh? What planet are they on?

 

Dec 11

Unknown

Nov 29

IRSTargetsThousandsOf Small BusinessesForExtraScrutiny – In 3 Parts

 

Part I – What the IRS is doing.

 The IRS has always been able to match individual tax returns against information statements and propose under reporter adjustments that come in the form of CP2000 notices. ?? But things are changing, and a new era at the IRS is upon us. ?? Now, the IRS is using information statements to find under reporting on business returns.

 

Thetaxagencyisdoingsome targetingofitsown,fingeringatleast 20,000smallbusinesses. Andthatnumber willgrow. Thescrutinyonthisgroupandinthisway isalittlefrightening.   Smallbusinesspeople acrossAmericaarereceivingIRSnotices. Morewillbecoming.TheIRSgathersdata frommanythirdparties-including credit cardcompanies-toseeif youpickedup everynickelofincome. Remembertorecordandpay

tax on all transactions?

 

In September, the IRS started its first information return-matching program for business return Forms 1120, 1120S and 1065. This program matched business return incomes to the total amounts reported on all information returns. ??  That would include merchant reporting of credit cards and third party network payments and cash reporting.

 

This year, business taxpayers also started receiving Form 1099-K, Merchant Card and Third-party Network Payments, reporting amounts received from payment settlement entities (from debit/credit cards and third-party network payers such as PayPal). To avoid taxpayer burden, the IRS stated in a letter to the National Federation of Independent Business on Feb. 9 that it will not require taxpayers to separately report amounts from Forms 1099-K on returns, and has no plans to in the future. ??

 

Wait a minute; not everyone is convinced. One Congressman, Sam Graves (R­ Mo), Chairman of the House Committee on Small Business, notes that the IRS’s first sentence begins, “Your gross receipts may have been underreported.” Says Congressman Graves that sounds like the IRS is looking for more than just additionalinformation. It soundslikeitcouldmeanmoretaxes,penalties andinterest,Sam Graves wroteinthislettertothe agency.

Mr.Gravessuggeststhattheletterscouldintimidate businesses.Hesaysthatasmallbusinessowner receivingthisnoticemaybealarmedandfeel threatened. TheIRSnoticegoesontosayyour receiptsareofffromanIRSaverage. Within30 days,pleaseprovidedocumentationtoprovewhy yournumbersdon’tfallwithinIRS’sstandard,the IRSasks.

 

YettheIRSdoesn’trevealitssourceanddoesn’tsay

whatthestandardisorwhereitcamefrom. It soundslikeyouarebeingaskedtoprovethat youdidn’tunderreportyourincome. That’s provinganegative,andcouldrequireextensive correspondenceanddocumentation.

 

AsaresultofForm1099changesandtheever-increasingwebofreporting,theIRSreceives detaileddataaboutcredit-anddebit-card transactions. TheIRSminesthedataandmaythink thatahighpercentageofcardtransactionsmay meanyouarenotreportingall thecashyoureceive.

 

‘Pleaseexplain,’theIRSmayask. – go to Part II

May 13

May 12 from Reuters -

When U.S. tax agents started singling out non-profit groups for extra scrutiny in 2010, they looked at first only for key words such as ‘Tea Party,’ but later they focused on criticisms by groups of “how the country is being run,” according to investigative findings reviewed by Reuters on Sunday.

Over two years, IRS field office agents repeatedly changed their criteria while sifting through thousands of applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status to select ones for possible closer examination, the findings showed.

At one point, the agents chose to screen applications from groups focused on making “America a better place to live.”

Exactly who at the IRS made the decisions to start applying extra scrutiny was not clear from the findings, which were contained in portions of an investigative report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

Expected to be made public this week, the report was obtained in part by Reuters over the weekend as a full-blown scandal involving the IRS scrutiny widened, embarrassing the agency and distracting the Obama administration.

In one part of the report, TIGTA officials observed that the application screening effort showed “confusion about how to process the applications, delays in the processing of the applications, and a lack of management oversight and guidance.”

After brewing for months, the IRS effort exploded into wider view on Friday when Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations for the IRS, apologized for what she called the “inappropriate” targeting of conservative groups for closer scrutiny, something the agency had long denied.

At a legal conference in Washington, while taking questions from the audience, Lerner said the agency was sorry.

She said the screening practice was confined to an IRS office in Cincinnati; that it was “absolutely not” influenced by the Obama administration; and that none of the targeted groups was denied tax-free status.

It is clear from the TIGTA findings that Lerner was informed in June 2011 that the extra scrutiny was occurring. Key words in the names of groups – including ‘Tea Party,’ “Patriot’ and ’9/12′ – were being used to choose applications, TIGTA found.

“Issues” criteria were also used, TIGTA found. Scrutiny was being given to references to “Government spending, Government debt, or taxes; Education of the public via advocacy/lobbying to ‘make America a better place to live;’ and Statements in the case file (that) criticize how the country is being run.”

Under these early criteria, more than 100 tax-exempt applications had been identified, according to TIGTA.

Briefed on the practice, Lerner ordered changes.

CONSTANTLY SHIFTING CRITERIA

By July 2011, the IRS was no longer targeting just groups with certain key words in their names. Rather, the screening criteria had changed to “organizations involved with political, lobbying, or advocacy.”

But then it changed again in January 2012 to cover “political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding government, educating on the constitution and bill of rights, social economic reform/movement,” according to the findings contained in a Treasury Department watchdog report.

In March 2012, after Tea Party groups complained about delays in processing of their applications, then-IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman was called to testify by a congressional committee. He denied that the IRS was targeting tax-exempt groups based on their politics.

The IRS said on Saturday that senior IRS executives were not aware of the screening process. The documents reviewed by Reuters do not show that Shulman had any role.

In May 2012, the criteria for scrutiny were revised again to cover a variety of tax-exempt groups “with indicators of significant amounts of political campaign intervention (raising questions as to exempt purpose and/or excess private benefit),” according to a TIGTA timeline included in the findings.

THOUSANDS OF APPLICATIONS

Each year the IRS reviews as many as 60,000 applications from groups ranging from charities to labor unions that want to be classified as tax-exempt. “Social welfare” groups dedicated to the general good can be tax-exempt under tax law 501(c)4.

These groups do not have to disclose the identities of their donors and they can spend money on advertising for general issues, but they may not endorse specific candidates or parties.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s January 2010 “Citizens United” ruling unleashed a torrent of new political spending and 501(c)4 groups became a popular conduit for some of it, on both ends of the political spectrum, but especially for conservatives.

The number of applications sent to the IRS by groups seeking 501(c)4 status rose to 3,400 in 2012 from 1,500 in 2010. As money poured into 501(c)4 groups, campaign finance activists began to raise questions and demanded a crackdown by the IRS.

 

Feb 07

Everyone’s check is smaller!

The rate of workers’ payroll taxes, which fund Social Security, has been 4.2% for the past two years. As of Jan. 1, it’s back to 6.2%, on the first $113,700 in wages.

The tax break was always meant to be temporary.

Workers earning the national average salary of $41,000 will receive $32 less on every biweekly paycheck. The higher the salary (up to $113,700), the bigger the bite, but business owners say their lower wage employees will feel it most.

Jul 06

We are beginning over here to re-review the tax aspects of ObamaCare after the Supreme Court’s decision last week. There are several tax changes, but today we will revisit the new investment income tax and the new earned income tax. These will happen in 2013, so let’s go over them.

Investment Income

If you are single, you will owe a new investment tax if your adjusted gross income (AGI) is over $200,000. If you are married, you will owe the new tax if your AGI is over $250,000. (I know, twice $200,000 is considerably more than $250,000. I did not write the law). If this is you, will owe a brand-new 3.8% tax on your investment income.

Let’s be clear: it is not necessarily ALL your investment income. Rather it will be on investment income over $200,000 or $250,000, as the case may be. If you are married and retired and your entire adjusted gross income of $250,000 is interest and dividends, you will owe no NEW tax. You will owe plenty of OLD tax, though.

What is investment income? Let’s go with the easy examples: dividends, interest, capital gains (short-term and long-term), royalties and annuities outside retirement plans

NOTE:  Net investment income is also defined to include income from a passive activity. This concerns me, as the rental of a duplex is a passive activity, as is passthrough income to a “passive” member in an LLC. Under Section 469, these activities were considered “trades or businesses,” although the activity could be further tagged as “passive” or “nonpassive.” They were not however tagged as “investment.” This new tax appears to use the language differently from Section 469 and equates “passive” with “investment.” The IRS unfortunately has yet to issue formal guidance in this area.

How can this tax surprise you? Here are a few ways:

(1)   You sell your business.

(2)   You get married.

(3)   You sell your principal residence, and the gain exceeds the $250,000/$500,000 exclusion.

(4)   You inherit and sell stock from a parent’s estate.

Earned Income

If you are single, you will pay an extra 0.9% Medicare tax on your earned income over $200,000. If married, that threshold changes to $250,000.

What is earned income? The easiest way is to ask whether you paid or will pay social security or self-employment tax on the income. If the answer is “yes”, you have earned income. Note that this definition excludes your pension, 401(k) and IRA distributions.

Let’s go over a few examples.

EXAMPLE 1: A married couple filing jointly has $360,000 of adjusted gross income—$240,000 of wages plus $120,000 of interest, dividends and capital gains. They have $110,000 of investment income` over the $250,000 threshold. They will owe an extra 3.8% of that $110,000, or $4,180, in tax.

EXAMPLE 2: In the following year, the same couple has $400,000 of income, the difference being a $40,000 bonus. All their investment income is now above the threshold amount. Their new investment income tax will be $4,560. In addition, since their earned income is now above $250,000 they will owe the new earned income tax of $270 ((280,000- 250,000) times 0.9%).

EXAMPLE 3:  After many years, you move from Purchase, New York. You sell your house for $920,000 and are single.  Your exclusion amount on the sale is $250,000 so the taxable gain is 670,000. Assuming that you earned income is over $200,000, the new investment income tax will be $25,460 ((920,000 – 250,000) times 3.8%).

We will discuss other tax changes in a future blog. Some are delayed (such as the employer penalty) and others are already in place but are somewhat esoteric (the prescription drug fee).

Jun 27

Would you be aggressive on your taxes if your job was on the line?

I am reading Agbaniyaka v Commissioner. Benjamin Agbaniyaka (Ben) started with the IRS in 1986. He received excellent evaluations, several promotions and a Master’s Degree in taxation from Long Island University. Between the years 1988 and 2006 Ben engaged in a side business selling African arts and crafts.  Here are the business results for selected years;

            2001    no sales and a loss of $5,661

            2002    sales of $3,216 and a loss of $15,232

            2003    sales of $1,372 and a loss of $7,624

            2004    sales of $200 and a loss of $6,383

He also claimed itemized deductions, including annual expenses for “Union Dues” and “Accounting Journals.”

He gets audited for 2001.

Let’s go over what the IRS expects when it sees that Schedule C on your return. It expects you to maintain records so that you can compile a tax return at the end of the year. Records can be as simple as a checkbook with a year-sheet recapping everything by category. The IRS also wants you to keep invoices and receipts, to allow a third party to trace a check to something. There are some expenses where Congress itself tells the IRS what documentation to review. Meals and car expenses are two of the most common examples. With those two, the IRS is somewhat limited in its flexibility because Congress called the tune.

Then we have the hobby loss rules. The idea here is that a business activity is expected to show a profit every so often. If the activity has always shown losses, it is difficult to buy-into the argument that it is a business. An actual business would eventually shut down and not throw good money after bad. There are exceptions, of course, but it is a good starting point.

The third point is that a revenue agent is going to be held to a higher standard. There is the education and training involved, as well as that whole working for the IRS thing.

The IRS audits 2001. It finds the following:

(1)   Ben deducted expenses for a course on trust and estates. He cannot provide any documentation, however. He also has other unsubstantiated education expenses, including his journals.

 (2)   Ben claimed a deduction for union expenses. He cannot present any proof he paid the union.

 (3)   Ben is hard-pressed to persuade the IRS that there was any profit intent to his arts and crafts activity. The problem is that Ben never reported a profit – ever. The IRS simply disallowed the loss.

 (4)  The IRS is now miffed at Ben, especially since Ben is one of their own. They argue that the Ben’s failure to make any reasonable attempt to comply with the tax code is negligence. In fact, failure to keep records shows not only negligence but also Ben’s intentional disregard of the regulations. The IRS slapped Ben with a substantial understatement penalty.

The IRS expands the audit to 2002, 2003 and 2004, with similar results.

Can this get worse? You bet. The 1998 IRS Restructuring and Reform Act requires termination of an IRS employee found to have willfully understated his federal tax liability, unless such understatement is due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect.

Let’s go back to the substantial understatement penalty. One of the exceptions to the penalty is reasonable cause. Ben goes to Tax Court. He pretty much has to. He has to win, at least on the penalty issue. If he can get the court to see reasonable cause, he might be able to save his job.  

The Tax Court is unimpressed. Here are some comments:

We found Mr. Agbaniyaka’s testimony to be general, vague, conclusory, uncorroborated, self-serving and/or questionable in all material respects.”

During the years at issue, Mr [] was a trained revenue agent and was fully aware of the requirements imposed by …. Nonetheless, petitioners failed to maintain sufficient records for each of their taxable years 2001 through 2004 to establish their position with respect to any of the issues presented.”

On the record before us, we find that petitioners have failed to carry their burden of showing that they were not negligent and did not disregard rules and regulations, or otherwise did what a reasonable person would do, with respect to the underpayment for each of the years at issue.”

After the Tax Court’s decision, the IRS ended Ben’s employment effective April 15, 2008.

Ben appeals to the Federal Court of Appeals. That too fell on deaf ears:

“… he was undoubtedly aware that he had to substantiate his efforts to conduct a business in 2001 and beyond. Being an experienced and knowledgeable Agency employee, he had to have been aware that he could not substantiate his alleged business activities. By claiming deductions on Schedule C, he knowingly and willfully submitted tax filings to which he was not entitled.”

Ben next tried other channels. In the end, he lost and stayed fired.

How much money are we talking about? The court does not come out and specifically give a dollar amount, but there is enough to approximate the taxes as little more than $10,000.

I question the lack of documentation for some of these claimed expenses. The bank can provide cancelled checks for the subscriptions or seminars, and the union will provide a letter of membership and dues activity.  The court doesn’t elaborate, but it is clear that Ben wasn’t trying too hard.

Would you gamble your job for $10,000? Ben did.

I wouldn’t.