Major tax issue that could change the landscape for numismatics.

Regulated · November 2, 2017 3:00PM

I was just informed that section 3303 p.230 of the proposed House tax bill will do away with like/kind exchange provisions for collectibles. This is a serious issue for anyone who collects coins, as this will effectively make every numismatic trade a potentially taxable event.

This legislation, if passed, would effect all transactions starting on January 1st of 2018.

Like/kind exchanges will still be possible with real estate, but coins, paintings, etc. will no longer benefit.

Discuss.

Broadstruck · November 2, 2017 3:17PM

Could you explain that in a story format like Sarah Huckabee Sanders did the Cut, Cut, Cut Act?

jessewvu · November 2, 2017 3:24PM

Every sale I make is subject to tax... not sure how’s this impacts me

Regulated · November 2, 2017 3:29PM

Let's say that you buy a coin for $500, and it's value increases to $5,000 (either because you held it, upgraded it, or discovered that it was a nifty variety). Today, you can trade it for another $5,000 coin (or group of coins), and you are not required to pay any taxes until you sell those coins. If this bill passes, you would be required to pay tax on $4,500 profit at the time you took the other material in trade.

AUandAG · November 2, 2017 3:37PM

No, don't think this is true for Numismatics as we normally know them.
For like kind exchanges the seller that intends to "upgrade" swap or otherwise exchange for another coin CANNOT take the money and make the new purchase. This would have to be structured by or into escrow and the seller cannot in any way hold or handle the funds for the sold coin(s).

bob

oldgoldlover · November 2, 2017 3:37PM

This will be a tough one to enforce as trades between two individuals seldom evolve a 1099.

Lakesammman · November 2, 2017 3:42PM

There are so many other bad provisions that it may be DOA unless significantly modified.

Is there anything in the bill that simplifies taxes?? I'm tired of paying $1600-$1700 a year to have my taxes done!

Broadstruck · November 2, 2017 3:44PM

That's only if the dealer isn't too lazy to write up a receipt.

I've done a few trades like that at shows and rarely ever get any documentation.

messydesk · November 2, 2017 3:56PM

Seems like a pay me now vs. pay me later situation, except that you can no longer defer gains to your estate. Might actually make bookkeeping easier for those who both sold and traded.

Justacommeman · November 2, 2017 4:01PM

The 401K tax reform could tank the stock market. This could further hurt the coin market. Deshaun Watson my fantasy football QB is out for the year as of today. I'm going back to bed

m

blu62vette · November 2, 2017 4:04PM

I just cant imagine trades make up that large of % of coin transactions, and even less that are documented.

DIMEMAN · November 2, 2017 4:32PM

What coin? What deal?

Gluggo · November 2, 2017 4:47PM

I am in the Exempt Status!

jmlanzaf · November 2, 2017 5:04PM

I've never traded a coin. I don't know that there is that much trading up that goes on. I've seen some people trade for store credit, but it is rare.

Personally, I think it's a good idea, although there will be enforcement problems. Why should people be able to avoid tax on their gains, especially when such a trade could be used to avoid any taxes at all? For example, I buy a bust dime for $500, it increases in value to $5000, I trade it for a pile of 90% silver which I then sell at Cash for Gold places in small enough quantities to avoid detection.

sellitstore · November 2, 2017 5:09PM

Yeah, but after you sell $5000 worth of 90% at a cash for gold place you only walk away with $1500.

jt88 · November 2, 2017 7:06PM

I never trade coin so it doesn't brother me. I really don't care.

daltex · November 2, 2017 7:11PM

@Regulated said:
I was just informed that section 3303 p.230 of the proposed House tax bill will do away with like/kind exchange provisions for collectibles. This is a serious issue for anyone who collects coins, as this will effectively make every numismatic trade a potentially taxable event.

This legislation, if passed, would effect all transactions starting on January 1st of 2018.

Like/kind exchanges will still be possible with real estate, but coins, paintings, etc. will no longer benefit.

Discuss.

I had no idea this was legal now.

Ronyahski · November 2, 2017 8:53PM

@jmlanzaf said:
I've never traded a coin. I don't know that there is that much trading up that goes on. I've seen some people trade for store credit, but it is rare.

Personally, I think it's a good idea, although there will be enforcement problems. Why should people be able to avoid tax on their gains, especially when such a trade could be used to avoid any taxes at all? For example, I buy a bust dime for $500, it increases in value to $5000, I trade it for a pile of 90% silver which I then sell at Cash for Gold places in small enough quantities to avoid detection.

You are comparing taking advantage of a stated benefit in the tax laws with purposely entering into a transaction to evade the laws. Scary for you that you don't understand the difference.

RogerB · November 3, 2017 1:50AM

The tax code has a specific definition for "like kind." Exchanging one coin for another is not a like kind transaction. The proposed law does not change that. For numismatic purposes a like kind exchange not subject to tax only occurs between items of identical character: gold bullion in one form for gold bullion in another form such as US Gold Eagles for Canadian Maple Leafs. Also, if you buy "graded" gold bullion and trade it for anything else, it is not a like kind exchange because "grading" has changed the character of the original bullion.

(Recently discussed this with an IRS Supervisor.)

jmlanzaf · November 3, 2017 4:45AM

@Ronyahski said:

@jmlanzaf said:
I've never traded a coin. I don't know that there is that much trading up that goes on. I've seen some people trade for store credit, but it is rare.

Personally, I think it's a good idea, although there will be enforcement problems. Why should people be able to avoid tax on their gains, especially when such a trade could be used to avoid any taxes at all? For example, I buy a bust dime for $500, it increases in value to $5000, I trade it for a pile of 90% silver which I then sell at Cash for Gold places in small enough quantities to avoid detection.

You are comparing taking advantage of a stated benefit in the tax laws with purposely entering into a transaction to evade the laws. Scary for you that you don't understand the difference.

Don't be an asshat. Oh, wait, you can't help it.

Let me school you, bubba.

One of the main reasons for the provisions on "trading up" is real estate. As long as you keep buying more expensive houses, you are not forced to pay taxes on capital gains on your residence. But you can't hide a real estate transaction.

Transactions involving smaller items rely on reporting requirements. For example, the $10k cash transfer reporting requirements for banks. There are similar recording requirements for cash instruments like coins due to the Patriot Act. There are, however, no such reporting requirements for smaller transactions. So, allowing for trading of coins in general as opposed to upconverting coins of $10k or more creates an unenforceable tax code allowing for easy evasion. That was my point. And any law that isn't enforceable isn't worth having.

Do YOU understand the point now?

Further, there is no reason for it. I can't trade my Apple stock for Ford stock and delay taxation. Why should coins be any different? The exception for your primary residence makes some sense - although even then it should probably be capped at some reasonable number ($500k?) But the trading of any hard to trace asset should not be exempted. It's hard enough to get people to report such gains.

Honestly, how many of you non-dealers have EVER claimed a capital gain on a coin on your taxes? As a dealer, I have to claim capital gains even on unsold inventory. But how many people out there actually declare ANY tax gains on coin sales? So why make the laws any easier to evade?

amwldcoin · November 3, 2017 4:49AM

My capital gains taxes on my collectables I've sold in the last few years have been higher than my income tax.

BillJones · November 3, 2017 5:03AM

The IRS has been out to screw coin collectors for years. Coins once had calital gains status without question. That changed when a crummy Massachusetts congressman named Jim Shannon get legislation through that changed that. I knew a yellow dog Democrat coin who actually to him to get to hell to his face.

1630Boston · November 3, 2017 5:11AM

I have looked at this and admit that I AM NOT AN EXPERT [not even close] but....
I do not believe that trading numismatic coins for 'junk' silver is considered a like kind exchange currently by the IRS.
JMO

ricko · November 3, 2017 5:50AM

Trading coins? Never even thought of that.... I do not sell my coins and cannot imagine trading them.... My coins are like pets....... I could not bear to part with them. Cheers, RickO

MrEureka · November 3, 2017 6:04AM

@RogerB said:
The tax code has a specific definition for "like kind." Exchanging one coin for another is not a like kind transaction. The proposed law does not change that. For numismatic purposes a like kind exchange not subject to tax only occurs between items of identical character: gold bullion in one form for gold bullion in another form such as US Gold Eagles for Canadian Maple Leafs. Also, if you buy "graded" gold bullion and trade it for anything else, it is not a like kind exchange because "grading" has changed the character of the original bullion.

(Recently discussed this with an IRS Supervisor.)

If that is the case, what is the new proposal trying to change?

RogerB · November 3, 2017 7:01AM

A regulation into law, maybe?
The present proposal will change over the next weeks, so there's little to do except wait for the final version. Unfortunately, with the majority party unwilling to use "regular order" the public has no means of learning about proposed content or having the other half of their representatives involved in forming a final bill. Sen. McCain is entirely right.

jmlanzaf · November 3, 2017 7:06AM

@1630Boston said:
I have looked at this and admit that I AM NOT AN EXPERT [not even close] but....
I do not believe that trading numismatic coins for 'junk' silver is considered a like kind exchange currently by the IRS.
JMO

It doesn't have to be "junk silver", it just has to be any smaller value coins whose sale would go unreported. "Junk silver" would be considered by the IRS as no different than silver eagles. I'm not sure whether they would accept a bullion trade as an in kind exchange but I have seen dealers do it.

johnny9434 · November 3, 2017 7:08AM

@DIMEMAN said:
What coin? What deal?

exactly

1630Boston · November 3, 2017 7:13AM

I'm not quite sure that they consider junk silver 'bullion'

The Code itself tells us very little about the like-kind standard other than providing that “livestock of a different gender” are not like-kind

ModCrewman · November 3, 2017 7:24AM

Lots of off target advice given in this thread. Please consult your tax advisor in regards to any material transactions that are being contemplated. Here's my 2 cents on a few of the points regarding current tax law.

The statement was made that a coin for coin trade doesn't currently meet the definition of an exchange because each coin is unique. Then how would a trade of a Ford for a Chevy qualify? The analysis needs to be more in depth than that; the Internal Revenue Code Section requires that assets be of a "like class" to qualify for like-kind treatment. That class determination is such that the asset must be of like use and type. For example, a vehicle and a building aren't like-kind property, but a building and farmland are like-kind property as both are real estate (if both used for business or investment). I believe, a collector coin with numismatic value and bullion coins aren't like-kind, because they are of a dissimilar character; but an exchange of numismatic coins of similar type should qualify. Each individual case needs to be evaluated on it's own merits. "Section 1.1031(a)-1(b) of the Income Tax Regulations provides that as used in section 1031(a) of the Code, the words 'like kind' have reference to the nature or character of the property and not to its grade or quality. One kind or class of property may not, under that section, be exchanged for property of a different kind or class."

Here are a few related excerpts from one of our tax research services of types of transactions that DO QUALIFY:

Gold bullion for Canadian Maple Leaf gold coins. The like-kind exchange rules apply to coins that are bought and sold for their intrinsic value, that is, their gold, silver, etc. content, rather than for their face value, as when they are used as a common medium of exchange. The Maple Leaf coin is legal tender in Canada, but its intrinsic value greatly exceeds its face amount of $50. It has no numismatic value. Because the coins are traded for their gold content, they are bullion-type coins of like kind with the gold bullion.
Bullion for South African Krugerrands.
Bullion-type gold coins minted by one country for bullion-type gold coins minted by another, where the coins are no longer a circulating medium of exchange within their respective countries, and, hence, aren't “money.”
.

The following are transactions that DO NOT QUALIFY:

U.S. currency for foreign currency or foreign currency for U.S. currency. (My note - think currency exchanges on the world market, not US paper for Canadian paper.)
Swiss francs for U.S. Double Eagle gold coins. Swiss francs are a medium of exchange in Switzerland, while U.S. Double Eagles are traded only by numismatists. Therefore, the taxpayer's economic position after the exchange was far different from its economic position beforehand.
Gold bullion for silver bullion. While the metals have some similar qualities and uses, they are “intrinsically different metals and primarily are used in different ways. Silver is essentially an industrial commodity. Gold is primarily utilized as an investment in itself. An investment in one of the metals is fundamentally different from an investment in the other metal. Therefore, the silver bullion and the gold bullion are not property of like kind.”
Collector-type gold coins for bullion-type gold coins; for example, U.S. $20 gold coins for South African Krugerrands. The former are collector-type coins whose value is determined by such factors as rarity and aesthetics. The value of the latter is solely determined by their metal content. Hence, they are different kinds of investment. In so holding, IRS distinguished Revenue Ruling 76-214 as having involved the exchange of coins that were both bullion-type coins.
.

This info shouldn't be construed as tax advice to anyone, but I did want to point out some of the current law that is applicable...please consult your own tax advisor.

Kkathyl · November 3, 2017 7:26AM

@oldgoldlover is correct unless your doing 1 Kilo Gold or 1,000 oz silver.... (see irs schedule) then no 1099 required and that is per day. So just spread it out 90% (junk) is over 1,000.00 face value

Ronyahski · November 3, 2017 10:08AM

@jmlanzaf said:

@Ronyahski said:

@jmlanzaf said:
I've never traded a coin. I don't know that there is that much trading up that goes on. I've seen some people trade for store credit, but it is rare.

Personally, I think it's a good idea, although there will be enforcement problems. Why should people be able to avoid tax on their gains, especially when such a trade could be used to avoid any taxes at all? For example, I buy a bust dime for $500, it increases in value to $5000, I trade it for a pile of 90% silver which I then sell at Cash for Gold places in small enough quantities to avoid detection.

You are comparing taking advantage of a stated benefit in the tax laws with purposely entering into a transaction to evade the laws. Scary for you that you don't understand the difference.

Don't be an asshat. Oh, wait, you can't help it.

Let me school you, bubba.

One of the main reasons for the provisions on "trading up" is real estate. As long as you keep buying more expensive houses, you are not forced to pay taxes on capital gains on your residence. But you can't hide a real estate transaction.

Transactions involving smaller items rely on reporting requirements. For example, the $10k cash transfer reporting requirements for banks. There are similar recording requirements for cash instruments like coins due to the Patriot Act. There are, however, no such reporting requirements for smaller transactions. So, allowing for trading of coins in general as opposed to upconverting coins of $10k or more creates an unenforceable tax code allowing for easy evasion. That was my point. And any law that isn't enforceable isn't worth having.

Do YOU understand the point now?

Further, there is no reason for it. I can't trade my Apple stock for Ford stock and delay taxation. Why should coins be any different? The exception for your primary residence makes some sense - although even then it should probably be capped at some reasonable number ($500k?) But the trading of any hard to trace asset should not be exempted. It's hard enough to get people to report such gains.

Honestly, how many of you non-dealers have EVER claimed a capital gain on a coin on your taxes? As a dealer, I have to claim capital gains even on unsold inventory. But how many people out there actually declare ANY tax gains on coin sales? So why make the laws any easier to evade?

First, the example you gave does not even qualify for like-kind exchange treatment, so I'll pass on attending your school.

Second, the entire U.S tax regime is a self-reporting system. It presumes that everybody will report their income on their tax return, and pay their fair share of income taxes. Not including a properly reportable transaction on your tax return because you don't think you will get caught is grounds for tax evasion.

The tax regime is not based on the presumption that everybody will not self-report if they think they can get away with it. Based on your comments, apparently you think that is the case. Apparently you believe that no non-dealer has ever claimed any capital gain on a coin. Like I said, scary. But based on the tone of your post, I'm not sure you'll get why.

Last, I spent over 30 years as a corporate tax advisor to many of the largest corporations in the country, running multi-million dollar tax planning transactions, including like-kind exchanges. So please spare any more lecturing.

Elcontador · November 3, 2017 10:38AM

Roger B is correct. Like kind provisions are very rarely applicable to numismatic coins. Ie., a business strike 1899 IHC in PCGS MS 66 RD is not the same coin as a business strike 1899 IHC in PCGS MS 66+ RD. I am a CPA. Every year the people in Washington talk about "tax reform." What usually happens are some incremental changes which often have nothing to do with what was originally discussed.
I am ignoring all of this until it actually becomes law. I have seen too many people spend thousands of dollars with attorneys changing estate plans, only to find out that the proposed law changes don't happen.
The last time we had a major tax code overhaul was at the end of 1986, which annoyed me to no end because the research services had no time to analyze the new tax code. I was basically given the new code, regs, the new software, and told "good luck, you'll need it."

tommy44 · November 3, 2017 11:53AM

@ModCrewman said:
Lots of off target advice given in this thread. Please consult your tax advisor in regards to any material transactions that are being contemplated. Here's my 2 cents on a few of the points regarding current tax law.

The statement was made that a coin for coin trade doesn't currently meet the definition of an exchange because each coin is unique. Then how would a trade of a Ford for a Chevy qualify? The analysis needs to be more in depth than that; the Internal Revenue Code Section requires that assets be of a "like class" to qualify for like-kind treatment. That class determination is such that the asset must be of like use and type. For example, a vehicle and a building aren't like-kind property, but a building and farmland are like-kind property as both are real estate (if both used for business or investment). I believe, a collector coin with numismatic value and bullion coins aren't like-kind, because they are of a dissimilar character; but an exchange of numismatic coins of similar type should qualify. Each individual case needs to be evaluated on it's own merits. "Section 1.1031(a)-1(b) of the Income Tax Regulations provides that as used in section 1031(a) of the Code, the words 'like kind' have reference to the nature or character of the property and not to its grade or quality. One kind or class of property may not, under that section, be exchanged for property of a different kind or class."

Here are a few related excerpts from one of our tax research services of types of transactions that DO QUALIFY:

Gold bullion for Canadian Maple Leaf gold coins. The like-kind exchange rules apply to coins that are bought and sold for their intrinsic value, that is, their gold, silver, etc. content, rather than for their face value, as when they are used as a common medium of exchange. The Maple Leaf coin is legal tender in Canada, but its intrinsic value greatly exceeds its face amount of $50. It has no numismatic value. Because the coins are traded for their gold content, they are bullion-type coins of like kind with the gold bullion.

Bullion for South African Krugerrands.

Bullion-type gold coins minted by one country for bullion-type gold coins minted by another, where the coins are no longer a circulating medium of exchange within their respective countries, and, hence, aren't “money.”
.

The following are transactions that DO NOT QUALIFY:

U.S. currency for foreign currency or foreign currency for U.S. currency. (My note - think currency exchanges on the world market, not US paper for Canadian paper.)

Swiss francs for U.S. Double Eagle gold coins. Swiss francs are a medium of exchange in Switzerland, while U.S. Double Eagles are traded only by numismatists. Therefore, the taxpayer's economic position after the exchange was far different from its economic position beforehand.

Gold bullion for silver bullion. While the metals have some similar qualities and uses, they are “intrinsically different metals and primarily are used in different ways. Silver is essentially an industrial commodity. Gold is primarily utilized as an investment in itself. An investment in one of the metals is fundamentally different from an investment in the other metal. Therefore, the silver bullion and the gold bullion are not property of like kind.”

Collector-type gold coins for bullion-type gold coins; for example, U.S. $20 gold coins for South African Krugerrands. The former are collector-type coins whose value is determined by such factors as rarity and aesthetics. The value of the latter is solely determined by their metal content. Hence, they are different kinds of investment. In so holding, IRS distinguished Revenue Ruling 76-214 as having involved the exchange of coins that were both bullion-type coins.
.

This info shouldn't be construed as tax advice to anyone, but I did want to point out some of the current law that is applicable...please consult your own tax advisor.

I agree with the information in this post. In addition You must report an exchange to the IRS on Form 8824, Like-Kind Exchanges and file it with your tax return for the year in which the exchange occurred.

Form 8824 asks for:
•Descriptions of the properties exchanged
•Dates that properties were identified and transferred
•Any relationship between the parties to the exchange
•Value of the like-kind and other property received
•Gain or loss on sale of other (non-like-kind) property given up
•Cash received or paid; liabilities relieved or assumed
•Adjusted basis of like-kind property given up; realized gain

If you do not specifically follow the rules for like-kind exchanges, you may be held liable for taxes, penalties, and interest on your transactions.

In addition Internal Revenue Code section 1031 defines qualifying property as "business or investment property" and specifically excludes "Inventory or stock in trade" which would automatically exclude exchanges between a dealer and another dealer or customer unless somehow the dealer could establish the fact that the merchandise was "investment" property and not "inventory"

Considering the above I doubt if many, if any, coin exchanges would qualify as a like-kind" exchange.

I'm not saying that there aren't people out there that think they are participating in a "like-kind" exchange but that is most likely not the case and it could come back to bite them in the future.

Like ModCrewman, I am not giving tax advice but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn a couple of years ago. I can also say that I had worked as a tax preparer for 23 years in a second career and had never seen a legitimate "like-kind" exchange that didn't involve real estate.

logger7 · November 3, 2017 12:05PM

From what I have seen state and federal tax authorities do not have the resources to go after so many areas of tax fraud as they could or should. Even if it becomes law you can be sure people will be looking for all the loopholes. Maybe artificial intelligence would connect the dots? Way too many cases for the government to pursue, they usually go after the top few percent.

Major tax issue that could change the landscape for numismatics.

Comments

Leave a Comment