Not Sure Which Is Sadder
- 2
- Add a Comment
I just read that the guy who caught Barry Bonds’ home run, record-breaking ball is going to have to sell it to pay taxes on its estimated worth. Not that I am an IRS law guru or anything, but what the heck? The guy, Matt Murphy, really seems like he would like to keep the ball, but is being advised about the tax ramifications of that.
So, which is sadder: the fact that the ball is worth that much to begin with (est. 500K), or that we have to pay taxes on something that has not even given us value by way of auction? I guess it’s up to memorabilia experts to say! By the way, this is no way intended to open a debate about the historical debate/ramifications of the home run itself!
2 Comments
Ed
August 22nd, 2007
at 10:35am
Or sadder still, that if the ball wasn’t tainted by steroids, some have estimated that it would be worth at least $2-3 million, based on other record-setting balls.
Urban Underbrink
August 27th, 2007
at 4:56pm
It is my opinion that if the IRS puts a value on an item and wants you to pay taxes on it, then they should be required ( at your option ) to buy the item from you at that price minus the tax they are after.
This should keep the **** more honest.