Jon and Kate Plus 8, Official Thread--Part 7

[C.Ann]

in case you haven't noticed ... I'm not posting quite as often as I have in the past ... and while I don't plan on stepping away (because every time I say I'm going to, I get sucked back in ), the main focus these days is on the trial and that's not something I understand very well. There's just not much for me to say right now.

Pleeeeeeease don't leave us! LOL..

You're right though.. Generally speaking there isn't much going on "out there" right now.. Is this the "lull before the storm"??

 

[OhMari]

That's how ours does it too. We pay by check (deposit the actual love offering). Usually the person who receives it puts it down as misc income. If Kate or Jon files a schdule C as a business she would put it there and pay her own share of social security, income taxes and deduct her expenses on that form.

I'm sure she has lots of business deductions. Plus, they get to claim 8 children on their taxes, plus get the child tax deduction, which is what $4,000 a child now. That $4,000 comes directly off taxes owed. $32,000 is a good chunk. I sure wish that deduction was around when my 4 were small. I think we got to use it may 2 years.

in case you haven't noticed ... I'm not posting quite as often as I have in the past ... and while I don't plan on stepping away (because every time I say I'm going to, I get sucked back in ), the main focus these days is on the trial and that's not something I understand very well. There's just not much for me to say right now.

This thread has remained in the top 10 for almost 2 years on the Community Board. We've come close a few times with having it almost shut down, hopefully we can keep it open during the divorce proceedings. Divorce is shut a hot topic. So hopefully everyone can be civil.

 

[madge]

That's a good thing Madge..that means the two of them aren't doing a bunch of stupid things to talk about. I do know you are on the kids side..we all are on that side, but I unless things have changed, I know you have gone to a Kate speech, you and I have chatted, and I know she's not your favorite of the two LOL!

and here I thought I'd hid my dislike pretty well....

I am sick of beating the "Jon is making poor choices" horse to death, I will say that. Because he is making poor choices. We all know that. But, I also think he's made some unfortunate alliances (which is his fault, I know) that have said and done things that were out of Jon's control. Especially Lindsay Lohan's dad and the Stephanie nanny. They've perfected the art of throwing Jon under the bus.

I just wish they'd both shut up and move on privately, like they claim they want to.

OH. Did anyone see The View spoof last night on SNL?

 

[MAKmom]

I know many people that get paid cash. There is nothing illegal about that as they pay taxes on the income.

For example, when my kids were little, I paid my daycare provider in cash. At the end of the year, she claimed it all as income and I was still able to take the childcare tax deduction by using her SS#.

I'm not sure why people here are getting so upset about this and acting like there's some illegal activity going on. According to the IRS site he would need to file a 1099-MISC. Until you know that he's not going to report the income, it sure sounds like you're making a big deal about nothing.

Well I enjoy making a big deal out of nothing just like you do.


Anyway

If Lindsay Lohan's Daddy can be believed Jon asked to be paid in cash to hide the income from TLC. I'm sure he was planning on claiming it all.

Now If he won with the chips does he claim all his winning or if he loses does he get a deduction

 

[DMRick]

I do agree with you. Jon makes poor choices. Yes, it's his fault, but I do feel like he just doesn't seem to get they are poor choices.

It does quickly become out of their control what gets said for both of them. Plus, both of them manage to say things that get (IMO) twisted and changed and make them look like they mean even worse than what they say. For instance, if it had been any other person than Kate, who said someday she'd like to buy a ring with 8 small diamonds to represent her kids, everyone would be fine with it. But she says things at the dumbest times..like when she's saying she doesn't have enough money to pay the bills. In all likelyhood, she didn't mean she would buy it tomorrow, but gee, what a stupid time to say it. Then everyone grabs what she said, and it becomes a big deal.

Jon says he wants off of the reality show..next thing you know he's talking about going on a reality show. Again, stupid and poor timing.

If they both just shut their mouths, they would be so much better off.

and here I thought I'd hid my dislike pretty well....

I am sick of beating the "Jon is making poor choices" horse to death, I will say that. Because he is making poor choices. We all know that. But, I also think he's made some unfortunate alliances (which is his fault, I know) that have said and done things that were out of Jon's control. Especially Lindsay Lohan's dad and the Stephanie nanny. They've perfected the art of throwing Jon under the bus.

I just wish they'd both shut up and move on privately, like they claim they want to.

OH. Did anyone see The View spoof last night on SNL?

 

[madge]

so I'm reading the TLC papers again... and notice something funny. Among all the evidence they're using against Jon, one of the sites cited is www.examiner.com ... which is pretty much a blog, written by lay people. Most of the JK8 articles are usually rewritten from a source like RadarOnline... not exactly the most newsworthy of sources.

 

[mikki'smom]

Usually I come down pretty hard on Jon but in the cash vs. check controversy I think he was pretty smart...I wouldn't take a check from Michael Lohan either....

 

[newtodis]

It's been great hanging out with you all -- I'll check in again if something big comes out, or I get over this feeling, or you get to Thread 8 -- whichever happens first.

I will certainly miss you! Your legal knowledge is so impressive and helpful! The more opinions the better!

in case you haven't noticed ... I'm not posting quite as often as I have in the past ... and while I don't plan on stepping away (because every time I say I'm going to, I get sucked back in ), the main focus these days is on the trial and that's not something I understand very well. There's just not much for me to say right now.

I'm glad you're hanging around! There are times here when it's hard to get "both sides" across but it looks like we're back on a "good" streak.

This thread has remained in the top 10 for almost 2 years on the Community Board. We've come close a few times with having it almost shut down, hopefully we can keep it open during the divorce proceedings. Divorce is shut a hot topic. So hopefully everyone can be civil.

I'm sure we will!!

 

[3prettyprincesses]

so I'm reading the TLC papers again... and notice something funny. Among all the evidence they're using against Jon, one of the sites cited is www.examiner.com ... which is pretty much a blog, written by lay people. Most of the JK8 articles are usually rewritten from a source like RadarOnline... not exactly the most newsworthy of sources.

Good grief. That's almost as bad as an 'unamed source' being used. Not very reputable. How on earth could THAT be used as evidence to support TLC's case, a blog? What a 3-ring circus. I'm rapidly reaching my crap limit here with J&K and TLC.

 

[MAKmom]

Jon Gosselin Goes Four-Wheeling With His Kids

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/11/new-photos-jon-gosselin-goes-four-wheeling-his-kids

 

[DMRick]

Did they interview him or pay him for an interview? Would that be what they are using? I would think if not, that would just be heresay.

so I'm reading the TLC papers again... and notice something funny. Among all the evidence they're using against Jon, one of the sites cited is www.examiner.com ... which is pretty much a blog, written by lay people. Most of the JK8 articles are usually rewritten from a source like RadarOnline... not exactly the most newsworthy of sources.

 

[DMRick]

Helmets people..what is wrong with you? It would just take a second to put them on.

Jon Gosselin Goes Four-Wheeling With His Kids

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/11/new-photos-jon-gosselin-goes-four-wheeling-his-kids

 

[MAKmom]

http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/08/taylor-swift-saturday-night-live-video/

SNL Spoof of Kate

 

[kidshop]

and here I thought I'd hid my dislike pretty well....

I am sick of beating the "Jon is making poor choices" horse to death, I will say that. Because he is making poor choices. We all know that. But, I also think he's made some unfortunate alliances (which is his fault, I know) that have said and done things that were out of Jon's control. Especially Lindsay Lohan's dad and the Stephanie nanny. They've perfected the art of throwing Jon under the bus.

I just wish they'd both shut up and move on privately, like they claim they want to.

OH. Did anyone see The View spoof last night on SNL?

Yeah, I saw it! It wasn't great (well, it WAS SNL) but I chuckled a few times. For those who didn't see it, Taylor Swift played Kate. there were some funny hair jokes and of course my favorite, about how a mother needs patience, b/c sometimes the paparazzi say they will show up at 10, but then they don't get there until 11!

 

[madge]

Did they interview him or pay him for an interview? Would that be what they are using? I would think if not, that would just be heresay.

I can't remember ever reading anything on examiner.com that wasn't either a reprint of something from a larger tabloid or someone's opinion about an article. I suppose the possibility exists that there has been an original, examiner-based article where Jon was directly interviewed, but I've not seen it.

this is one of the articles used as reference in the paperwork:
http://www.examiner.com/x-11363-Dal...selin-returns-home-cancels-visit-to-nightclub

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If the money is in a revocable trust the grantor of the trust can change it at any time that he/she wants. From what I've read, Kate set up revocable trusts with her being the grantor. That means Kate could change the trust at anytime including withdrawing all of the funds.

Now, she has said repeatedly that the money is safe and secure but no one knows what the future brings.

That wasn't my question.

My question was whether the state of PA can allow that money to be used to pay a penalty i.e. if they were to lose a lawsuit.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Good grief. That's almost as bad as an 'unamed source' being used. Not very reputable. How on earth could THAT be used as evidence to support TLC's case, a blog? What a 3-ring circus. I'm rapidly reaching my crap limit here with J&K and TLC.

Unless it were the ONLY source, I don't think it is "crap" to include it.

Really--what's the difference between a lay person and a reporter anyway?

The fact that Jon's antics were being written about is the problem. Then it becomes Jon's responsibility to demostrate they are not true--or to accept that they are.

Innocent until proven guilty--how does one explain all these stories if they weren't guilty but opted to not do anything about the "lies"?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I can't remember ever reading anything on examiner.com that wasn't either a reprint of something from a larger tabloid or someone's opinion about an article. I suppose the possibility exists that there has been an original, examiner-based article where Jon was directly interviewed, but I've not seen it.

this is one of the articles used as reference in the paperwork:
http://www.examiner.com/x-11363-Dal...selin-returns-home-cancels-visit-to-nightclub

Little tidbit of trivia for everyone..

If you glance through your newspaper, you will notice MANY articles reprinted from the AP wire or other syndicated service. (and there will be errors sometimes, so even the AP professionals aren't correct.)

Also--much of what you see on your local news (outside of the "local" part) are sourced from lots of sources including CNN or MSNBC or FOX (whomever their agreement is with) as well as AP.

Much of what gets reported is unoriginal. It doesn't make it invalid though on that fact alone.

 

[daughtersrus]

That wasn't my question.

My question was whether the state of PA can allow that money to be used to pay a penalty i.e. if they were to lose a lawsuit.

If it's in a revocable trust, I don't see why not. The state of PA has no say over how the money is used. The grantor of the trust does. At any time, the grantor can withdraw any/all of the money and spend it on anything that he/she wants to. Whatever money is in the trust belongs to the grantor. Upon the grantor's death, the money then transfers to the beneficiaries.

In this case J or K is the grantor and the children are the beneficiaries.

 

[daughtersrus]

Well I enjoy making a big deal out of nothing just like you do.

Besides this IRS topic, can you give some examples?

Anyway

If Lindsay Lohan's Daddy can be believed Jon asked to be paid in cash to hide the income from TLC. I'm sure he was planning on claiming it all.

Where did you read that Jon asked to be paid in cash?

Now If he won with the chips does he claim all his winning or if he loses does he get a deduction

The casino is not required to give you a 1099 unless you win over $1,999.99 but that doesn't mean that you're not supposed to be reporting all of you wins under that amount. As the tax law stands, you are entitled to deduct your losses up to the amount of your winnings on your federal return. http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc419.html