Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:HO HO HO NOW I HAVE A MACHINE GUN! (Score 1) 381

No, they don't. When an employee gives a real gift, they add it's value to the employee's W-2 as unexpected income. If the employee donates the gift, they employee can now deduct it. If you donate in an employee's name, you don't add it to the employee's W-2, so there's nothing for the employee to deduct. If they were to report it as income, then everyone who doesn't itemize would get shafted, being taxed for income that they never saw or had the freedom to use as they pleased.

Comment Re:Write off (Score 1) 381

Nah. Employer gifts are income according to the IRS. If they reported the donation as income on your W-2, yes, you could deduct that, but that's not what they'd do. They'd just not report it on your W-2, so that you don't have to deduct anything. Otherwise, people who don't itemize would get completely screwed over. https://www.shrm.org/resources...

Comment Re:So do the employees get to write that off? (Score 1) 381

If alphabet gifts to the employees, that gift is taxable income, meaning the employee pays the tax. If they give you as an employee a gift and you donate it to charity, it stops being taxable income, meaning you are able to deduct that reported value from you taxable income and potentially be refunded as a result. If they donate in your name, that means that the additional taxable income isn't reported for you, so there's nothing to deduct.

Comment Re:So do the employees get to write that off? (Score 1) 381

The $14,000 gift limit explicitly does not apply to employers giving gifts to employees. When an employer gives a gift to an employee, it is considered a fringe-benefit, and the value of it must be reported as taxable income. If Alphabet were to use trickery like putting stuff in other people's names, when giving significant gifts to 70,000 employees, they would get caught pretty easily.

Comment Re:So do the employees get to write that off? (Score 1) 381

You are mistaken. The $14,000 gift exclusion is for gifts from friends and family. When an employer gives you a gift, unless it is something so tiny that it isn't practical to account for it (known as de minimis), its value is supposed to be reported as income. Now what constitutes that tiny amount is open ended, but if it's anything worth more than $50, the IRS would probably not be cool with it going unreported if it were to find out.

Comment Re:A gift for the stupid and uneducated (Score 1) 188

One is Analog microphones + digital effects & synths -> digital recording -> analog conversion through speakers which vibrates your ear.

The other is Analog microphones + digital effects & synths -> digital recording -> analog recording -> conversion to voltages which are amplified -> conversion to speakers which move your ears

Honestly, as long as the digital sample rate is high enough (these days, it always is) and you listen to the record on a quality hi-fi, and you take care of your records, then you aren't losing anything, except convenience. But yeah, you aren't really gaining anything either, unless you count the ability to do record-scratching (which can also be done digitally) and being more forced to listen to a whole side of a record before flipping it or changing records, instead of the modern ease of the "next track" button.

Comment Re:Looks like the loudness war is being fought (Score 3, Insightful) 188

I'm sure there are exceptions, but it's not like producers routinely do an entirely separate mixdown for vinyl when they release modern stuff in multiple-formats. They make one mix, and if causes the needle to skip over, they limit the entire track on the vinyl until it doesn't. The ratio between the amount of quiet portions and loud portions (dynamic range) doesn't change, it's just that the overall amplitude is reduced. Absolutely nothing prevents producers from making CDs with high dynamic range. Compressing the dynamics in order to up the loudness was done on CDs because they could, and because they were finding it helped sell more albums when you had more loudness to make you stand out over the competition.

By all means, go buy an original vinyl album in good condition instead of a "Remastered anniversary edition", where, yeah, they tend to compress the mix and amplify the result. Or go buy a vinyl album because you are a DJ who actually knows how to spin vinyl. Or shit, go buy vinyl because you're nostalgic for the way things used to be, if that's what you're in to. But don't buy vinyl because you think it's gonna sound better than digital. That is, unless you group together the hiss of a low-quality hi-fi setup, and the clicks and pops from mishandling an record over time somehow improve the sound. And even if you do want that, There's an App for That.

Slashdot Top Deals

Heuristics are bug ridden by definition. If they didn't have bugs, then they'd be algorithms.

Working...