Trump wants to exclude tipped earnings from “pornographic activity”. How would you define it & does the medium matter?

[DrPepper12]

President Trump’s promise for “no tax on tips” has raised important practical questions for the Internal Revenue Service. What is the exact definition of a tip? Who typically receives them? Are photos of bare feet a type of pornography?

Maybe we should back up.

A sweeping tax cut that Republicans passed this summer created a new deduction for tips. While the tax break does not exempt tips from taxes entirely, it’s still an incentive for people to earn more of them. To avoid any economywide shift of earnings into tips, the I. R. S. and Treasury have had to impose some limits. Only people who work jobs that have “customarily and regularly” received tips can claim the deduction.

On the list of nearly 70 eligible occupations, detailed in a proposed regulation in September, were “digital content creators,” “entertainers and performers” and “dancers,” categories that, at first blush, seemed as if they could be a boon for America’s sex workers. But the Trump administration also added that tips for prostitution or “pornographic activity” would not be entitled to the new tax break.

The exclusion came as a disappointment to people who post sexually explicit, or even just sensual, content on platforms like OnlyFans where users can leave tips. Performers in the adult entertainment industry already face difficulties accessing basic financial services. And the I. R. S. rule seemed like another example of America’s hostile public attitude toward a type of work that, at least privately, is widely consumed. In 2024, there were more than 4.6 million creator accounts on OnlyFans, and more than 377 million fan accounts, according to public disclosures by the site’s parent company, though it is unclear how many of those accounts are based in the United States.

[CalmUntilAbused]

Okay, first of all, I love this claim: "To avoid any economywide shift of earnings into tips, the I. R. S. and Treasury have had to impose some limits." What I understood from this was: "The bureaucrats are greedy, so they had to blunt the axe cutting the taxes." This is pure comedy to me.

Since You mentioned digital content creators and as I got familiar with the phenomenon of VTubers recently, I think the following explanation would put it best for people familiar with a certain circle of VTubers: "Projekt Melody will keep Her full donations from Twitch, but She will still pay taxes on Her yoga streams donations." Basically, tips for any activity where actually valuable content is being created will be exempt from taxes, while any activity where the "content" is being created by simply getting undressed will be still subject to full taxes (I guess this might actually allow Projekt Melody to be fully exempt from taxes, since from what I've heard, on Her yoga streams it is Her avatar that is getting undressed, not Her).

Now, as a proud hater of the OnlyFans phenomenon, I am glad that there will finally be some motivation for women to switch to more respectable jobs, since OnlyFans created a dark, dystopian reality where women whose skillset was restricted to simply getting undressed on camera were more successful than women who were actually contributing to the society as waitresses, entertainers and social/political commentators (I suspect from the last two cases that the general idea might also serve as a slight nod from President Trump to the female social and political commentators, including VTubers, who highlighted a few very important issues plaguing the USA before the latest elections and mostly hurting men, which might have given Him a slight edge in the race). Hopefully, it will heal the society from its mass addiction to sex and make it actually productive again - this would align with Trump's goal of resurrecting the US economy.

As for the "disappointment" suffered by traditional and online prostitutes of all kinds, as long as they are not getting banned from doing their professions (as a Catholic, I would actually be tempted to introduce such a ban, but I guess I'm more concerned with nigh-absolute economic freedom recently), I don't really care about it. It's not like those taxes are new, they existed before, and therefore I believe it is justified to use them as an incentive for women to switch to professions that have more positive effects on society. Sometimes, just like with Projekt Melody, who I mentioned earlier, they could just split their time into both kinds of activities.

[msc545]

Sex tense to make more people in its ultimate expression. In somewhat less your expressions. It makes people happy and feel good. How is this not contributing to society?

[CalmUntilAbused]

@msc545

Well... You cannot exactly do sex in its "ultimate expression" with a traditional prostitute, that would carry all kinds of risks, including for the baby that would get in the way of his/her mother's job. With online prostitutes, You cannot do sex in any "expression" (except the "singleplayer expression", I guess). Therefore, I don't think there is any contribution to the society here.

While I understand and appreciate the contribution of "sex in its ultimate expression" to the society, there is a terrible dark side to sex in any other expression, especially excess sex in any other expression. Namely, it's addictive. A person addicted to sex becomes incapable of leading a normal life, including meaningful, long-term relationships with the other sex. That sounds like a pretty significant detriment to the society.

[msc545]

Yep, I think you're right about this part of it.

[msc545]

Trump's just trying to hit The Sweet spot on people that earn tips. Still have to pay taxes but people who in occupations that he likes don't have to pay taxes or as many. At least. He is again basing policy on content and that is of course illegal and wrong. Seems like everything he does is either illegal or wrong or both.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Are you surprised? He's a FREAKIN' CROOK !!!

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Puritanism doesn’t do anything but turn people into shameful cowards about sex lmao


Honestly, there’s no exemption on taxes which is where I, someone who earns tips as a living, call bullshit. There are still taxes on them, meaning I still have to pay at the end of the year unless I make fewer than $20k again. Honestly, you could just rename tips to be “donations” as a cam girl and it’s essentially the same function except instead of going to a larger financial entity such as a charity or hospital, it’s going to a much smaller entity that still happily accepts the money offered. It’s a load of bullshit trying to backpedal and say “yes, we’ll give tax reductions on tips for everyone except whores because they’re not really people in our eyes.”

[Gwendoline]

he's absolutely right. Another thing is should we be facilitating sex work given how virtually every female pornstar comes to regret it.

Gratuity: Extra money for service (e. g., "leave a tip for the waiter").

[msc545]

I don't get it if every female pornstar comes to regret it. Why should we be facilitating sex work?

[Gwendoline]

@msc545 sorry I was asking my own question but forgot the question mark.

[msc545]

I don't even understand it as a question actually

[Gwendoline]

@msc545 thats ok.

[Still-alive]

Well i know the heritage foundation really really hates the LGBTQ folks so sooner or later they’ll start deeming anything with any hint and homosexual activity as ‘pornographic’. This is likely them talking through Trump.

[exitseven]

Sometimes there are unintended consequences whenever there is a sweeping change in policy. Tax codes are notorious for having gray areas where clever accountants can find a loophole that will save their clients a bundle.
The tax codes change from year to year and I imagine the problem will be addressed.

[msc545]

It seems really for some reason that I can't quite figure out those tax codes seem to have all kinds of loopholes for rich people and corporations and none for the rest of us. Of course, I'm sure that's just an oversight on the part of wealthy people.

[exitseven]

@msc545 I may have taken advantage of a few gray areas but never color outside the lines.

[msc545]

Yeah, I think that's true for me too. But for wealthy people, there's no such thing as coloring outside the lines. There are just advantages, and more advantages, and loopholes, and more loopholes, to the point where they don't pay taxes at all, and in fact, often benefit from tax money.

[exitseven]

@msc545 yes, I often wish that I could afford a high priced tax accountant.

[msc545]

I wish I could, too, but it sort of begs the question that if I could afford one, would I actually even need one? Probably so, but I'm not sure.

[exitseven]

@msc545 I have a degree in Accounting but it is just enough to be dangerous,. It did leave me with a pretty good idea about what would get flagged and what is too difficult to check.

[msc545]

Well that is certainly useful knowledge

[exitseven]

@msc545 Yes, if you write off a home office you better have all your receipts

[msc545]

I have a home office too but I don't bother trying to write it off because I think the hassle with the IRS is not worth the savings for me. Maybe I'm wrong about this but it just seems like too much trouble.

[exitseven]

@msc545 It is legal to do but it is one of these things that are scrutinized. Maybe a lot of people cheat.

[msc545]

I see.

[midnightmoon05]

Get a good lawyer 😉

[msc545]

@midnightmoon05 I have a good lawyer, but I try to make sure I never really need him.

[midnightmoon05]

@msc545 smart

[msc545]

@midnightmoon05 I try to be careful, and this guy costs $800/hour, so I am super careful.

[Sal_Monella]

I have absolutely no doubt that you can produce receipts that will prove your claim exactly. Don't you?