What to do with Bonds' ball?

[Pedro Cerrano]

Some lunatic that won the Bonds auction has left it up to the general public to decide what to do with the ball:

A) Give it to the HOF

B) Give it to the HOF with an asterisk branded on it

C) Launch it into space (no I'm not kidding)

This is bad in so many ways but the top one, of course, is that anyone can vote on this. Including those that are not baseball fans and only recognize Bonds as some evil cheater.

Bonds is, in my opinion, the greatest hitter to ever live. His accomplishments should be enshrined in the Halls of Cooperstown.

If this ball is launched into orbit because some eccentric decided to get a little publicity I won't be happy.

[Todd-O]

I think the Bonds record along with the McGwuire record are jokes. I understand that a lot of players... pitchers and hitters... have dipped into the juice over the last decade +. And I also understand that Bonds is and has been a truly exceptional player... if it weren't for the fact that he put on 35 lbs and saw his hat size increase from a 8 to a 12, then I would be apt to say he's one of the best ever. And he may be one of the best ever... except for the small issue of this home run record. See... I disagree with the fact that muscle doesn't = more home runs. I saw both Big Mac and Bonds play on several occasions and witnessed - with my own eyes - hits that for your very good NON-steroid players would have been only hard line-drives or warning track fly balls. I have avidly watched baseball my whole life - and the HRs coming off of these players are crazy. Bonds didn't need help seeing the ball... but his added strength made any contact he have different effects on the ball. Namely, flying out of the park.

Frankly, I could careless about Bonds and his insane body size. But I feel ripped off because watching someone chase the home run record FOR REAL would have been fun. I remember watching Rose get his record... and of course the build-up to Cal's truly unbelievable chase of history. Those were thrilling. They were awesome. They made me happy to be a fan. Frankly, Bonds' achievement was meant nothing to me... and that sucks.

[BustaJ2632]

If I were in the Hall of Fame and I wanted to see Bonds stuff from #756, I'd MUCH prefer to see the bat than the ball. Maybe that's just me. But considering that if I had caught the ball, I'd likely have kept it, I don't get bothered by it not being in the Hall of Fame.

Not to mention that everything under the sun seems to wind up in the Hall these days. Oooooh, they have Mike Bordick's glove! And there's Jose Canseco's Devil Rays hat! Seriously, pretty soon the entire village of Cooperstown is going to have to be abandoned and all the stores will become part of the Hall's archives just so that they can store all the stuff people donate to them.

[Camden_yardbird]

As much as I dislike Bonds and how this record may have been obtained, this ball belongs in the HOF. It should be put there so that when we, and those who come after us can educate our children as to how baseball was changed by steroids, so that they may better ward against whatever cheating is going on in the game when they are watching it.

The history of cheating in baseball has its stories, but most are hidden to the general public who has no interest in pursuing the stories. But showing this ball in the HOF for the controversy that it is.

[Lt Melmo]

It's not just some eccentric though. It's Mark Ecko, the multi-millionaire designer, and that makes all the difference to me. This looks like one big publicity stunt. I haven't been able to find any info on Ecko actually being a baseball fan in the least before this. I think it'd be awesome for the ball to go into Cooperstown with an asterisk, but not because a multi-millionaire put it up to vote. That just isn't meaningful to me. If it were vandalized by an angry fan then it would hold more weight to me, not something politely put to vote by Mark freaking Ecko.

[SpringBarb]

Eko was on the Today Show this morning talking about it. He kept talking about himself as a fan of "popular culture." He also said that he voted for the asterisk one.

[square634]

If I were in the Hall of Fame and I wanted to see Bonds stuff from #756, I'd MUCH prefer to see the bat than the ball. Maybe that's just me. But considering that if I had caught the ball, I'd likely have kept it, I don't get bothered by it not being in the Hall of Fame.

Not to mention that everything under the sun seems to wind up in the Hall these days. Oooooh, they have Mike Bordick's glove! And there's Jose Canseco's Devil Rays hat! Seriously, pretty soon the entire village of Cooperstown is going to have to be abandoned and all the stores will become part of the Hall's archives just so that they can store all the stuff people donate to them.

I doubt you would have kept it because you would have probably had to pay $200,000 in income taxes even if you didn't sell it. And if it increased in value, you'd probably have to pay even more taes.

[BustaJ2632]

I doubt you would have kept it because you would have probably had to pay $200,000 in income taxes even if you didn't sell it. And if it increased in value, you'd probably have to pay even more taes.

OK I'm sorry for what is about to become a hijack but that whole thing is absolutely the most bogus thing I've ever heard (no offense to you, I know it's something that's been around for a few months). From what I've read, it seems likely to me that if someone had chosen to fight it, they'd have had a good chance in court.

It's a baseball...I can't imagine it costs more than $20. If someone offers $1 million, that's great, but if I have no interest in selling I can't comprehend how I should be required to pay taxes. The ball itself has a miniscule value. Any other value that someone puts on it is completely sentimental/arbitrary.

If I were to catch a ball like that, I would do one of two things. Give the ball back to the player in rare instances (if I felt I could parlay it into meeting a guy I really admire, like Griffey), or keep it. In all honesty, if the IRS came after me, I'd fight them tooth and nail.

[square634]

OK I'm sorry for what is about to become a hijack but that whole thing is absolutely the most bogus thing I've ever heard (no offense to you, I know it's something that's been around for a few months). From what I've read, it seems likely to me that if someone had chosen to fight it, they'd have had a good chance in court.

It's a baseball...I can't imagine it costs more than $20. If someone offers $1 million, that's great, but if I have no interest in selling I can't comprehend how I should be required to pay taxes. The ball itself has a miniscule value. Any other value that someone puts on it is completely sentimental/arbitrary.

If I were to catch a ball like that, I would do one of two things. Give the ball back to the player in rare instances (if I felt I could parlay it into meeting a guy I really admire, like Griffey), or keep it. In all honesty, if the IRS came after me, I'd fight them tooth and nail.

Oh yeah, it's totally bogus, but it isn't at all surprising that the government wants as much money as it can get. I'm sure their argument would be that in economics, the cost of something is the highest price someone is willing to pay for it. For example, hypothetically a company could get around income taxes by paying their employees with rare baseball cards instead of paychecks (I know this would never happen, but I'm sure you could create a more plausible hypothetical item). Yes, the "card" is only worth 3 cents or whatever, but its actual value as income is its sale price.

[TGO]

OK I'm sorry for what is about to become a hijack but that whole thing is absolutely the most bogus thing I've ever heard (no offense to you, I know it's something that's been around for a few months). From what I've read, it seems likely to me that if someone had chosen to fight it, they'd have had a good chance in court.

It's a baseball...I can't imagine it costs more than $20. If someone offers $1 million, that's great, but if I have no interest in selling I can't comprehend how I should be required to pay taxes. The ball itself has a miniscule value. Any other value that someone puts on it is completely sentimental/arbitrary.

If I were to catch a ball like that, I would do one of two things. Give the ball back to the player in rare instances (if I felt I could parlay it into meeting a guy I really admire, like Griffey), or keep it. In all honesty, if the IRS came after me, I'd fight them tooth and nail.

I think this was settled when McGwire hit either his 62nd or 70th HR, don't recall which one.

You getting the ball I believe was determined not to be a taxable event. The owner of the ball, MLB, essentially "loses" the ball and you find it. Not a taxable realization of income.

It is also not taxable as a gift. People always seem to think there's a gift tax on recipients, but there isn't. The gift tax is applied to the giver, not the recipient. More on that in a minute.

Obviously, if you sell the ball, you will be realizing income and you will be taxed. If you give the ball to the person who hit it, technically you should be taxed under the gift tax (which applies to gifts worth more than a certain amount, I think $10k). However, at the time of McGwire's HR, the internal revenue commissioner said the IRS would not tax someone who gave the ball back to the hitter.

Note: This is not legal advice. I am not a lawyer, just a law student who got a measley B+ in Federal Income Tax. :p

[Odenton O]

TGO is right. The IRS wouldn't want taxes on anything until you sold it. Catching the ball is a windfall. You don't have actual income until you sell it.

This is ALSO not legal advice. ;)

[ELC]

I don't know, if I were Bonds I'd think it would be pretty sweet to be able tell people that record breaking home run I hit is somewhere in orbit.

[TGO]

Bonds sez: Marc Ecko is an idiot (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3026654&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines)

[square634]

Bonds sez: Marc Ecko is an idiot (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3026654&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines)

I have to agree.

[bgfield]

That "lunatic" happens to be pretty damn rich, so I think what he's doing is great.

If anyone wants to vote on what to do with the ball (and if you think he's an "idiot" then you may as well vote that it goes to the Hall), go here: http://www.vote756.com/marcecko/

I think he should put an asterisk on it, and THEN send it to the hall :)

[bgfield]

It's not just some eccentric though. It's Mark Ecko, the multi-millionaire designer, and that makes all the difference to me. This looks like one big publicity stunt. I haven't been able to find any info on Ecko actually being a baseball fan in the least before this. I think it'd be awesome for the ball to go into Cooperstown with an asterisk, but not because a multi-millionaire put it up to vote. That just isn't meaningful to me. If it were vandalized by an angry fan then it would hold more weight to me, not something politely put to vote by Mark freaking Ecko.
Who cares who put it to vote? He's only going by the results of the vote, which is determined by US.

And why would you be able to find info on the net about whether or not someone is a baseball fan? Is that gonna be listed under their bio? :rolleyes:

[bgfield]

TGO is right. The IRS wouldn't want taxes on anything until you sold it. Catching the ball is a windfall. You don't have actual income until you sell it.

This is ALSO not legal advice. ;)

According to the link which talks about Bonds' comments on the matter: "Some tax experts said Murphy would have owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes based on a reasonable estimate of the ball's value even if he had never sold it. He may also have faced capital gains taxes as the ball gained value."

So he may have been subjected to heavy taxes.

[weams]

<a href="http://www.vote756.com"><img src="http://www.vote756.com/marcecko/banners/banner1.gif"></a>