Suppose an individual has won the $10 million jackpot in the United States. After the taxes, he will receive $4,218,274 in his account (assumed that the winner is residing in a state where there are no state taxes on jackpot).
Now consider another case, where the winner claims that he took the ticket on behalf of a group of 10 individuals and the reward needs to be split. After the taxes, everyone will receive $451,909 in their accounts for a total of $4,519,090, which is around 7% higher compared to the first case.
My question is whether this strategy is legal or not? Can the winner reduce the tax burden by using this method?
I don't know exactly how the laws work in the United States. But in general it seems to me that this option would not work. One person buys the ticket, and he is the winner. And after paying all the taxes, he divides the money among the other participants.
Although it seems to me that if you have proof that you have negotiated in advance the purchase of this lottery, you can try through the court somehow reduce the tax. But I wonder how much money your lawyers will ask for it
I have to agree with StartupAnalyst. This loophole should not be there, else the governments would lose a lot of the tax revenue. Here the example is given for jackpot being shared by 10 individuals, resulting in a reduction in tax burden of 7%. Why 10? Why not 1000? In that case there won't be any tax which is due. If it was possible to reduce taxes in this way, then jackpot winners would start misusing it. So I don't think that it is possible. And I don't even know whether you can claim multiple ownership of a single lottery ticket if the lottery T&C clearly prevents it. So going to the courts also won't work.