1984 deemed ineligable for all Tony categories — Page 2

IdinaBellFoster said: "I'm sure Riedel will make something up about this."

Actually LOLed in my office.

This is quite the twist.

Fordham2015 said: "This story just keeps getting weirder- the whole thing may have stemmed from a negative review of The Social Network

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/theater/1984-ineligible-tony-awards-nominator-denied-access.html?smid=tw-share"

I read the review. It's really more of a "think piece" about what the movie gets wrong about Mark Zuckerberg and the place of Facebook in our lives blah blah blah. It's not a particularly dynamic read and I doubt it would have had much, if any, effect on the box office. Rudin isn't even mentioned.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jose-antonio-vargas/the-social-network-hollyw_b_747233.html

Something strange is going on, but I don't think a 7-year-old screed on HuffPo is it.

PepperedShepherd said: "Rudin isn't even mentioned."

Rudin produced the movie The Social Network.



I can't remember which theatre writer tweeted a few theories the other day, but they said maybe Rudin doesn't want journalists as Tony nominators?

SomethingPeculiar said: "I can't remember which theatre writer tweeted a few theories the other day, but they said maybe Rudin doesn't wantjournalists as Tony nominators?"

That's dandy, but them's not the rules in force, and the way one gets what one wants is not to break the rules but to attempt to change them.

As a sidebar, Rudin may think he has some power here, but he doesn't. And if you don't believe that, bear in mind that the admin committee is basically controlled by the landlords and they have voted where to draw the line. He could royally mess up this year's awards (see my post about the revivals) but they can choose to give their real estate to folks who follow the rules. Unless he is prepared to pack up his toys and go play in a different sandbox, he will submit. LOL

JustAnotherNewYorker said: "What's the value of the tickets and who is the recipient (is it the Tonys, or the nominator)?


If the value ishigh enough and the recipient is the nominator, they may be required to issue a 1099-misc: In order to do that, they require a valid taxpayer ID number or SSN (without this you may get an information return reporting penalty). I wonder if that's part of what Rudin's accountant perceived as the problem.
Alternatively, Rudin is an ass, so that's also a possibility"

Jose Antonio Vargas has a Social Security Number. Many immigrants who don’t have legal status nevertheless have SSNs, precisely so that they can pay taxes and report income accurately. It makes them more likely to qualify for normalization of status if they eventually find themselves in a position to apply.

annang said: "
Jose Antonio Vargas has a Social Security Number. Many immigrants who don’t have legal status nevertheless have SSNs, precisely so that they can pay taxes and report income accurately. It makes them more lJkely to qualify for normalization of status if they eventually find themselves in a position to apply."

Yes. He happens to have one that he got with a fake student visa. It's clearly marked "Valid for work only with DHS authorization" (or something similar) (see his old WashPo article disclosing how he got it, and his tweet with the picture of the ssn card). They don't usually give you an SSN unless you can legally work:

Per the Social Security Administration:

"Generally, only noncitizens authorized to work in the United States by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can get a Social Security number."

https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10096.pdf

No argument about whether that's a good policy or not.

Given that Jose Antonio Vargas' SSN card says "Valid for work only with DHS authorization" and that he has disclosed that he doesn't have authorization, it would put anyone who want to pay him in a sticky situation. It's unclear to me whether the tickets are considered something given to the Tonys, given to him [as in a gift, which may not require work authorization], or perhaps given and requires a 1099-MISC. Depending on the validity of the underlying number, they may or may not want to issue the 1099.

SomethingPeculiar said: "

Comp tickets are usually listed as $0.00, so there is no monetary value of the ticket"

Just because they write $0 on them, doesn't mean they have 0 value per the IRS. The usual test [at least for those given internally to employees] is whether the event has empty seats of a similar type (so these are "free of cost" to the production). In this case, prime orchestra seats (depending on the production) certainly have value. Consider "Sunday in the park" which didn't go for the Tony: Some were arguing that was because the cost of the seats they would give up (to nominators, voters) would turn it from a hit to a flop (in the industry parlance). Those tickets would have had a value no matter what they print on them.



Of course, this could all be moot. I have no idea how the producers account for the tickets nor of their tax treatment. Hogan? Any insights?

My guess is that Rudin is an ass is the answer

There are, in fact, no 1099s issued. People who get comps for the benefit of the production, whether reviewers, editors, nominators, voters, admin committee members or just celebs who are given tickets to show up, among plenty of other situations, are not receiving income or a prize. You also do not get 1099'd when you get free samples at the grocery store.

There's a difference between being a jerk and a criminal, my dear friend.