Tarot Readers don't need to be Licensed in Los Angeles

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 06 Aug 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

I do not know	06 Aug 2004
I'm hope I'm posting this in the appropriate forum. Tarot has apparently come up in the news in Los Angeles recently ( http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=4&u=/nm/20040804/od_nm/life_fortunetellers_dc ), and has been under discussion at Democratic Underground, in the thread linked below: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=111x28479#28506 I guess I wondered if any tarot readers here had any feelings about licensing, paying taxes on your income, and the spiritual versus mundane nature of your work.

Ace	07 Aug 2004
I do readings for money and I report my income. Even my CASH income. Not because I am afraid of the IRS, but because it is right to do. After I had worked at pschic fairs for a year, and made a little money, I told my tax preparer that I was reading cards at a psychic fair, and I needed to report the income. When we met a week later, he said, "that was a weird phone call, I thought you said you were a fortuneteller and did readings for money and needed to report the income." He did a Schedule C for me shaking his head the whole time, "I never did taxes for a psychic before." I never thought about it as mundane vs spiritual work, but don't even churches have to report income to the IRS? even if they are not for profit? It is kind of funny though, to take my tarot decks (I have ordered them 6 at a time from Robin Wood) off my taxes as a business expense!

I do not know	08 Aug 2004
Thanks for your response. I guess it wasn't a very popular topic. To answer your question--I'm not an accountant or tax lawyer--I believe that churches do report, but they're incorporated (is that a license?) as a particular type of religious non-profit organization. I don't do Tarot readings for anyone but myself. I used to sell items at the swap meet, and also reported all my cash income. I figured that to be legal, which was always important to me, I had to. What I wonder about the Los Angeles problem outlined in the Yahoo! article, is what does licensing do to reduce scamming? I think it's a non-sequitur. What does one's competence have to do with one's integrity? I've certainly run into plenty of licensed professionals (in the U.S.) who don't have much integrity beyond their own wallets, and I've also run into other professionals who do appear to have integrity.

cartarum	10 Aug 2004
personally, i think that its wrong to sell spirituality in any form. however, paying for a reading does symbolize to some extent that the querent recognizes that they are asking for a reading, therefore absolving the reader of any responsibility. tarot, i think was not originally meant for reading for others, anyhow. as for the law of money, i would say that since psychologists, financial advisors, and the such must pay taxes, so must tarot readers. unless, of course, tarot reading became an actual religion, much like astrology and divination in general in china. if so, then it would be neccessary to have licensed practitioners, in the same way that a preacher cannot preach typically, unless they have learned at the seminary. ~A~

The Tarot Readers don't need to be Licensed in Los Angeles thread was originally posted on 06 Aug 2004 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.