iscoverAmateur poker player “Lucky Eddie” has failed to overturn a substantial tax bill after an audit uncovered numerous “unexplained” income sources.
Gambler’s luck runs out with hefty tax bill on ‘unexplained’ income
25 July 2025
•
8 minute read
In 2017, the Commissioner of Taxation audited poker player Ti Ke (Eddie) Tran after he failed to lodge income tax returns in 2014, 2015 and 2016, despite the significant sums of money that had flowed through his bank account.
A skilled poker player, Tran claimed that numerous “unexplained” deposits identified in the investigation were from poker earnings, which are tax-free in Australia, as well as informal loan repayments from other players.
You’re out of free articles for this month
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
However, the Commissioner contended that Tran’s numbers didn’t add up and assessed him for a steep tax bill, a decision Tran appealed.
“Mr Tran was quick to offer the Tribunal estimates [of his winnings], which suggested he was a remarkably successful player, but did not have the records to substantiate them,” court documents read.
Tran did not keep records of his gambling income, noting that he had obtained advice from an accountant who informed him that gambling earnings were not assessable income.
The Commissioner concluded that Tran’s actual poker winnings had been significantly smaller than he had led them to believe, and that he’d spent large sums of cash – $4.7 million at the Star casino and $849,000 at the Crown – which appeared to have ‘no identifiable source.’
“Analysis of Mr Tran’s bank accounts suggested these ‘unexplained’ funds could not have come from Mr Tran’s winnings at poker or his bank accounts,” court documents read.
During the 2017 audit, Tran told the Commissioner that he was involved in property investment and development. However, he had not listed any occupation on his personal living expenses questionnaire.
He later denied that he had any source of income aside from gambling and gave evasive answers to questions relating to whether or not he had been gambling full-time.
“Tran’s answers to these questions struck me as highly calculated and evasive in circumstances where he was well aware that the Commissioner had expressed doubts about the source/s of other income he might have earned in the years in dispute,” the Commissioner said.
“I was not confident given these events that Mr Tran was being honest with the Tribunal about his sources of income.”
The Commissioner added that Tran never properly explained the discrepancies between self-reported accounts of his property development activities.
“Tran has also not adequately explained why he told the Australian Taxation Office he was involved in property development but subsequently has denied knowledge of the property development activities carried out by the Family Trust,” the Commissioner said.
Court documents said that Tran’s hearing had been time-consuming and that Tran had caused “significant disruptions” throughout the process.
“He was a difficult witness. Under cross-examination, he frequently objected to or tried to deflect or avoid answering any question he did not like.”
The tribunal found that Tran himself had written large parts of his witnesses’ statements concerning alleged loans he had given to players, friends and family. He did not deny his involvement in crafting the witness statements.
Based on the available evidence, the Commissioner determined that Tran had earned large amounts of taxable income from an unidentified source outside of his gambling revenue.
He found that Tran had received unexplained deposits, which it treated as taxable income, of $1,492,164, $1,527,636, $2,879,606 and $3,355,016, respectively, for the 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 income years.
Tran also received an administrative penalty of 75 per cent for the 2014 to 2016 income years due to his failure to lodge tax returns, which was uplifted by 20 per cent for the 2015 and 2016 income years.
The Administrative Review Tribunal of Australia declined Tran’s appeal to overturn the amended tax assessment and associated penalties.
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!
