If you own real estate, you’re no doubt familiar with that wonderful paper loss called depreciation. But you may not be entirely aware that land cannot depreciate. Alas, you must delete part of the price you paid for your real estate land from your original purchase price to generate your tax deduction.
A cost segregation study might be the answer. The study, done by an engineer, can accurately allocate the cost between building and land. This price of the allocation can be cost-justified; after all, it can save you tax.
But at lower depreciation amounts, the benefits might not outweigh the cost, or, if you’re a tax pro, your client might not believe it does. You’ve still got a tax return to do. Regulation 1.167(a)-5 tells us that we have to do something:
In the case of the acquisition on or after March 1, 1913, of a combination of depreciable and nondepreciable property for a lump sum, as for example, buildings and land, the basis for depreciation cannot exceed an amount which bears the same proportion to the lump sum as the value of the depreciable property at the time of acquisition bears to the value of the entire property at that time.
It doesn't really give us much guidance. But you may have seen online or heard somewhere about the old 80/20 rule. That’s right, the tax law says 80 percent of cost gets allocated to the building with the remaining going to land. Only, hold on a second, I can’t find a citation for that one. Is it possible there is no such rule? Then again, Reilly’s 19th Law of Tax Planning says that Reilly uses sarcasm when discussing tax.
For the truth about this rule, continue reading here.
Subscribe to Read the rest of the article
Think Outside the Tax Box provides tax reduction strategies along with practical implementation advice in order to reduce your clients’ federal tax bill with ease.
Already have an account?Signin
CURRENT EDITION
An Overview of the Risks and Possibilities of Related Party Exchanges
Jorgen Rex Olson
IRC § 1031 exchanges have the ability to confer substantial financial benefits to taxpayers. Although taxpayers may use § 1031 to place themselves in a superior economic position, taxpayers may not exploit this section in an abusive manner. Taxpayers can use exchanges to give themselves different types of benefits, but one of the primary benefits is the deferral of federal income tax. When conducted correctly, 1031 exchanges are regarded as a form of legitimate tax avoidance. One of the main issues involved with these transactions is determining the boundaries between abusive tax avoidance and non-abusive tax avoidance. In the context of “related party exchanges” – i.e. those transactions which involve subsection 1031(f) – this issue shows up in a relatively complex fashion, because the related party rules are not well understood by most practitioners. Furthermore, determining abusive tax avoidance with related party exchanges is difficult because of the scarcity of case law.
Based on the case law which we have, and on the other authoritative references, we can put together a reasonable overview of the risks of related party exchanges. This overview should prove useful when providing expert counsel to taxpayers seeking to conduct this type of transaction. For direct exchanges, the 2-year ownership rule found in 1031(f)(1)(C) should be used as the dominant source of guidance. For “indirect exchanges,” taxpayers must be aware of the higher levels of risk involved, as there is a greater possibility of abusive tax avoidance.
To read more click here!
Famous Bad Citizens and the Code That Caught Them – Al Capone
Amber Gray-Fenner, EA NTPI Fellow USTCP
At its peak, Alphonse (Al) Capone’s criminal empire was worth approximately $1.3 billion when adjusted for inflation. On June 5, 1931, Capone was indicted on multiple counts of income tax evasion. At the time the maximum penalty for his offenses was 32 years in jail and $80,000 in fines (almost $1.6M in inflation adjusted dollars). The prosecution in Capone’s case “documented Capone’s lavish spending, evidence of a colossal income. The government also submitted proof that Capone was aware of his obligation to pay federal income tax but failed to do so.”
Click here to keep reading about this fascinating case…
Vehicle and Mileage Issues – Real-World Best Practices and Maximizing Deductions in a Tax Plan
Matt Metras, EA
Every tax professional has at least one client that when asked about business mileage replies, “I don’t know; what did I have last year?” You may have read that last sentence and thought, “most of them.” Self-employed taxpayers generally know they must track their mileage, but it’s seldom done correctly, or at all. Vehicle deductions are an area frequently challenged by the IRS on examination as well as an area the taxpayer is unlikely to prevail without strong, contemporaneous documentation. That said, very few taxpayers keep perfect records, so what are the best practices for mileage deductions in the real world?
Keep reading to find out!
