
Posted by taxguru on December 3, 2004

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on How a Ponzi Scheme stays alive:
Posted by taxguru on December 3, 2004

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Treacherous Waters
Posted by taxguru on December 3, 2004
I recently received this email from a very perceptive reader:
Great articles
Suggestion: “their different businesses” did you their different corporation. A corporation may have various DBAs or business but only qualifies for 1 section 179 expense election. Keep up the good work.
More Deductions
As I have described elsewhere, the Section 179 expensing election is much more lucrative for owners of C corporations because they can literally multiply their total deduction by splitting their purchases of business assets among their different businesses. With an S corp, the Section 179 deduction is limited to just the one amount. Likewise, the deduction for net rental losses is magnified by using a C corp because it can use rental losses to offset all operating income. An S corp’s rental losses are subject to the restrictive passive loss rules.
My response:
That is an excellent point. I should have referred to different “business entities” (1040 Sole Proprietorships vs. 1120 Corporations) instead of the less descriptive different “businesses” because a single 1040 or 1120 could each contain several different and distinct businesses and the Section 179 deduction is limited to a total of $102,000 for the entire 1040 and $102,000 for the total 1120, along with similarly controlled 1120s (a related topic I will probably be discussing soon). I also appreciate your copying & pasting the text from my site. That made it easier for me to go in and make the correction.
Thank you very much for your comments and please continue to point out examples that you notice where I may have said something in a confusing or otherwise less than precise manner. The last thing the tax game needs is more confusion.
Kerry Kerstetter
Posted in 179 | Comments Off on Section 179 Usage By Multiple Businesses
Posted by taxguru on December 3, 2004
Property taxes rising nationwide – Eventually this reaches the breaking point, as it did in the PRC in 1978, sparking Proposition 13.
Aide Takes Blame for Tax Return Snooping Provision – So, it wasn’t an immaculately conceived provision after all. It was actually added by an oblivious human being who has no concept of the principles of privacy. Thanks to TaxProf Paul Caron and his sources for the latest on this topic. Unfortunately, this kind of thing happens all the time. The actual language in tax and all other laws is actually drafted by staffers and none of our elected rulers take the time to read the entire text before casting their votes. Sometimes these little hidden gems are discovered before the final vote; but most of the time nobody, other then the persons who snuck the text in, notice them until after it is passed. If they are outrageous enough, they may be changed in the technical corrections bill that inevitably follows many major pieces of legislation.
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on