Tax Guru – Ker$tetter Letter

Helping real people win the tax game.

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 690 other subscribers
  • Blog Stats

    • 327,316 hits
  • Posts By Day

    May 2005
    M T W T F S S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    3031  
  • Subscribe

  • Special Pages

Archive for May 1st, 2005

Taxes Should Be Irrelevant In Investment Decisions

Posted by taxguru on May 1, 2005

Q:

Kerry:
 
Did not help my “new” stock broker’s news that we now have $38,000.+/- in losses in Tech Stocks.  From a Tax strategy, do we now _need_ to dump this and take the losses over the next three years?  Or, offset this with $38,0000.+/- sales of our Bank stock (mostly old Bank of America (BAC)).  Bank of America pays 4% dividend on a $44. per share.  Our BAC cost basis is $24. per share.  I calculate a bit more return than 4% dividend.  To keep or not to keep BAC?

Our new broker recommends we move to more cash thru this offset. Go into Mutual funds.

Kerry, what say you?

 

A:

Just as with whether or not it’s a good time to sell off real estate, the tax consequences of selling off stocks are completely irrelevant in deciding whether to dump them or not.  That decision should only be based on whether you believe that their value has peaked and is likely to go down, and whether you could put the proceeds into a more lucrative investment.

Assuming that you do come to the conclusion that those tech stocks have no upside potential and are heading downward, selling would be the best move from an investment perspective.  From the tax angle, that will give you $38,000 of capital losses that can be used to offset up to that much of capital gains. 

Again, you shouldn’t sell off appreciated assets just to recognize the gains, unless those assets meet the same criteria of heading downward.

If you don’t have enough capital gains this year to offset the full $38,000 of losses, you can claim $3,000 of losses above the gains, and carry the unused losses over to your next year’s tax return, and so on.

While it wouldn’t make any sense to do this in your case, there are some people who try to intentionally recognize capital losses by selling off deflated stocks and then repurchasing them.  IRS has a weapon against this kind of manipulation called the Wash Sale Rule.  Under this rule, if the same stocks are repurchased within 30 days after their sale, no capital loss from the sale may be claimed on your tax return.  The loss would have to be added to the cost basis of the replacement stock.     Again, this shouldn’t apply to your case because, if the stocks are already so terrible that selling is the wisest move, there would be no reason to repurchase them.    

I hope this covers the points you were after.

Kerry

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Taxes Should Be Irrelevant In Investment Decisions

Rapid Home Sale

Posted by taxguru on May 1, 2005

Q:

Kerry, I have a capital gains tax question that I need answered. My wife and I are thinking about selling our new home I say new home because we have only lived in it for 3 months now. If I sold it tomorrow I would make about $96,000 In my pocket (after selling fees). We want to sell our home because my wife physically cannot handle her job anymore and I cannot solely handle the bills we have. She has been plagued by health conditions last year alone she had 4 separate surgery’s we thought it was all over after her hysterectemy last September. We thought she would be ok to return back to work. After her surgery and 6 week healing time we figured she was ready to go back to work and she felt great so we sold our current home and 6 months later moved into our current home. Now she is feeling more pain the Dr’s think it is kidney related now she can barely cope with being a mother to our 2 children let alone her 30 hour a week job. Now we want to sell our home and pay off our 2 vehicle payments and some other debt. Unfortunately since home prices have been skyrocketing here in AZ we would not be able to find a cheaper house payment. I have been doing tons of reading under the IRS website on unforeseen circumstances related to “A change in employment that leaves the taxpayer unable to pay the mortgage or basic living expenses”. I guess my question is what is considered basic living expenses? Is paying off all my debt so my wife does not have to work qualify for this? It says transportation expenses. Either way I will most likely sell my home but if I can avoid the 20k capital gain tax that would make things a lot easier on us.

I would rather know up front and pay the taxes so a few years down the road I do not get surprised by a piece of mail saying I owe x amount of dollars to IRS. Can I avoid part or all of the capital gain tax?

Thank You

 

A:

From your description, it sounds as if you would qualify for the pro-rated tax free exclusion based on the health issue.   Selling in order to pay off debt wouldn’t make as much sense as a rationale for the pro-rated exclusion as would the health and employment reasons.

As I described on my website, the prorated tax free exclusion works out to about $684.93 per day for a married couple.  Assuming your estimate of a net gain of $96,000 is accurate, you would need to live in the home for at least 140 days in order to have all of your profit exempt from tax.  If you move out and sell sooner than that, part of your profit will be subject to ordinary income tax rates since you will have owned the house for well less than the 12 months required for lower long term capital gains rates.

I hope this helps. You should obviously work out the figures in more detail with a tax pro.  My guess is that your calculation of the $96,000 gain may be seriously off, as most people don’t understand how to properly figure their true cost basis.

Good luck.

Kerry Kerstetter

 

Follow-Up Q:

Wow thanks for the quick response. Basically I should select had to move for health reasons? What kind of proof would I need to provide in the event I would be audited. Also how likely would it be for me to be audited?

Thanks again

 

A:

Again, your should really be working with your personal tax advisor to better take into account your unique circumstances.

However, if your wife’s medical condition is as bad as you described, the health reason seems perfectly appropriate.  While it’s not required, my philosophy with unusual circumstances is to attach a lot of explanation and documentation of the issues to the original tax return so that IRS screeners can see it up front and not waste their (and your) time calling you in for an audit.  His is the main reason that I have steadfastly refused to electronically file any tax returns.  There is no ability to attach additional info to e-filed returns.

In regard to what should be attached, I would include a narrative description, such as in your earlier email to me, plus some doctor’s statements.  That should be more than enough to convince IRS that your wife’s health is bad enough to warrant moving out of that home so soon after you moved in.

Good luck.

Kerry Kerstetter

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Rapid Home Sale

Leased Equipment And Section 179

Posted by taxguru on May 1, 2005

Q:

I read on your website that equipment acquired through $1.00 purchase option capital leases qualify for Section 179 treatment exactly the same as a cash purchase.  Would the tax treatment be any different if the lease had a mandatory 25% purchase requirement?  The purchase requirement is considered a put (balloon).  The Lessee must purchase the equipment at lease maturity and cannot return the equipment.

 

A:

It depends on how the buyer/lessee records the acquisition on his books.  If he sets it up as a purchase with the present value of the loan as the offsetting credit, and posts subsequent payments to principal and interest instead of lease expense, he would have a good case to claim the Section 179 in the first year.  The value to be used would not be the sum total of the lease payments because the obligation to the lessor would have to be discounted for the interest rate that is built into the monthly payments.

If, as many lessees want to do, he doesn’t show the debt on his balance sheet, and wants to expense the monthly lease payments, no Section 179 or depreciation would be appropriate.

IRS actually addresses this issue on its website:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=135485,00.html

Kerry Kerstetter

Posted in 179 | Comments Off on Leased Equipment And Section 179

Minimum Holding Period For 1031 Exchange

Posted by taxguru on May 1, 2005

Q:

I have a question that I have gotten many different answers on.  I bought my 1st investment property on March 15th (it was a pre-construction home and that is the date of the closing).  I am selling the property and it will be closing on May 4th.  I was told that 6 weeks is too short of a time period to hold a property to be exchanged.   I was told also that it could be done, but it is a very high risk and if you get caught there are penalties to pay.

I also am considering starting a small business (C corp) to funnel the sale through the corporation and then I can also re-invest the money and claim some expenses.  I am new at this and could use some advice. 

Thanks in advance for any info you can give me.  I live in the state of Florida and the investment property is also in Florida.

Thank You,

 

A:

There is no minimum holding period for property that is involved in a 1031 exchange.

What is a potential concern is if you start doing a lot of rapid purchases and sales and you or your corporation do nothing but that.  That would make you a real estate dealer, with the properties considered to be inventory.  Dealers are not allowed to use any of the tax saving techniques that investors can, such  as Section 1031, installment sales, or the special lower capital gains tax rates.  In addition, profits are subject to the additional 15.3% self employment tax.  There is no statutory explicit number of deals that will classify someone as a dealer.  It is a very gray area in taxation and should be addressed with a tax pro who knows how to avoid the dealer tag.

Using a corporation has a lot of tax saving potential.  However, it is not a do-it-yourself area.  You need to consult with a tax pro who understands how to best utilize them in order to avoid the common and very costly mistakes that people constantly make when going it alone.

Good luck.

Kerry Kerstetter

 

Posted in 1031 | Comments Off on Minimum Holding Period For 1031 Exchange

COLA

Posted by taxguru on May 1, 2005

I received this from a reader regarding my Section 179 info.

Hello,

I’m on your website and for 2006 & 2007 you have “+ COLA”. What exactly is cola?

Thanks,

My Reply:

COLA = Cost Of Living Adjustment

This is a standard term to designate adjusting something for inflation, usually based on something like the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Kerry Kerstetter

Posted in 179 | Comments Off on COLA

Investing In Bubbles

Posted by taxguru on May 1, 2005

As strong a supporter as I am in real estate as the best type of investment, I am well aware of the fact that people can get carried away in feeding frenzies, such as we are seeing in parts of the country right now. It can stop abruptly; so be careful.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Investing In Bubbles