On Mar 26, 6:05 am, "Gil Faver" <rowdy'sb...[at]xxyz.com> wrote:
- quote -

purposes....makes it harder for a tenant to find where I actually live
(they are low income apartments..I have had problems before).

========================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
- please trim the post to which you are responding

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

"Paul Thomas" <paulthomascpa[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9hiGj.25727$r76.25223[at]bignews8.bellsouth.net...
- quote -

Thanks - this clears up for me what the OP was doing (I think). So, if this
was me, I would want to get rid of the "partnership with self", and hold the
property itself in my living trust. What are the tax issues here?

And, what was the purpose for not doing this in the first place? A savings
in property taxes?

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

<zl1515[at]yahoo.com> wrote
- quote -

Since the building didn't change hands........no.


- quote -



Looks like you have your answer.

Any new owner/partner buying in at any amount would not change the basis in
the asset.



- quote -


And that asset - the building - isn't what you bought.




--
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Athens, Georgia

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

This is the scenario
Rental Property-Purchased thru a Partnership in 2003.
I held 51% interest in the Partnership.
On 12-31-07 I bought my partner's 49% and placed it in the name of my
Revocable Living Trust in order to avoid changing the deed from the
Partnership name.
The IRS no longer recognizes it as a Partnership (since my RLT and I
are the same tax entity).

Question:
Is it acceptable to depreciate the first half as usual and the newly
purchased half according to the new basis?
I understand that normally buying out a portion of a Partnership would
not alter the basis of the Real Estate the Partnership owns. However,
this is the only asset of the Partnership and if the IRS will not
recognize it as a Partnership anyway...wouldn't that make it acceptable
to figure it with the new basis?

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >