Arthur Kamlet wrote:

- quote -

Isn't this a double-edged sword for 1031-exchange specialists?

Plus: some who are just embarking on real estate investment and would
have planned to use the old strategy going forward (reside in the
investment for the last two years before sale) may now consider
deferring gain via exchange instead.

Minus: those who have already been doing exchange deferral for some time
will find that the pre-2009 "grandfathering" of non-qualified use
becomes less valuable as the years go by and may want to move into the
property now so they can sell in two years and still get the benefit of
the old rule, rather than continuing to defer gain with future exchanges.

-Mark Bole

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Arthur Kamlet <-To[at]panix.com> wrote:
- quote -

Alas, did take into consideration the non-arm's length
sales of rental property?

Dick

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Phil Marti <prm20871[at]verizon.net> wrote:
- quote -

Whenever I hear 'tax simplification'. I reach under my pillow
and click off the safety catch on my Luger.

Though obsolete, my Luger is deadly force against politicians
standing in my bedroom doorway or more likely on the screen
of my television. A least destructive alternative is to
give such politicans the little finger of your left hand -
better known as "when you don't care enough to send the very
best."

Dick

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

"Arthur Kamlet" wrote:

- quote -

Shame on you! Every last one of them is working tirelessly to simplify the
Code. Haven't you been paying attention to their campaign rhetoric?

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

In article <U6Opk.91$w51.88[at]trnddc01> , Phil Marti <prm20871[at]verizon.net> wrote:
- quote -


You're right.



And it applies to all periods after 2008, not just the five
years before sale. So if you used the house as rental property
for fifteen years after 2008 and the last two years of ownership
you converted to your main home, then 2/17 x (gain) would qualify
against the 250,000 or 500,000 exclusion.


As said ealier, there is really very little money to be made by
the government here. Just something to add complexity to the
tax laws, an element clearly lacking today :-)
--


ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

"Arthur Kamlet" wrote:

- quote -

I think it's the gain that's prorated, not the exclusion. IOW, the full
$250,000 exclusion is available if you have that much gain during the period
of qualified use.

It's Section 3092 of the bill, HR 3221

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

In article <g7tb6d$sth$1[at]reader1.panix.com> ,
Dick Adams <rdadams[at]panix.com> wrote:
- quote -


The first two have been answered here.


The exclusion of gains modification is not going to bring in
much revenue, but satisfies some lawmakers sense of right
and wrong.


As Section 121 read before this change, if you owned and livd
in this home as yourmain home for at least two of the five years
before sale, you got the $250,000/500,000(MFJ) exclusion of gain.


Someone discovered you could have rental property for umpteen
years, then the last two years before sale move in and use it
as your main home, and still exclude the 250,000/500,000 except for
any post May 5, 1997 depreciation allowed/allowable on the rental.


The modification is to require you to prorate the exclusion for
the time used as a rental when you later move into the home as
your main home.


So if you used it as a rental for the first three of the five years,
and as your main home the last two of the five years, the exclusion
amount is now 2/5 x 250,000 = 100,000.


This prorating of the exclusion is one way only. If you lived in it
as your main home the first two or three years then converted it
to a rental the last three or two years, there is no need to
prorate the exclusion.
--


ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

"Dick Adams" <rdadams[at]panix.com> wrote in
- quote -





There are, or so it is believed, a slew of people "in business" who are
operating mainly on e-bay type sites that conduct business through paypal
type services. Also, many believe that the reporting mechanisim from the
credit card processor (which will catch paypal users) - similar to a 1099 -
will increase reporting.



They act as if there are people who would, like, cheat on their taxes by
under-reporting their income. Say it isn't so.



For a bulk of taxpayers, it has no direct impact.

For those who conduct an unreported business - or an under-reported
business - they are soon going to force the reporting of some of your
revenues.






--
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Watkinsville, 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Dick Adams wrote:
- quote -

Act of 2008, HR 3221.

Actual Text: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...:H.R.3221.ENR:

JCT Explanation of the tax provisions:
http://www.house.gov/jct/x-63-08.pdf

CCH Briefing should answer your questions:
http://www.house.gov/jct/x-63-08.pdf

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

The following is a cut-n-paste from a CCH article:
"According to a Democratic summary of the legislation,
the bill would provide tax relief to homebuyers and
homeowners, increase state allocations of low-income
housing tax credits and tax-exempt bond financing.
It would also increase funding for the Community
Development Block Grant program. The cost of these
and other provisions would be offset by requiring
credit card information return reporting by merchants,
delaying the worldwide allocation of interest rules
and modifying the exclusion of gains on the sale of a
principal residence."

What is the purpose of the credit card information return
reporting by merchants and what is its effect on taxpayers?

What are the worldwide allocation of interest rules?

How has the exclusion of gains on the sale of a principal
residence been modified?

Dick

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >