On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 14:13:53 EST, kamlet[at]panix.com (Arthur Kamlet)
wrote:

- quote -

Actually to clarify my situation is that the only 'improvement' that
was depreciated was a $1000 lousy retaining wall. (IMHO it should
have been expensed since it was a repair of a 'situation' - but goes
along to get along).
The property was purchase in 1976 or so in Calif for about 50k - now
the land value only - is about one million.
80% of the property purch value (50k) or about 40k was depreciated
straight line because it was regarded as the rental portion.

Question - assuming no complications - and nothing fancy what will be
the tax rate on that if sold today? Ordinary income or the long term
rate or something else?
m

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <_ghTk.8557$ZP4.7418[at]nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com> ,
Mark Bole <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote:
- quote -


What Mike is referring to is sec 1250 [Sec 1250 covers structural
buildings and additions that are structural in nature (a new
deck, and not a new refrigerator)] accelerated depreciation taken
before 1976. The difference between the accelerated amount and the
straight line amount is unrecaptured S 1250 depreciation figured
on Part III of the 4797. By now I would expect there are no such
properties in existence, but in case there are, the rule is still on
the books.


You are talking of the recapture of S 1250 depreciation on sale
of such property, and can see the calculation worksheet in the
Schedule D S1250 worksheet. Yes, there is such a worksheet.

--


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

mike[at]nosamm.org wrote:

- quote -

Right, my point was 25% is the *maximum*, not the minimum.

- quote -

No, it is not a matter of accelerated depreciation. As a simple
example, suppose you owned a residential rental building purchased for
$50K, you've taken $20K straight line depreciation, and you sell it for
$80K. You have $30K of long term capital gain, and $20K of unrecaptured
1250 gain. The latter will be taxed at your ordinary tax rate up to but
not higher than 25%.

I may well be leaving out historical difference in how depreciation was
calculated, in any case Form 4797 is not for the faint of heart.

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

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 21:55:39 EST, kamlet[at]panix.com (Arthur Kamlet)
wrote:

- quote -

1250 is very confusing to me - has to do with accelerated
depreciation from what I know (which is not much). In my case I took
25 year straight line depreciation (it was not questioned during two
audits - the 80 20 ratio was <grin> ). Would 1250 be applicable? Given
that what would my tax rate be today?

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <gB4Tk.6944$yr3.2437[at]nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com> ,
Mark Bole <makbo[at]pacbell.net> wrote:
- quote -


But Long Term section 1250 maximum rate is 25% which
is higher than 15%.
--


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

mike[at]nosamm.org wrote:

- quote -

Not higher than your ordinary tax rate.

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

On Nov 13, 1:47*pm, m...[at]nosamm.org wrote:
- quote -

Both are correct in the sense that you must claim "depreciation
allowed or allowable"--it really doesn't
help if your records show you hadn't depreciated everything you were
supposed to.

I believe if your estate sold the property it would not have to
recapture the depreciation, although
that is a rather extreme method of tax avoidance.

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <f%_Sk.26544$_Y1.21054[at]bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> ,
Gil Faver <rowdy'sboss[at]xxyz.com> wrote:
- quote -


For Sec 121 exclusion purposes, depreciation allowed or allowable
since May 6 1997 is not excludable. No age limitations.
--


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

"Paul Thomas, CPA" <paulthomascpapc[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:nQ_Sk.61671$bx1.4498[at]bignews1.bellsouth.net...
- quote -


I think a long time ago there was a distinction with respect to pre 1964 (or
some such year) depreciation, but that is reaching way back into my memory .
... .

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

<mike[at]nosamm.org> wrote
- quote -







Don't know who you heard that from. The records on cost basis (purchase +
improvements) and depreciation should be kept for as long as you have that
property and then boxed up and stored with the records for the year of the
return in which you sold or otherwise disposed of the property.






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

Somebody told me that I did not have to save information on
depreciation taken on real estate - if it was taken prior to a certain
year or was a certain age - since it was taken. I had the
understanding that upon sale all depreciation was 'recaptured' (??)
and became taxable at a special - usually higher rate.
Which is correct?

In my case (in Calif) I rented part of the property and depreciated
80% of purchase price (and later a cheap retaining wall). The
purchase was about 30 years ago and the last depreciation taken was
used about 8-10 years ago.

I understand that improvements to the property over the years is
deductible from the selling price (to reduce tax liability at sale) if
it was not expensed at the time.

Thanks all for your help.
m

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