On Feb 23, 7:14�pm, "Paul Thomas, CPA" <paulthomascp...[at]bellsouth.netwrote:

- quote -

sorta unfair of you, Paul. People ask question about what they
*don't* know about, right?

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <8f7839d5-18da-419f-8db3-14b059593297[at]p2g2000prf.googlegroups.com> ,
removeps-groups[at]yahoo.com <removeps-groups[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

Even if no Sec 179 and 168k, the difference between any accelerated
depreciation expense and straight line is recapturable if the business
use falls below 50%.
--


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

On Feb 23, 4:14 pm, "Paul Thomas, CPA" <paulthomascp...[at]bellsouth.netwrote:

- quote -

Will regular depreciation have to be recaptured when the musical
instrument is eventually disposed off (sold, given to charity)?

And to confirm, there's no depreciation recapture when the instrument
is converted to personal use (except for recapture of 179 or bonus
depreciation)?

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 wrote:
- quote -


C$,
h

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

"Harlan Lunsford" <lunstax[at]bellsouth.net> wrote
- quote -






I read it as Section 179. Who would ask about recapture of regular
depreciation?





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

Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:
- quote -

Wellll now. That depreciation in 2007 was proper against income for
that year. What recapture is needed in 2008? If it had been
subject to section 179, then of course. But regular depreciation?

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

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

"Y" <ybotkaspm[at]cinci.rr.com> wrote
- quote -




Is she still using that instrument in her employee capacity? If so, I'd
suggest that recapture is not necessary.

Does she expect to have income from the music business in 2009? If so, then
I'd suggest that the instrument is not subject to recapture of the Section
179 taken.

If the instrument is now just used for personal use, then recapture is
necessary.





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

A musician filed a return for 2007 incuding a Schedule C which listed
depreciation for an instrument, and a net profit. For 2008, the
musician was a W-2 employee only, and will not file a Schedule C. She
still owns the instruument.

Is there any recapture of depreciation calculation necessary?

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