"Wilson" <highledge[at]roadrunner.com> wrote in message
news:grb8c4$c88$1[at]reader.motzarella.org...
- quote -

The statute says NET business income of the TAXPAYER, not the business.

- quote -

Not for an individual: Contributions are always non-business expenses.

- quote -

The gain on the sale of a business asset is business income. Real estate
rental income is not.

Note that the computation of business income is without regard to Section
179. Therefore, if one has a home office (280A) where there's a
carryforward (when section 179 were to be included at face value) that
exceeds the 179 amount, there is no 179 deduction (because the 280A amount
carried comes out as a current year expense, leaving a net business income
of zero or less).

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

sometime in the recent past Arthur Kamlet posted this:
- quote -

1040 ln. 7. How about 1040 ln. 14 (especially from 4797) and Rental income
(non-passive) from ln. 17?

I'm using Taxcut which gives me a 'Data Verification warning' that my S 179
'appears to exceed your taxable income from all sources' and may or may not
need to be corrected.

--
Wilson N44º39" W67º12"

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <grb8c4$c88$1[at]reader.motzarella.org> ,
Wilson <highledge[at]roadrunner.com> wrote:
- quote -


Your S 179 allowance is limited to net earned income but that
includes wages and even net income from another unrelated business.
--

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

I thought I understood this completely, but now I'm wondering. All other
limits withstanding, I was under the impression that if a business grossed
$50K, then it could expense up to $50K of depreciable property in the year
of that purchase. Now I'm wondering if I should be looking at the business
net income before §179 depreciation is taken as the proper limit.

I know that according to Pub. 946, charitable contributions can come into
play, but not an issue in my situation.

The reason is that I want to take more than the $25K of 179 that I can take
for Maine in order to lower my fed. liability and then deal with the excess
179 later. Sorry if I'm unclear & thanks.
--
Wilson N44º39" W67º12"

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