Real Estate Strategies

The concept of cost segregation began in the 1960s, when taxpayers argued specific components of real estate had a shorter life than the depreciation tables allowed (39 years for commercial property and 27.5 years for residential real estate). After decades of legal cases, the IRS provided rules and safe harbors in 1996 and 2002. Taxpayers now can use cost segregation and remain compliant with IRS regulations. The real question now is: Does a cost segregation study really reduce a taxpayer’s liability? And if so, by how much?

Today I want to talk about the quick question, “Can I rent my home to my business tax free?” The answer is not straightforward. It takes time to look at the specific set-up of that taxpayer's business. It requires a bit of research. You need to know things like: ● What's the fair market value of renting your home? ● How many days will you rent your home to your business? ● Can we substantiate that this rental is ordinary and necessary? Amber Gray-Fenner already did an excellent job of explaining the Augusta Rule in an earlier issue of the newsletter. So, I won't go over all the same points. I want to look at what the Augusta Rule is and how it came about. Then, we'll look at three takeaways for you to remember in your practice and give to your clients.

Albert Lauber, my favorite Tax Court judge, gave us an opinion in February that paints a detailed picture of the workings of a syndicated conservation easement. In the end, he supports the findings of the Senate Joint Finance Committee that the engine of these abusive transactions is an inflated appraisal. In November, David Gustafson issued an opinion that exposed the financial engineering techniques that promoters engaged in. We’ll take a look at those, but first I would like to give you an overview, because we may need that to figure out the lessons to be learned.

Somebody I consult for threw a kind of oddball fact pattern at me. Their client, “Terry,” owns a big house with many rooms in a kind of resort type area. Terry rents the rooms out on a short-term basis averaging three or four days and provides no other services. Between this and that, Terry ends up spending about 15 hours a week. The big concern comes from Terry buying a cost segregation study, which will mean a big loss. Can Terry use the loss in the year incurred, or will it be suspended? And is the income subject to self-employment tax in the future? I thought the answers to those questions were the same, but we learned from the Chief Counsel’s Office, one of those things is not like the other.

IRC § 1031 exchanges have the ability to confer substantial financial benefits to taxpayers. Although taxpayers may use § 1031 to place themselves in a superior economic position, taxpayers may not exploit this section in an abusive manner. Taxpayers can use exchanges to give themselves different types of benefits, but one of the primary benefits is the deferral of federal income tax. When conducted correctly, 1031 exchanges are regarded as a form of legitimate tax avoidance. One of the main issues involved with these transactions is determining the boundaries between abusive tax avoidance and non-abusive tax avoidance. In the context of “related party exchanges” – i.e. those transactions which involve subsection 1031(f) – this issue shows up in a relatively complex fashion, because the related party rules are not well understood by most practitioners. Furthermore, determining abusive tax avoidance with related party exchanges is difficult because of the scarcity of case law. Based on the case law which we have, and on the other authoritative references, we can put together a reasonable overview of the risks of related party exchanges. This overview should prove useful when providing expert counsel to taxpayers seeking to conduct this type of transaction. For direct exchanges, the 2-year ownership rule found in 1031(f)(1)(C) should be used as the dominant source of guidance. For “indirect exchanges,” taxpayers must be aware of the higher levels of risk involved, as there is a greater possibility of abusive tax avoidance. To read more click here!

I remember trying to explain the dealer versus investor concept to a would-be real estate entrepreneur. I asked him whether he was holding the property for sale. He kind of looked at me and smiled and said “Everything is for sale. It just depends on how much.”. If there is any ambiguity it is easy to know what the answer is after the fact. If there was a big gain relative to expenses then you were an investor. If there was a loss, then you were a dealer. Unfortunately, you really are not supposed to practice that way. I am going to assume that you want investor status and that you are blessed with a gain. What can you do to make sure the IRS respects your investor status?

I recently wrote a sort of case study to illustrate the economics of RV tourism . I thought that my fellow tax pros might appreciate a little more analysis of the numbers. I also have some observations on working out of an RV, because I wasn’t actually entirely retired...

The Inflation Reduction Act has brought back and revised credits we have seen before. One of these credits had a $500 lifetime value but now can be $1,200 for each eligible tax year. That is a potential $11,500 increase in savings for your clients. They do not have to build a new house to take advantage of these savings. Taxpayers can receive this credit for improvements made to their home. The tax savings do not stop there. If your client buys an electric vehicle, they are going to need somewhere to charge it, right? Well, the Inflation Reduction Act has considered that, too. Homeowners can save an extra $1,000 on their taxes by installing the charging equipment at home. Let's explore how you can help your non-business clients capitalize on these types of tax savings on these improved energy credits. We will look at both credits now.