Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mountains and Molehills

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Mountains and Molehills

    Here is the Mountain:

    Client owns 100% of a seasonal rental house. I believe he offers service that would make the income subject to SE tax.

    Client owns 100% of a corporation.

    This corporation is a 1% partner in a partnership. The other 99% is held by a charitable foundation. The partnership also holds a bunch of stock and receives dividends and capital gains.

    The partnership leases the residential rental from the Client for $10 per month. Doesn't sound like he can take expenses because it is so far below FMV. Client has never depreciated the rental property. Doesn't sound like he would be able to do that in any event - Right? Would love to hear your response on that.

    Here is the Molehill:

    The partnership pays the corporation a management fee out of rental profits and stock transactions. This is generally around $25k per year.

    The corporation takes the $25k and pays the Client a salary.

    BTW: This client was subjected to a field audit last year that resulted in no change. It was no fun explaining the way this thing works to the IRS. They had trouble believing anyone would set up something like this without using it to hide income. I had the same thought when this client came to me initially, but couldn't find anything except that this fellow got snookered by a slick outfit who talked him into donating all of his stocks to the charitable foundation and charged him a fortune to set this mess up. That is also what the IRS concluded.

    I'm especially curious about the following:

    1. No depreciation on the rental? Is that right? Because he is leasing the property to the partnership for only $10 per month and is a related party, sort of?

    2. What happens if he sells it? Depreciation allowed or allowable? Neither would apply?

    Thanks for your time.

    #2
    Economic Substance

    Not sure my head can stop swimming long enough to understand all the ramifications of your client as you have presented them, but it sounds like the various structures and the amounts involved are not economically viable transactions.

    IRS routinely squashes transactions and devices which, no matter how well documented, have no economic substance other than tax avoidance.

    Comment


      #3
      What do you think about the depreciation on the rental property?


      Agree with you regarding economic substance. Doesn't look like there is any tax avoidance here, though. It's possible the guy is paying more tax than he otherwise might.

      Thanks for responding.

      Comment


        #4
        After Season

        Please bring this one back to us after tax season. Then I love to deal with mountains. Right now, I have to turn everything into molehills ASAP and get them done. For 2008, keep doing what you were doing when it came through an audit. For 2009, bring it back to us.

        Comment


          #5
          Darn good idea

          Amazing how clients can complicate relatively simple matters. I love the ones who ship an entire box of paperwork to me, well organized and perfectly tallied, and they can only file a 1040A anyway.

          Comment

          Working...
          X