Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

payment from developer

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

    #16
    Originally posted by Bees Knees View Post
    Irrelevant.

    How is this damaging somebody's property? Was the house damaged? No. Were the solar panels damaged? No.

    Therefore, OKC, 82 T.C. 638 is an irrelevant citation.

    The payment is taxable.
    No damage? Why is the developer willing to pay thousands of dollars? Out of the goodness of his heart?

    Damage doesn't have to be physical to be for "the impairment of capital."

    The construction of the new house cut off power to the old house. That's damage. Just because you can't see electricity doesn't mean it's not there.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Luis Mopeo View Post
      No damage? Why is the developer willing to pay thousands of dollars? Out of the goodness of his heart?
      I don't know. You tell me.

      Damage doesn't have to be physical to be for "the impairment of capital."

      The construction of the new house cut off power to the old house. That's damage. Just because you can't see electricity doesn't mean it's not there.
      Really?

      Power was cut?

      How does cutting power to your house damage your house? Gee, maybe I should ask the electric company for reimbursement next time they damage my house by cutting power in a storm, since the fact that my house is wired for electricity means, by your definition, I own the right to have electricity supplied to me.

      What capital asset was damaged or destroyed?

      82 T.C. 638 deals with “settlement proceeds received as a replacement for capital destroyed or for the sale or exchange of a capital asset so that they are treated as a nontaxable return of capital or a taxable capital gain…”

      Tell me, what was damaged? Were the solar panels damaged? Nothing to indicate that. Was the house damaged? Nothing to indicate that.

      The only thing damaged was the supply of sunlight. The solar panels still work perfectly fine. Does the taxpayer own the sunlight flying across the neighbor’s yard? Is sunlight a capital asset to the householder? What is the taxpayer’s basis in that sunlight?

      In order for you to claim that a capital asset was damaged or destroyed, you would have to claim that the taxpayer has a right to the sunlight that flies through the neighbor's yard. You think you own any right to the air space above your neighbor's property?
      Last edited by Bees Knees; 11-05-2007, 02:03 PM.

      Comment

      Working...
      X