|
Posted by Stuart A. Bronstein on December 20, 2006, 1:26 am
Please log in for more thread options
sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
>>> If you do claim Home Office Deduction, when you sell this
>>> property you will have to recapture the allowed or allowable
>>> depreciation, so best to take it now if you have an ofice in
>>> the home. See Pub 587.
>> Isn't it true that even if you don't claim any home office
>> deduction, you will have to recapture the depreciation
>> (because it was allowable)?
> If you don't claim to have a home office, there's no
> deduction or depreciation allowable. If you claim a home
> office and take deductions but not depreciation, you get hit
> for the allowable depreciation anyway.
I think you mean that if you don't claim a home office, it
would be difficult for them to prove that you actually had
one. But if you actually had one and could have claimed it
and didn't, technically you are required to recapture the
depreciation that you could have claimed.
Stu
<< ======================================================= >>
<< 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 (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ======================================================= >>
|
|
Posted by Victor Roberts on December 20, 2006, 10:11 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> I think you mean that if you don't claim a home office, it
> would be difficult for them to prove that you actually had
> one. But if you actually had one and could have claimed it
> and didn't, technically you are required to recapture the
> depreciation that you could have claimed.
Based on the discussions I have read here it seems to be
hard to prove that the area claimed as a home office was
used ONLY for business purposes, not even 1% use allowed for
personal activities. Therefore it would seem that if the
home office deduction is NOT claimed it would be exceedingly
difficult to prove that now personal activity took place in
that space. I am not suggesting that anyone "hide" their
home office, but I doubt there is any home office in which
some personal activities do not take place. Put another
way, the IRS has made it so difficult to claim the home
office deduction, I don't see how they could claim a home
office exists and is used 100% for business activities if
the home owner has not claimed that to be the case.
Not having a space devoted 100% to business activities seems
to be the default condition.
Disclaimer - I do not take the home office deduction for the
space I use for my home-based consulting business since I
also use the space for personal activities.
--
Vic Roberts
Replace xxx with vdr in e-mail address.
<< ======================================================= >>
<< 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 (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ======================================================= >>
|
|
Posted by Seth Breidbart on December 28, 2006, 12:26 am
Please log in for more thread options > sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
>> If you don't claim to have a home office, there's no
>> deduction or depreciation allowable. If you claim a home
>> office and take deductions but not depreciation, you get hit
>> for the allowable depreciation anyway.
> I think you mean that if you don't claim a home office, it
> would be difficult for them to prove that you actually had
> one.
Actually, impossible rather than merely difficult. (Prove
that on April 16th I didn't relax with a glass of scotch and
a good book and enjoy the fact that I was sitting in my
spare bedroom with no work to do.)
> But if you actually had one and could have claimed it
> and didn't, technically you are required to recapture the
> depreciation that you could have claimed.
What I'm not sure of (and doesn't matter in reality) is
whether a home office is something that has to be claimed in
order to exist. If so, depreciation isn't allowable if it
isn't claimed, even if it could have been.
Seth
<< ======================================================= >>
<< 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 (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ======================================================= >>
|
|
Posted by Harlan Lunsford on December 28, 2006, 8:54 pm
Please log in for more thread options Seth Breidbart wrote:
>> sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
>>> If you don't claim to have a home office, there's no
>>> deduction or depreciation allowable. If you claim a home
>>> office and take deductions but not depreciation, you get hit
>>> for the allowable depreciation anyway.
>> I think you mean that if you don't claim a home office, it
>> would be difficult for them to prove that you actually had
>> one.
> Actually, impossible rather than merely difficult. (Prove
> that on April 16th I didn't relax with a glass of scotch and
> a good book and enjoy the fact that I was sitting in my
> spare bedroom with no work to do.)
(balance snipped.)
My only question is, what brand of Scotch?
Scotch 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 (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ======================================================= >>
|
|
Posted by Seth Breidbart on December 29, 2006, 8:07 am
Please log in for more thread options >> Actually, impossible rather than merely difficult. (Prove
>> that on April 16th I didn't relax with a glass of scotch and
>> a good book and enjoy the fact that I was sitting in my
>> spare bedroom with no work to do.)
> (balance snipped.)
>
> My only question is, what brand of Scotch?
Brand? What is this "brand" of which you speak?
Macallan cask strength.
Seth
Moderator:
Keep the Scotch and the Drambuie in a refrigerator so you
won't need ice. If two double Rusty Nails doesn't relax
relax you, you may need Valium. LoL
<< ======================================================= >>
<< 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 (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ======================================================= >>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Expensing gas for work and school | January 26, 2007, 11:52 pm |
| IRA question | November 2, 2006, 11:56 pm |
| Question | January 18, 2007, 4:01 am |
| W-2 Box 12 question | April 13, 2007, 3:31 am |
| K-1 question | June 24, 2007, 10:41 pm |
| HSA Question | September 12, 2007, 10:05 pm |
| MLP Tax Question | September 20, 2007, 1:00 am |
| HoH question | October 13, 2007, 11:06 pm |
| Re: HoH question | October 17, 2007, 2:09 am |
| Re: HoH question | October 17, 2007, 11:42 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap