Discussion:At-Risk Limitations
From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> At-Risk Limitations
Southparkcpa (talk|edits) said: | 7 December 2007 |
| Without citing code section, at risk is actually quite simple. Is the tax payer personally liable for any losses is the question that at risk rules ask.
Example, in a partnership, a parter gets "basis" for a loan to the partnership or a bank loa made to the partnership and thus is entitled to a deduction. His at risk is usually satisfied by the partnership agreement requiring him to restore his negative capital account. However, If the partner is not personally liable on the debt, no at risk exists. the pecking order is usually, grasp and compute basis and then "at risk". | |
| 7 December 2007 | |
| 469? Nope - that's passive. I don't remember off the top of my head. | |
| 7 December 2007 | |
| At-Risk Limitations for K-1 Losses | |
To join in on this discussion, you must first
log in.
