Discussion:Partnership Portfolio Expense Reporting
From TaxAlmanac
| Revision as of 22:10, 12 February 2009 Futenma (Talk | contribs) (Yes, I see this) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Mtmckeecpa (Talk | contribs) (Apparently there) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Futenma|Date=12 February 2009|Text=Yes, I see this also. However, I always move the taxes up to Line 6. Looking at the Sch A instructions and Pub 529, doesn't appear to me that Line 28 is the proper place to report real estate taxes. Lacerte has a place to enter real estate taxes paid on investment property to make sure they are taken to the 4952 when necessary.}} | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Futenma|Date=12 February 2009|Text=Yes, I see this also. However, I always move the taxes up to Line 6. Looking at the Sch A instructions and Pub 529, doesn't appear to me that Line 28 is the proper place to report real estate taxes. Lacerte has a place to enter real estate taxes paid on investment property to make sure they are taken to the 4952 when necessary.}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Mtmckeecpa|Date=19 February 2009|Text=Apparently there is a court case out there, Sandy Lake Road Limited Partnership vs. Comm. (1997) TC Memo 1997-295, for additional support for treating property taxes as expenses related to portfolio income. | ||
| + | |||
| + | So, if I understand the flow of data in this case, the RE taxes are separately stated as a deduction portfolio other, ultimately flowing to form 1040, Sch A, line 28, Other Miscellaneous Deductions (not subject to the 2% haircut)) and NOT line 6 (taxes). The difference between RE Taxes on line 28 and line 6 seems to be treatment for AMT. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | }} | ||
Current revision
Discussion Forum Index --> Advanced Tax Questions --> Partnership Portfolio Expense Reporting
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Partnership Portfolio Expense Reporting
Mtmckeecpa (talk|edits) said: | 12 February 2009 |
| PPC 1065 Deskbook example 14H-1 seems to imply that RE taxes on investment land are allocable to portfolio expense other on 1065, Sch K, line 13d, then to Sch k-1, line 13 code L, Deductions - portfolio other (1065 for 2008). This ultimately flows to 1040, Sch A, line 28, misc other.
Proseries does have an embedded line item for deductions related to portfolio income, 1040, Sch A, line 28. I would have thought that RE taxes, in this case, would flow to 1040, Sch A, line 6 and NOT line 28. Anyone else see RE taxes coming through this way to line 28 versus line 6? | |
RoyDaleOne (talk|edits) said: | 12 February 2009 |
| I sometimes Section 266 such items, because, if the real estate taxes are subject to the 2% floor, or subject to investment income limitation, a lot of the value of the deductions possible could be lost.
The software I use has a Schedule A investment real estate line in the tax deduction area. | |
| 12 February 2009 | |
| Yes, I see this also. However, I always move the taxes up to Line 6. Looking at the Sch A instructions and Pub 529, doesn't appear to me that Line 28 is the proper place to report real estate taxes. Lacerte has a place to enter real estate taxes paid on investment property to make sure they are taken to the 4952 when necessary. | |
Mtmckeecpa (talk|edits) said: | 19 February 2009 |
| Apparently there is a court case out there, Sandy Lake Road Limited Partnership vs. Comm. (1997) TC Memo 1997-295, for additional support for treating property taxes as expenses related to portfolio income.
So, if I understand the flow of data in this case, the RE taxes are separately stated as a deduction portfolio other, ultimately flowing to form 1040, Sch A, line 28, Other Miscellaneous Deductions (not subject to the 2% haircut)) and NOT line 6 (taxes). The difference between RE Taxes on line 28 and line 6 seems to be treatment for AMT. | |
