glennds wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:51 pm
Xan wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:52 am
yankees60 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:00 am
tomfoolery wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:15 pm
doodle wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 9:09 pm
If you sell at a loss is it a tax write off?
I would suggest asking Vinny because he’s an accountant but he’s not the kind of accountant most people think of when they hear that word.
I’m no accountant, not even the kind Vinny is, but it’s my understanding you can only write off losses against gains if it’s an actual business. And the IRS doesn’t like you to claim losses if it’s not a real business.
You are correct on ALL counts!
"A loss on the sale or exchange of personal use property, including a capital loss on the sale of your home used by you as your personal residence at the time of sale, isn't deductible. Only losses associated with property used in a trade or business and investment property (for example, stocks) are deductible."
So if you've got a house you want to sell, and it's declined in value, you can rent it out for a little while (a year? a day?) and then claim the entire loss as a business loss?
If the residence was used as a primary residence for two of the prior five years, it will be treated as a personal residence for tax purposes hence no capital loss deduction but you also get the capital gain exclusion which is what most people want.
But your example is where you're seeking deduction of a capital loss, therefore the first thing is to rent it long enough so the five year look back will not test as a personal residence, so more than three years. The second thing to know is that your basis will be the FMV of the home at the time of conversion into an investment property, not the original acquisition cost. This would also be your basis for depreciation. If you did this, I think it would be ideal to obtain an appraisal as of that date, but some people are comfortable with internet comps like Zillow.
Vinny is the local expert, so I hope he will elaborate or correct my information if necessary.
Indeed, the basis for depreciation (and for determining how much--if any--loss there is on the sale when you do sell the rental property) is actually either the LESSER of:
1) the adjusted basis on the date of conversion, or (2) the property’s fair market value (FMV) at the time of conversion (i.e. the value on the date it was converted, not the value when you bought it)
Adjusted basis is the cost of the property plus amounts paid for capital improvements, less any depreciation and casualty losses claimed for tax purposes.
After converting it to a rental property the tax basis treatment IIRC is if the property is sold at a gain the basis is the original cost plus amounts paid for capital improvements, less any depreciation and casualty losses taken. OTOH, if you sell the (now-rental) property at a loss the basis is the lower of the property original cost or the fair market value at the time it was converted from a personal residence to rental property.
I couldn't find anything specifically saying that the personal residence tax treatment test (2 of 5 years) applies for the purposes of determining whether a property will be considered rental property or not for the purposes of whether or not one can avail oneself of the
loss deduction on a sale of rental property. Section 121 just specifies that the person (or person/s if married) has to have lived in it at least 2 out of the proceeding 5 years as their primary residence in order to avail themselves of the $250K/$500K exclusion on the
gain; it also (for post 1-1-2009 sales) requires them in certain cases to allocate any
gain between qualified use (as a personal residence) and nonqualified use (say, as a rental property) and therefore would make at least some of the otherwise excludable gains taxable; see
https://www.merriman.com/wealth-preserv ... his-first/ . This portion of the tax law was basically designed to prevent people from simply moving into a rental property for two years and a day as their primary residence in order to convert taxable gains into tax free ones (and thus follows in the footsteps of the "after 5-6-1997" rule that any depreciation recapture gains are not excludable under Section 121's $250K/$500K exclusion....another law designed to try and thwart homeowners from using--some might say abusing--section 121 to convert taxable recapture or taxable gains into untaxable personal residence capital gains). But again, this applies to a situation where the person is converting a rental property to a personal residence, not the other way around (personal residence to rental property.....since that is what we are discussing here) and also (as written) seems to apply to treatment of gains (and whether those gains are excludable), not of losses.
Are there any TAMs, PLRs, FSMs, or Tax Court administrative law rulings that say otherwise (regarding whether one has to have lived in it as a personal residence for less than two of the proceeding five years otherwise one cannot take advantage of any rental property loss treatment even if the house was rented out for at least a year or more before one sold it and took the loss) than the above?
For what it's worth I know of four people who (in the time period from 2009 to early 2014), having bought properties at the 2006-07 height of the boom/bubble, did the "convert to a rental for a year or a little bit over a year, sell at a loss, and take the Section 1231 ordinary loss" thing (incl one accounting teacher!) and none of them were ever audited or penalized (and three of these people--including the accounting teacher--were shall we say....umm, rather "generous" to themselves when deciding what the FMV was when they converted it to a rental property i.e. they decided the FMV was a number that was a heck of a lot closer to the purchase price than to the actual FMV at the time).