DANRVAN

I don't see why. As long as the property remains in the s-corp after the 1031 there is no gain recognized. Your client can buy out 25% shareholder either before or after, but replacement property must remain in the corp.

And Merry Christmas to you Eric, thank you for all you do!

Thank you for the reminder Lee!

I have paper filed a few this year with form 1310 and they received refunds in a reasonable amount of time Well, he would probably be glad to receive a much larger refund; wait time included. ( I know I would). Thank you for your comments!

I don't see any tax ramifications in your situation. Sounds like you reimbursed your kinfolk for travel and lodging; maybe threw in some extra to express your gratitude for helping you out. They in return gifted you the pot pie for what ever reason. Unless I am overlooking something I say forget it. Glad you made it back to the forum!

I had not heard of or thought of doing that. However, this is for a deceased taxpayer with a small refund due and PR probably does not care to write a check to find out. I will keep that in mind for the future, thank you for the tip Catherine!

The credit is available in the year the system is placed in service per sec 48(a)(1). However, the percentage of the credit depends on the date construction began and the date placed in service, see Notice 2018-59. There is a safe harbor for determining the date construction began which is also explained in Notice 2018-59.

Thank you for your replies. So a paper return is shall be.

Does anyone know how far back we can e-file personal returns with ATX when the system opens back up in 2022? I have a 2018 that just came in.

I knew that was what you meant!

and sales of public traded stock is prohibited per section 453(k)(2).

That appears to be a redemption that would be treated as an exchange under sec 302(b). If it is treated as an exchange, it can be reported under the installment method. Once you get to that point, you follow the installment sale rules such as related party sales and nondealer rules of section 453A.

Not for 2021. It appears Section 9661 of ARPA 2021 eliminates the 400% FPL repayment cliff and replaces it with a max. repayment of 8.5% of household income for 2021 and 2022.

For the energy credit the reduction is 50% of the credit, per sec 50(c)(3).

The solar panels qualify because they are property for which depreciation is allowable; provided they meet the rest of the criteria for qualified property per sec 48(a)(3). The reference to allowable depreciation distinguishes it from the residential energy credit under code sec. 25(D).

Hate to drag this on, but then why leave it blank and withhold the information requested by the IRS? Here is a second "opinion" per https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2013/dec/casestudy-dec2013.html "......the effective date of the S election could be entered."

I have to disagree, otherwise why would they ask the questions? My interpretation is the IRS wants to know when the entity was incorporated and in what state. In the OP, the incorporation date is the same as the effective S-CORP election date, that will match the incorporation date on 1120-S. And possibly receive a rejection or request for additional information? Have you filed one that way before?

Date of incorporation that will show on 1120-S.

That is true, but I put in the date that will show as the beginning of the first tax year on 1120-S rather than leaving it blank. Have not had an issue with it.

Just put in the effective date of the S-corp. election.

Depending on facts and circumstances she might be entitled to 1/2 of carryforward.

I have researched this issue before. In Rose, T.C. Memo. 1973-207, wife actively participated, but the business was reported under her deceased husband's name and SS#. Court allowed surviving spouse 1/2 of NOL c/f due to her participation in the business. I believe that article makes an incorrect reference to RR 74-175 in regards to NOL c/f of surviving spouse. A revenue ruling is an interpretation based on a set of facts. Rev Ruling 74-175 is vague and does not reflect the situation described by TAXMAN. The article states "Rev. Rul. 74-175 specifically addressed NOL carryovers, providing that only the taxpayer who sustained the loss can use these carryovers." However RR 74-175 actually states: "Advice has been requested whether, under the circumstances described below, the estate of a decedent is entitled to deduct certain losses sustained by the decedent prior to his death".

It comes down to whether the activity rises to the level of trade or business based on facts and circumstances, a grey area to say the least. OP referred to "a property", I have clients with multiple properties that do not reach that level. Maybe if it was a sizable apartment complex.

If the grant is for his own education and training, then it is not subject to SE tax. If on the other hand he is performing service to the grantor, then SE tax applies.

In order to take the OIH deduction, the rental activity would need to rise to the level of a trade or business. The only OIH change made by TCJA was elimination of 2106 that I am aware of.