RoyDaleOne

Do a google search on Catch-62. There maybe some tax relief but not as investment interest.

I would guess you do not have the assets associated with the correct activity.

I agree with your treatment of the remaining loan costs.

So there are no hot assets or a Section 754 adjustment needed.

There is nothing to record on the partnership books, unless the partnership terminated the retiring partner, and the other partner did not purchase the partnership interest. The sale of the partnership interest from one partner to another is not recorded on the partnership books, well, at least not directly, just like the sale of stock between shareholders is not recorded on the Corporate books.

Expense the remaining unamortized balance from 2004 in 2008, under other deductions -- Write-off of remaining unamortized loan cost -- is a good description.

Start amortizing the 2008 loan costs as of the date of the loan over the term in the note payable documents.

Loan costs 5,000.00 credit

Accumulated amortization 1,333.33 debit

Write off 3,666.67 debit

New loan costs 5,000.00 debit

Loan payable 5,000.00 credit (This enter should be or was part of the new loan recording.)

Amortization Expense 666.67 debit

Accumulated Amortization 666.67 credit

Sorry about the detail entry I just don't want to come back, and it is a heck of a lot quicker this way.

IRS Circular 230 Notice: To ensure compliance with requirements

imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained

in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended

or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of

avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal

Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax provisions.

************************************************************************

This message and any attachment contain information that may

be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or

authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy,

print or disclose to anyone the message or any information

contained in the message. If you have received this e-mail in error,

please advise the sender by reply and delete the message. Thank you.

No depreciation if, in the same year, an asset is acquired and is disposed.

Both partners have zero ending balances.

It is over, finished.

Maybe even a business casualty loss, or a Section 165 loss. Who knows?

Your client should have an attorney to answer that question.

On the IRS web site storage sheds are listed as Section 1245 property, which would qualify for 5 year property.

Just as an added note, you can take spoilage as an expense and not part of COGS.

Just don't double up the deductions.

This is an area where the IRS has all the cards. Hind sight that is.

Very difficult to make the correct choice.

They may or may not be getting two deductions. If the accountant handles it properly they are not.

A determinable life is a thing of the past, for the most part, see R. O'Shaughnessy CA-, 2003-1 USTC

Asset Class 00.3 (Land Improvements) 15 year Asset Class is the one to use.

See also R. L. Hunter, 46 TC 477 Dec 28,025 a dam was treated as a depreciable asset with a determinable life.

Dams are also included in other Asset Classes, 49.11 is an example.

The Pub is incorrect for the most part about dams.

Only sales and exchanges of partnership interests are relevant to termination under Code Section 708((1)( -- transfers by gift and devise are ignored, as are liquidations of partnership interests. Reg. Section 1.708-1((2).

Earthen dams are depreciable.

Is true a true pond or one created by an earthen dam?

Because each piece of clothing is under the substation limit is another problem, err.. opportunity for you.

Wow that will be a long list.

My system worked fine. Because you gave no details, I can only guess the form is not filled out correctly.

I would guess:

Part III

line 16 6,000,000

Line 18 4,000,000

Line 15 is unkown how I use 4,000,000 which produced the same results no tax.

There is a web site that has a list of fmv for used clothing. I think it is Goodwill's site.

So are accounts payable.

I am in the office so I can not check, however, I would guess that there is not a termination of the partnership, under this set of facts. I could be wrong and will post more later.

That is what is wrong, the original use was intended for Police Officers, Fireman, Military, now everyone is trying to get into act.