Jump to content
ATX Community

Client has stock holdings under an LLC.


Max W

Recommended Posts

I suppose a disadvantage would be if you have large stock holdings held under your LLC and the LLC is being sued/assets being seized, those holdings would be apart of it - on the flip side the LLC's stock holdings would be safeguarded against any personal losses. Tax wise, having it under SMLLC, multi-LLC, or S-Corp really wouldn't change the taxability of them. I do one one client that is an S-Corporation and has a sizeable amount in stock holdings with a brokerage firm - that only started because they didn't have enough basis at the time to take it as a distribution and put the investment in their personal name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JackieCPA said:

I do one one client that is an S-Corporation and has a sizeable amount in stock holdings with a brokerage firm - that only started because they didn't have enough basis at the time to take it as a distribution and put the investment in their personal name. 

Wouldn't putting the investment in their personal name be considered a distribution?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the investments were contributed to the LLC (1065), then you would probably have to deal with differing inside and outside basis, extra tracking work.

If the investments were inside an LLC (1120S), and the stockholders wanted to distribute the investments, wouldn't you have the same FMV issues

that you have with distributing Real Estate held inside an 1120S?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, cbslee said:

Is it an SMLLC, A 1065 OR A 1120S?

SMLLC

10 hours ago, DANRVAN said:

It appears you are referring to a single member LLC.  An LLC has no meaning for tax purposes, it is a creation of state law.  So for tax purposes it does not make any difference if the investments are held under the  client's LLC .

It can become a disadvantage in CA due to the way the annual LLC fees are calculated.  The fee is $800 up to $250,000 net income; then another $900 if it goes above that; an additional $1600 over $500K.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Max W said:

It can become a disadvantage in CA due to the way the annual LLC fees are calculated.  The fee is $800 up to $250,000 net income; then another $900 if it goes above that; an additional $1600 over $500K.

Oh man! MN LLC's are way different than that - SMLLC's only have taxes due like federal and no extra fees. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...