L.S. Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Farmer sells 80 acres to son on contract. 3 years later farmer borrows $80,000 and builds house for son. Farmer sells house on new contract to son. Son occupies as first principal residence before 12/1/09. Does he qualify for first time home buyer credit? thanks, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion EA Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Did son own a principal residence within three years of closing on this residence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.S. Posted October 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don in Upstate NY Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Farmer sells 80 acres to son on contract. 3 years later farmer borrows $80,000 and builds house for son. Farmer sells house on new contract to son. Son occupies as first principal residence before 12/1/09. Does he qualify for first time home buyer credit? No. Property acquired from a related party does not qualify for the credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion EA Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 What are you really asking? Which qualification do you think he misses? Does the locality tax the house as real estate? Is it somehow movable? Does he have a spouse who owned a home? Why are you asking if he qualifies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcjenkins Posted October 16, 2009 Report Share Posted October 16, 2009 Does not matter if he qualifies or not, the purchase from his father makes it ineligible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jainen Posted October 17, 2009 Report Share Posted October 17, 2009 >>Property acquired from a related party does not qualify for the credit<< Also, improvements to property one already owns does not qualify. What a coincidence that the cost was exactly what is needed for the maximum credit! Except, of course, that there wasn't any genuine cost, just leverage. Nah, this one is a tax scam, and not even very clever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAXBILLY Posted October 17, 2009 Report Share Posted October 17, 2009 >>Property acquired from a related party does not qualify for the credit<< Not quite true although it is for a parent. A sibling would not be a related party for this purpose. taxbilly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.