REG Study Group October November 2013 - Page 89

Viewing 15 replies - 1,321 through 1,335 (of 3,212 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #480539
    Qlad
    Member

    In the current year A had wages of $60,000 in wages from full time job. His share of net income as limited partner in the DD ltd. was 10000. He also had a rental loss from house of $30,000 how much net income does A has?

    ….for this the answer is 40000…

    I want to know if the wages were say $130,000…how wud we calculate….i know there is some special calculation if above $100,000 …but can't remember…

    FAR 72,71,81 πŸ™‚
    AUD 64,71, 72, 75 πŸ™‚ I'm done !!!
    REG 73, 74, 74, 84 πŸ™‚
    BEC 76 πŸ™‚

    #480563
    Qlad
    Member

    In the current year A had wages of $60,000 in wages from full time job. His share of net income as limited partner in the DD ltd. was 10000. He also had a rental loss from house of $30,000 how much net income does A has?

    ….for this the answer is 40000…

    I want to know if the wages were say $130,000…how wud we calculate….i know there is some special calculation if above $100,000 …but can't remember…

    FAR 72,71,81 πŸ™‚
    AUD 64,71, 72, 75 πŸ™‚ I'm done !!!
    REG 73, 74, 74, 84 πŸ™‚
    BEC 76 πŸ™‚

    #480541
    Skrier
    Member

    Qlad, if I am understanding your question correctly, under the Mom and pop rule, the allowance is reduced by 50% of taxpayers AGI over $100k, so the allowance would be completely eliminated with AGI over $150k. Is this what you are referring to?

    AUD- 84
    FAR- 75
    REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
    BEC- 79

    #480565
    Skrier
    Member

    Qlad, if I am understanding your question correctly, under the Mom and pop rule, the allowance is reduced by 50% of taxpayers AGI over $100k, so the allowance would be completely eliminated with AGI over $150k. Is this what you are referring to?

    AUD- 84
    FAR- 75
    REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
    BEC- 79

    #480543
    Qlad
    Member

    yes..skrier…mom pop rule…do u think this will be the way to calculate?

    so 130000-100000= 30000*50%=15000

    therefore (active) 25000-15000= 10000

    and this 10000 we can reduce from wages of 130000 and the answer will be 120000….i hope i m right…

    FAR 72,71,81 πŸ™‚
    AUD 64,71, 72, 75 πŸ™‚ I'm done !!!
    REG 73, 74, 74, 84 πŸ™‚
    BEC 76 πŸ™‚

    #480567
    Qlad
    Member

    yes..skrier…mom pop rule…do u think this will be the way to calculate?

    so 130000-100000= 30000*50%=15000

    therefore (active) 25000-15000= 10000

    and this 10000 we can reduce from wages of 130000 and the answer will be 120000….i hope i m right…

    FAR 72,71,81 πŸ™‚
    AUD 64,71, 72, 75 πŸ™‚ I'm done !!!
    REG 73, 74, 74, 84 πŸ™‚
    BEC 76 πŸ™‚

    #480545
    terranz
    Member

    @insiyah –

    so ‘PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX' = ad valorum tax? all personal taxes or items are NOT deductible i thought?

    did you see my question about tender offers? (in reference to a mcq you asked about)

    beckers 2012 is still 250/500, occupy 2 out of 5 yrs.

    and does no one else thinks the “25% of gross income” statute of limitations is an issue?

    two places are saying 2 diff answers, 29000 or 109000…

    #480569
    terranz
    Member

    @insiyah –

    so ‘PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX' = ad valorum tax? all personal taxes or items are NOT deductible i thought?

    did you see my question about tender offers? (in reference to a mcq you asked about)

    beckers 2012 is still 250/500, occupy 2 out of 5 yrs.

    and does no one else thinks the “25% of gross income” statute of limitations is an issue?

    two places are saying 2 diff answers, 29000 or 109000…

    #480547
    Skrier
    Member

    Qlad, that is also how I understand the rule. Hopefully there is someone that can clarify this for us.

    AUD- 84
    FAR- 75
    REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
    BEC- 79

    #480571
    Skrier
    Member

    Qlad, that is also how I understand the rule. Hopefully there is someone that can clarify this for us.

    AUD- 84
    FAR- 75
    REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
    BEC- 79

    #480549
    Qlad
    Member

    @skrier….thanks…this is the only thing i got right today..(.if this is how we do it)…that is, unless the amount deductible does not exceed the actual loss of $20,000 u can deduct it and rest carry forward…

    FAR 72,71,81 πŸ™‚
    AUD 64,71, 72, 75 πŸ™‚ I'm done !!!
    REG 73, 74, 74, 84 πŸ™‚
    BEC 76 πŸ™‚

    #480573
    Qlad
    Member

    @skrier….thanks…this is the only thing i got right today..(.if this is how we do it)…that is, unless the amount deductible does not exceed the actual loss of $20,000 u can deduct it and rest carry forward…

    FAR 72,71,81 πŸ™‚
    AUD 64,71, 72, 75 πŸ™‚ I'm done !!!
    REG 73, 74, 74, 84 πŸ™‚
    BEC 76 πŸ™‚

    #480551
    Skrier
    Member

    @terranz…looking at the fact pattern you posted earlier, the statute of limitation applies if 25% or more of gross income is misstated. I assume that to be gross receipts and capital gains. I think this is what you are asking correct?

    AUD- 84
    FAR- 75
    REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
    BEC- 79

    #480575
    Skrier
    Member

    @terranz…looking at the fact pattern you posted earlier, the statute of limitation applies if 25% or more of gross income is misstated. I assume that to be gross receipts and capital gains. I think this is what you are asking correct?

    AUD- 84
    FAR- 75
    REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
    BEC- 79

    #480553
    Kenada
    Member

    yes that personal property tax is deductible because it is an “imposed” tax. you have pay it.

    For the 25 % rule it is on Gross Income.. 29,000 is not correct.

    FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

Viewing 15 replies - 1,321 through 1,335 (of 3,212 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group October November 2013 - Page 89’ is closed to new replies.