- This topic has 2,393 replies, 160 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
jordancole.
-
CreatorTopic
-
November 20, 2014 at 6:25 pm #190226
jeffKeymasterFree Study Planner, Notes, Audio, Flashcards: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-study-plan/
Free CPA Exam Survival Guide: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-survival-guide/
-
AuthorReplies
-
December 13, 2014 at 12:32 am #651208
TaherkqMembercan someone help with this please?
Current year Jensen has the following items:
Salary 50,000
Inheritance 25,000
Alimony from ex spouse 12,000
Child support from ex spouse 9,000
Capital loss from investment stock sale (6,000)
What is current year AGI?
FAR- 80
BEC- 81
REG- 85
AUD- 77Done!!!!
(Becker)
December 13, 2014 at 12:33 am #651209
maryduhParticipantDecember 13, 2014 at 1:28 am #651210
terryharmMemberTaherkq Current Year AGI $59, Salary 50000+Alimony 12,000 less 3,000 loss
BEC: 81
FAR: 75
AUD: 81
REG: 85PA license Pending..
December 13, 2014 at 2:11 am #651211
TaherkqMemberDecember 13, 2014 at 4:01 am #651212
wmcpaMemberan individual can take a maximum of $3000 capital loss in a year.
re: pro rata for accumulated e&p and current e&p. I just found the information R3-43. It turns out the pro rata is used when the dividend is greater than the sum of the (2) e&ps. In the example, the dividends were less than the sum (i.e. $25K).
FAR: 83
REG: 69, 69, retake Q1 2015
AUD: Q2 2015
BEC: Q2 2015December 13, 2014 at 4:19 am #651213
wmcpaMember@funtiks “I meant say I have 10k of education expenses.
Can i take the $4000 deduction + one of the credits? or its pick one or the other? “
If the 4K is strictly tuition and books and paid directly to the institution – I believe it's above the line deduction – meaning anyone can deduct – no need to itemize it. This is probably the best way.
Also – the $4K is an up to amount – it phases out after the AGI reaches a certain amount.
I believe that you could pick either deductions or the credit – not both for the *same* person. If you have (2) kids, you could deduct for one, and use the credit for the other.
and.. you can't use (2) different types of credits for the *same* child.
off the tangent – there is a student loan interest that could be deducted above the line, but it has a limit. Anything beyond that limit would be considered personal loan – thereby making it nondeductible.
FAR: 83
REG: 69, 69, retake Q1 2015
AUD: Q2 2015
BEC: Q2 2015December 13, 2014 at 5:07 am #651214
AnonymousInactiveJUST BUMPING!
I am confused when actually is the end of the return period.
For this rule such as failure to retain records properly, which says:
The tax preparer is required to keep, for the three years following the last day of the return period (the 12-month period beginning on July 1 of each year) blah, blah, blah…
Let's say I prepared my client's 2013 tax return on April 1, 2014, when is exactly the end of the return period for this scenario?
Why July 1 is the beginning, not January 1?
Is June 30 the last day of the return period?
Thanks guys!
December 13, 2014 at 8:32 am #651215
terryharmMemberDecember 13, 2014 at 11:21 am #651216
wmcpaMember@Amor – it's just the way the IRS defined return period – per Section 6060 (c):
c) Return period defined
For purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘‘return period’’ means the 12-month period beginning on July 1 of each year, except that the first return period shall be the 6-month period beginning on January 1, 1977, and ending on June 30,1977.
In your example, you would have to retain a copy until July 1, 2017 – since the return was completed without extension.
I like the examples and information related to your inquiry in this link:
https://www.taxresourcegroup.com/library/memo/1229.html
FAR: 83
REG: 69, 69, retake Q1 2015
AUD: Q2 2015
BEC: Q2 2015December 13, 2014 at 1:01 pm #651217
AnonymousInactive@wmcpa, thanks for taking time to answer my question. Thank you also for the link you provided above. It's good to know by reading the example on the link, when extension is used to file a return, the required three-year period of record retention becomes four.
December 13, 2014 at 9:23 pm #651218
AnonymousInactivePlease help me.
Lind and Post organized Ace Corp., which issued voting common stock with a fair market value of $120,000. They each transferred property in exchange for stock as follows:
Lind: Building – Adjusted basis: $40,000 FMV: $82,000 Percent Acquired: 60%
Post: Land – Adjusted basis: $5,000, FMV: $48,000, Percent Acquired: 40%
The building was subject to a $10,000 mortgage that was assumed by Ace. What was Ace's basis in the building?
a. $82,000
b. $30,000
c. $72,000
d. $40,000
Explanation
Choice “d” is correct. Ace's basis in the building is the same as Lind's basis immediately prior to its contribution to the corporation.
Choice “b” is incorrect. Ace's basis in the building is computed separately from any debt that it assumes related to the building.
Choice “c” is incorrect. Ace uses Lind's basis, not the building's fair market value, as its basis. Furthermore, the debt assumed by Ace does not affect the basis of the building to Ace.
Choice “a” is incorrect. Ace uses Lind's basis, not the building's fair market value, as its basis.
I am confused why the answer would not be $30,000. Shouldn't adjusted basis be reduced by the amt of debt the corporation receives on the property? Unless we're assuming that the $10,000 mortgage that the question mentions was already calculated in. The explanation for why B is wrong seems to contradict what I am directly reading in the Becker book. “The adjusted basis of property is reduced by any debt on the property” Can anyone offer some clarification?
December 13, 2014 at 9:32 pm #651219
AnonymousInactiveWait, sorry figured it out. The total basis would be $30,000 for Lind because of the mortgage, but it is simply asking about the BUILDING. Very next question changed to Lind's basis in Ace stock and the answer was $30,000. Devil's in the details!
December 13, 2014 at 9:51 pm #651220
wmcpaMemberI learned something new too (4 years with extension), @Amor – thanks for the question!
FAR: 83
REG: 69, 69, retake Q1 2015
AUD: Q2 2015
BEC: Q2 2015December 13, 2014 at 11:31 pm #651221
AnonymousInactiveI really like Peter Olinto!
He's intelligently and interestingly funny!!
I find it kind of amusing to hear him say “withdroRING” instead of withdrawing. (REG's Chapter 5, page 12).
I am non-native English speaker and hearing him say words like that, I tend to say to myself that “Opps, I pronounce the word wrrrrong again!”
I thought, it was just Pete's slip of the tongue:
“Consider WITHDRORING”….WITHDRORING….WITHDRORING…” LOL.
Is there any “RING” syllable on ‘withdrawing'?
December 14, 2014 at 12:05 am #651222 -
AuthorReplies
- The topic ‘REG Study Group Q1 2015 - Page 12’ is closed to new replies.
