REG Study Group Q2 2016 - Page 71

Viewing 15 replies - 1,051 through 1,065 (of 1,691 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #768093
    csvirk
    Participant

    @ Just3 for your question regarding installment obligation

    here is the explanation from IRC

    “Installment obligations. If the decedent sold property using the installment method and you are collecting payments on an installment obligation acquired from the decedent, use the same gross profit percentage the decedent used to figure the part of each payment that represents profit. Include in your income the same profit the decedent would have included had death not occurred. For more information, see Pub. 537, Installment Sales.”

    FAR: 71, 77!
    AUD: 69, 80
    BEC: 72
    REG: 84

    #768094
    Bear-Bear
    Participant

    Woo! Finally got over the 80% trending hump. I'm now trending 81%. This is painful.

    #768095
    Just3Letters
    Participant

    Thanks csvirk! I guess I should just start searching the IRC for these answers 🙂

    Bear-Bear, congrats! Keep it up! Are you doing all new questions or the normal “whatever it gives you” thing where you get new and old questions?

    FAR- 81
    REG- 81
    BEC- Aug 22, 2016
    AUD- TBD

    #768096
    Bear-Bear
    Participant

    @Just3Letters – Thanks! Up until a few days ago, I mostly did the normal random sets. But over the past couple days I have switched to “missed last time seen”. I know that if I do “new questions” I'll progress a lot faster too, but the only category that really has any new questions left is Business Law and dear god…no. I can't imagine doing a full set of Business Law. 🙁

    #768097
    csvirk
    Participant

    Sand orally promised Frost a $10,000 bonus, in addition to a monthly salary, if Frost would work two years for Sand. If Frost works for the two years, will the statute of frauds prevent Frost from collecting the bonus?

    A.
    No, because Frost fully performed

    B.
    No, because the contract did not involve an interest in real estate

    Incorrect C.
    Yes, because the contract could not be performed within one year

    D.
    Yes, because the monthly salary was the consideration of the contract

    Here is the Explanation
    Answer A

    “The statute of frauds applies only to contracts for the sale of goods, a transfer of interest in land, promises to pay for the debts of another, or contracts that cannot be performed within one year. Consequently, the statute of frauds will not be considered in the performance of this contract.

    Frost did fully perform and therefore a contract has been created. A contract contains an offer, acceptance of the offer, and valid consideration. Sand offered Frost a bonus, Frost agrees to work the two years (acceptance), and the $10,000 is the motivation or consideration for the contract.”

    What part of question indicates that Frost Fully performed?

    FAR: 71, 77!
    AUD: 69, 80
    BEC: 72
    REG: 84

    #768098
    csvirk
    Participant

    Business law is really killing me. I am at review phase and getting every other question wrong. FML!!

    FAR: 71, 77!
    AUD: 69, 80
    BEC: 72
    REG: 84

    #768099
    Just3Letters
    Participant

    Csvirk,

    I'm in the same boat as you. I get most of the tax questions correct. BLaw and Ethics is killing me. Sometimes the way questions are worded confuses me so much. Additionally, many times it seems like two or three answers choice could be correct!

    Per your question,

    The question actually does state, “If Frost works for the two years”. It's confusing but I believe it's saying, “Assume Frost worked the entire two years”. In that case, the contract is fully performed.

    FAR- 81
    REG- 81
    BEC- Aug 22, 2016
    AUD- TBD

    #768100
    csvirk
    Participant

    Just3.

    Thank you. B-Law really bummed me out. Lost all the motivation after scoring 50% on my set of 20. Wanted to throw the laptop against the wall!

    Sorry for whining! needed to vent.

    FAR: 71, 77!
    AUD: 69, 80
    BEC: 72
    REG: 84

    #768101
    Claudia408
    Participant

    Can someone help with this rental question? I don't have the exact question but I want to know the answer… Maybe is it in the IRC but could not find it?

    I live in my house but rent out my house 30% of the year, 1 room of my house. I paint the entire house. What can I deduct?

    I live in my house but rent out my house 30% of the year, 1 room of my house. I pay homeowner's insurance for the entire house. What can I deduct?

    BEC - 75 (3x)
    AUD - 78 (3x)
    REG - 67, 66, Aug 1
    FAR - 54, Sept 8

    #768102
    csvirk
    Participant

    Claudia

    If you have rented part of your house for more than 15 days in a year then you deduct espenses from rental income. 30% of 365 = 110 days

    I believe you can deduct 30% of the expenses.

    for more details : https://www.irs.gov/publications/p527/ch05.html

    FAR: 71, 77!
    AUD: 69, 80
    BEC: 72
    REG: 84

    #768103
    Just3Letters
    Participant

    Claudia,

    I believe the deduction states that the expenses must be incurred and necessary + small repairs/maintenance, etc.

    Painting your house probably does not fall in to the “necessary” and “ordinary” category. Therefore, I would say do NOT deduct painting expenses. However, homeowner's insurance is pretty dang ordinary and necessary.

    I would pro-rate the expense for homeowners and deduct the 110 days (30%) like csvirk just mentioned.

    Let us know if you get answer 🙂

    Edit: You also may have to pre-rate based on square footage because the renter is only staying in one bedroom and probably uses the kitchen.

    FAR- 81
    REG- 81
    BEC- Aug 22, 2016
    AUD- TBD

    #768104
    Claudia408
    Participant
    #768105
    Just3Letters
    Participant

    Actually I think from the link you provided it looks like we probably deduct both painting and insurance. I had it backwards. If it DOES improve the property, you capitalize, if not you immediately expense.

    Therefore, because painting does not improve property, current expense.

    FAR- 81
    REG- 81
    BEC- Aug 22, 2016
    AUD- TBD

    #768106
    Claudia408
    Participant

    well i guess it depends right? by itself you can deduct, but if it is part of a larger project that is a capital improvement then you capitalize.

    BEC - 75 (3x)
    AUD - 78 (3x)
    REG - 67, 66, Aug 1
    FAR - 54, Sept 8

    #768107
    Spartans92
    Participant

    I know Tim mentioned not to worry about the phase out (exact numbers) just know the fact there is a phase out. How important are these anyways then? Pretty much everything has a phase out limit to it. I thought I enjoyed tax but I hate it so much now!

    BEC- PASS

Viewing 15 replies - 1,051 through 1,065 (of 1,691 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group Q2 2016 - Page 71’ is closed to new replies.