michaelmars

I switched in 2012 also and I don't think I paid for the fast path last year, it was included in my package. And at my discounted rate, pro is still a better value. At there full rate of over 5k I might return to ATX after my discount runs out.

then I guess those "teachers" are assuming that the 1099's are prepared correctly. Remember, they are being prepared by those same people here that disagree on how the income should be reported, so why assume that the 1099's are correct. I do 100 of buildings and I can't tell you how many times I get 1099's with the rent reported in box 3 or 7. Even errors on 1099's prepared by big institutions like Hospitals and even some local municipalities.

we pick and choose, usually the income amt per state is below their filing threshold and the refund would be less than our fees. Don't forget to take ht withholding on schedule A. Some of the states might be part of a composite return, read carefully, if so then you don't file but get to take the resident state tax credit.

worst season ever, which is why I have been awol from here. we have worked most weekends since mid-august. The 3115's killed us since we do mostly real estate and of course once the 1120s and 1065's get done, then we can start on the 1040's which many have smllc real estate in, some people up to 40 properties. Got so many cost segs this year and doing those 3115's can take 3-4 hours extra per building. From the get go all my real estate clients were told to expect a 50% increase in fees this year and once they saw all the work, not one complained about the price. Great cash flow season, lousy sleep and rest season. Now its a 3 day weekend then payroll taxes [yay, oh joy, another deadline]

I meant -0- business use for depreciation purposes not on E. What if you put 365 rental days and just left the rest of the form blank, would that work? I just tried and I don't see any efile errors popping up

^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ THIS

you need to keep the schedule E open in proseries so the 8582 has something to link to. put the property in as it was including depreciation and make current business use -0- so no depreciation gets taken. When sold the suspended loss needs to appear on E as an ordinary loss, not capital loss.

FINANCIAL PLANNING Dan was a single guy living at home with his father and working in the family business. When he found out he was going to inherit a fortune when his sickly father died, he decided he needed a wife with which to share his fortune. One evening at an investment meeting he spotted the most beautiful woman he had ever seen. Her natural beauty took his breath away. "I may look like just an ordinary man," he said to her, but in just a few years my father will die, and I'll inherit $200 million." Impressed, the woman obtained his business card and three days later, she became his stepmother. Women are so much better at financial planning than men.

heads and tails

I think its part of the sale transaction. What I really don't understand, why this is at the point of tax court? Assuming the tax is even $3000, after paying your time etc it might be cheaper to pay.

target practice for Catherine?

he isn't the only one because it is still going on.

I AGREE and that's how it is now but I am looking for a way to get rid of the S corp if possible.

the ID doesn't have to be the same as long as the ownership is the same but in this case they went from holding title in a S corp to a LLC. Title was held by the S corp with 1 shareholder, the new entity was an LLC with 1 member. Since they at some point realized this was wrong, they transferred the LLC to the S corp so in effect the S corp still owns the replacement property. My desire now is to either dissolve the LLC and let title revert properly to the S corp. Or get rid of the Corp, leaving the LLC which is wrong but better tax wise. If the mortgage bank becomes a problem then my client can and is willing to pay off the mortgage.

This is a headache I inherited a few years ago and just went along with how it was even though I know its wrong. Time to try and make right. Client owned a building that he did a 1031 on. The attorney set up a new entity to hold the new property and did it as an LLC. The exchange agent let this fly. I guess as some point they realized the foul up and so they reported the LLC as a disregarded entity with the S corp as the sole owner. This way the property is still on the S corp return even though the title is held by the LLC. Probably should have just done an S election for the LLC but what is done is done. This was done in 2005, In 2012 there was a refi and they could have tried to fix it then but now its my problem. My options seem to be, keep as is; dissolve LLC and let title revert to S corp, or close S corp and let LLC stand on its own? Of course the last option is the best tax wise since it gets the property out of the Corp.

under TPR regs, since its reasonable to expect to use up the yarns within the time period I would probably expense.

yes, trying to do on-line

anyone know how to get an EIN if none of the shareholders or officers have US social security numbers?

i got a few of these too, about a month ago and then nothing since.

thanks for all the replies KC

I AM not concerned with the op only if the state or irs can get the money from the limited members. Yes they will have a claim against the managing member if their money gets taken but that's fight for another day, today the fight is with nys and their right to levy the limited members banks

Yes its a NY LLC, and I don't think the operating agreement is all that important to a NY tax collector, which often is outsource to private agencies. Yes if a limited member gets levied they will go after the managing partner but m question was if anyone knew if the limited partners can even get levied? Also there is some thoughts that even though the managing member should be liable, they are still considered limited partners per irs and thus would not be personally liable either.

KC that's out of line and making assumptions that weren't stated. The question is are any partners liable for this and if so is it just the managing partner. Imagine a partnership with 100 partners and you own .005 percent, not the State is coming after you for 100% of the late filing penalties. That is the current situation. The State agent said he is going after the bank accounts of any partner that has the resources and I was just wondering if he was blowing smoke or can really do that. This isn't about anyone getting write offs but not wanting to pay their liabilities. Heck some of my clients have over 70 K-1's in their return.

as long as they don't take out funds personally, they cant go after owners of a Corp so I am thinking this might be the same. They had losses for 5 years and no one wanted to fund the llc to pay accounting fees etc then all at once they decided to get current.

Can the individuals be held liable for the late filing penalties of an LLC that no longer has assets? This was an entity taxed as a partnership and NYS is threatening to levy the accounts of the partner's. IF so, just the managing partner or any of them?