I appreciate the opportunity to advise you regarding the tax treatment for your loss of $25,406 in 2015 from your dog breeding activities. I understand that you decided to start breeding purebred terriers to keep yourself busy after your divorce with your husband in January. There are two possible ways to treat the loss under rulings in the Internal Revenue Code. One option is to treat your dog breeding activity as a business and deduct the losses on Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, of your individual income tax return. The second option is to treat your dog breeding as an activity not engaged in for profit, which does not allow you to deduct the
A result on the next page shows that at sales price of $21.50, the sales quantity rises to 1,140,085 units and net profit turns to positive for the first time. Besides, if a company continues to reduce the price further, at the point of $15.50, it is where the company’s profit on product 101 is in the highest position as it gives the net profit of $3,901,908.
In order to deduct her moving expenses, she must meet certain conditions outlined in Reg. 1.217-2 (c). Helen meets the first two requirements (relevance to work test and distance test) without any issue. The third requirement has not yet been met yet though. This requirement is a minimum period of employment. Since she is a full-time employee, she must work full-time in this general location for at least 39 weeks during the 12 month period after the move. This does not mean she is not required to remain employed at her current place of work to meet this test. Even though she does not meet this requirement yet, she can deduct these expenses on the current years return or the year the reimbursement is paid to her by her employer. If she recognizes the expenses on this year’s return and does not end up meeting the requirement, she will have to include the deductions she took on this year’s return in next year’s gross income.
NOTE: In addition to the in-chapter and end-of-chapter exercises which serve as short cases you will find the following short cases arranged by course title that can also be utilized as short cases that require the student to access the authoritative literature to address the issue presented in the case. Solutions to the cases below are available to instructors on the Weirich Accounting & Auditing Research 8e instructor website at www.wiley.com/college/weirich. Other excellent sources of longer and more detailed cases include the Deloitte Trueblood cases and cases provided by various other firms.
In our second assumption, instead of using the cost of goods per cases in 1986, we try to use the percentage it counts in the total expenses which is 50.4% and to find the sales needed to break-even. The detail of the calculation is shown in the answer for questions d. The result is that 95,635, a little bit higher than the estimated sales of 90,000.
Jerry Hargrave, plaintiff, was convicted of the attempted murder of Shirley Mae Gill (the victim), in a trial by the court under Va. Code. 1950 § 18.2-51. The plaintiff and Ms. Gill, his common-law wife, had been drinking in the earlier part of the day in question. Sometime later, they disputed about the plaintiff moving out of the home they shared to begin a relationship with her sister. At which time victim refused to surrender the plaintiff’s property. Following, the plaintiff left the premises, returning shortly after with a rifle in hand standing 10 feet away from victim, and then shooting a bullet into a washing machine that was three feet way from the victim. The plaintiff was sentenced to a term of 4 years in the State penitentiary.
A price ceiling is a government-levied maximum rate for a product or good. When a price ceiling inflicted by the government is more than retail equilibrium price, the price ceiling has no effect on the market or economy. This is because it does not obstruct supply, nor does it boost the demand. A different effect transpires if the government imposes a price ceiling below the market’s equilibrium rate. The suppliers will no longer be capable of charging the price that the market mandates, but they are required to meet the maximum price determined by the government’s price ceiling. When the demand rises beyond the capability to supply, shortages ensue. This leads to rationing of the product, causing some consumers to experience longer lines to obtain the product. In a worse case, there would be no products available for the consumer to buy.
Even when everything seems to be in favor for you to consider that your filing status is head of household since you had the custody and you fully support your son. The fact that nonresidents alien for tax purposes don’t qualify as a head of household at any time of the tax year. In your case, the filing status for the 2015 tax return is contemplated as single.