Principal Residence Case Study

Illinois has a similar program to the Mills Act enacted where the primary tax incentives are given in the form of a property tax assessment freeze. Homeowners of historic structures listed on the National Register can have property taxes frozen for eight years if at least 25% of the market value of the property is spent on a rehabilitation project. The assessed value of the historic property is frozen at the same level as it was the year rehabilitation began. Over a four-year period, the valuation of the property is brought back to market level. Unlike federal incentives, the Property Tax Assessment Freeze Program is available only for homeowners and not for income producing properties.

Generally, a realized gain from sale of personal residence can be excluded from gross income under Exclusion 121. The amount realized is the selling price of the property less any disposition costs. The adjusted basis is then determined and the amount is subtracted from the realized sum. This will give you the amount of loss or gain from the sale of the property. Since the couple occupied the sold home for at least 2 of the last 5 years they fulfill the requirements for exclusion 121 treatment. The exclusion amount for the couple if filing jointly is $500.000 and the calculation would be as follows:

10. Gains/Losses are "generally" recorded at the same amount for both Capital Accounts and Tax Basis.

In 2013 Marianne sold land, building and equipment with a combined basis of $150,000 to an unrelated third party and in return received an installment note of $80,000 per year for five years. Of the $250,000 gain on sale, $150,000 was classified as Section 1245 gain and the remaining $100,000 was Section 1231 gain. In 2013, Marianne had a capital loss carryover of $60,000, $50,000 of which she used to offset her Section 1231 gain; she recognized no Section 1245 gain. The following year she recognized $40,000 of 1245 gain and $10,000 of Section 1231 gain which she promptly offset with the last $10,000 of the capital loss carryover. In 2015, she recognized $50,000 Section 1245 gain and no Section 1231 gain.

In summary, John and Jane would not be able to use 1031 tax exchange to purchase the new more expensive home. Due to the gain of buying an expensive house, it would not be considered “like-kind”. The additional money that is paid to acquire this

This largely depends on what types of property that individual owns, how much that property is worth, and the bankruptcy exemptions available

The Tax Court, per Judge Ruwe, issued an order on May 8, 1995, denying Pope & Talbot 's motion and granting the IRS 's motion. The court 's opinion characterized the issue before it as one of "first impression," and found resort to the legislative history of the statute necessary since the court was unable to "achieve...certainty based on the language of the statute." After reviewing the legislative history of IRC Sec. 311, the court observed the following: It is apparent that the purpose underlying IRC Sec. 311(d) was to tax the appreciation in value that occurred while the corporation held the property and to prevent a corporation from avoiding tax on the inherent gain by distributing such property to its shareholders...It follows that we must focus on the value of the Washington properties as owned by petitioner and value them as if petitioner had sold them at fair market value at the time of distribution.

John and Jane own and rent out a duplex in Atlanta. They are getting older now and are planning to retire and to move to Miami. John and Jane would like to sell the Atlanta Duplex and purchase a small commercial building next to the lovely condo they bought on the beach. The main issue is John and Jane can only afford to buy this building if they are able to capture all of the existing equity in their Atlanta duplex. To avoid (defer) a taxable event when they sell their duplex John and Jane can utilize Section 1031 of the IRC. There are, however, a few hoops that John and Jane must jump through to qualify.

Why? The owners capitalized and amortized 50 percent of the purchase price ($12 million) simply because the tax rules allowed it; therefore the

30. In 2011, José, a widower, sells land (fair market value of $100,000) to his daughter, Linda, for $50,000. José has made a taxable gift of $37,000.

For an HDB flat (except one-room flats), there is a minimum occupation period whereby the seller must physically occupy the flat before he would be eligible to sell the flat. For a flat bought directly from the HDB or a resale flat bought with a CPF housing grant, the seller must physically occupy the flat for five years before he can sell

The history of adverse possession can be traced back to the 12th century. During this time, a squatter could prove his right to ownership of property by the act of possession. Gradually, the law has been seen to favour the squatters as opposed to the landowners. The law required that the squatter had proof that he had dispossessed the property exclusively for 60 years in order to bar a landlord’s actions. There were further developments in the Statute of Limitations restricting other rights of the landlord in 1639. A landlord’s title would expire after a squatter had dispossessed a property for 20 years exclusively. Further amendments reduced the required time period from 20 to 12 years of exclusive dispossession.

Under Canadian Tax Law, there is an election for companies to defer recaptures and capital gains of property that was involuntarily or voluntarily disposed of. In this research paper, we attempt to prove that the election is a useful taxation strategy for businesses so that they are not subject to pay taxes on capital gains or recaptures until such a time where they may acquire an eligible replacement property that will help them earn business income. We will provide facts, definitions, and examples to illustrate the use of this election throughout the paper by explaining the capital cost allowance system, the offset available to business for capital gains and recaptures, the election process, the rules regarding replacing former business

The term capital gain is often associated with the wealthy or corporate entity. However, every single tax payer can receive a capital gain. Whenever you sell an item for more than you paid for it, you are earning a capital gain. That gain, the amount of money you made on the transaction, is subject to the capital gain tax. This means that the government has the right to tax a percentage of that money you earned. The sale of many different items can result in a capital gain, including stocks, investments, personal property, and homes or residences. As an example, if you purchase a used car for $1,000 and then sell that car for $5,000, you have made a capital gain of $4,000. However, any fees you paid toward that vehicle will be considered. If you restored the car, spending $2,000, that amount is decreased from your total capital gain amount.

The IRS addresses the topic of capital assets in Section 1221 (Legal Information Institute). Within this section, rather than defining what qualifies as a capital asset, The Code lists items that are not capital assets. This backwards approach has led to a grey area in regards to what classifies as a capital assets. As a result, many court cases have been on this topic. Once it is determined whether an asset is “capital in nature”, the various tax treatments can be considered. Specifically, capital assets sold at a gain that are held for less than one year at the time of sale will be classified as a short term gain (Investopedia, 2015). Short term capital gains can be used to offset short term capital losses for both individuals and corporations, however any excess short term capital gains will be taxed at the taxpayer’s regular tax rate. In addition, long-term capital gains experienced by a corporation are not subject to the more favorable capital gains rate. Also, when