No income but plenty of cash

No income but plenty of cash

Rental Property Investor · Mercer Island, WA · Member since 2008 · 22k+ posts · 14k+ votes

More than once someone has written something to the effect "I have plenty of cash but no income on my tax return." Usually in the context of trying to get a loan. I do understand deducting expenses, depreciation, and interest and the difference between taxable income and actual cash flow. But I still don't see how you end up with plenty of money in your pocket but no taxable income.

For example, consider a classical BiggerPockets 2% deal. Rent of $500. You pay $25K. By some miracle, you get a 5% 30 year fixed loan for 100% of the $25K. Assume you do this deal on Jan 1. Lets use all the simple assumptions about 80/20 split for depreciation. And lets assume your expenses and vacancy really are 50% and you have no capital (just to simply the depreciation calculation.)

Numbers are annual

Rent: $6000
NOI: $3000
P&I: $1610.46
Cash flow (before tax): $1389.54

Depreciation: $727.27
Interest: $1241.62
Taxable income: $1031.10

So, there's my quandary. This is a "good deal" and produces real cash flow. But it also produces taxable income.

Now, I understand you can take lots of deductions for running a landlord business. But those are, for the most part, included in the 50%. The ones I would say are not would be expenses associated with hunting down new deals and, if you set up as a C-corp, fringe benefits like health insurance.

Now, with a classical 1% rule deal, say you pay $50K for $500 in rent. With the same assumptions, I get negative cash flow of $220.93 and a passive tax loss of $937.79.

OTOH, if you're self managing and not counting anything for the management cost (so, expenses, capital and vacancy are one third of rents), I come up with $779.07 in cash flow and only $62.21 in taxable income. Is that you folks get to "plenty of cash and no income?" I don't get it.

1Reply
14 views

Most Popular Reply

Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
14y

I've assumed that this "chunk of cash" has come from somewhere else and not from REI income. Examples; inheritance, insurance settlement, sale of primary residence, nest egg from good job they used to have, sale of business proceeds, etc.

See this reply in the discussion

11 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Investor · San Ramon, CA · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 569 votes
    14y

    Curious in responses myself. My first question when I read that they have negative cash flow due to depreciation is "are they getting decent deals?".

  • Investor · Union, NJ · Member since 2011 · 838 posts · 295 votes
    14y

    Nate,

    I would think having a negative cashflow due to depreciation is one of the huge benefits of Re investing. My thought is where else can you show a paper loss but in reality have a profit?

    Here in NJ properties are not cheap, the depreciation I take on my properties definitely helps lower a good chunk of my taxable income from my passive investing activities.

    Am I missing something or are you looking at it in a different light?

    regards,
    chris

  • Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    14y

    I've assumed that this "chunk of cash" has come from somewhere else and not from REI income. Examples; inheritance, insurance settlement, sale of primary residence, nest egg from good job they used to have, sale of business proceeds, etc.

  • Investor · San Ramon, CA · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 569 votes
    14y
    Originally posted by Chris Masons:

    Nate,

    I would think having a negative cashflow due to depreciation is one of the huge benefits of Re investing. My thought is where else can you show a paper loss but in reality have a profit?

    Here in NJ properties are not cheap, the depreciation I take on my properties definitely helps lower a good chunk of my taxable income from my passive investing activities.

    Am I missing something or are you looking at it in a different light?

    regards,
    chris

    Chris, it's all relative. The more you're depreciating, the more you paid, the larger your mortgage, the bigger your downpayment, the more cash you need to show a decent CoC return.

    For me, that's the biggest metric I look at as I'm still investing my own money and as such that's my scarecest resource limiting my investments, cash.

    You can take X dollars and buy 4X worth of property. You're going to want .18*X in free cash flow. Your depreciation should be about 3% of 80% of 4X or about .096X. You should still be showing cash of .084X at the end of the year.

  • Investor · Round Rock, TX · Member since 2010 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    14y

    What Jon K. said...or a well-paying job or other lucrative business that has produced said pile of cash.

    The cash does not have to come from the real estate business. It could have come from other activities with a recent severe decrease in income. The no income phenomenon could probably stem from a long period of trying to get a business off the ground after years of working to save a nest egg.

  • Landlord · Seattle, WA · Member since 2010 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    14y

    Jon,

    It is very easy in the first 5 years to show positive cash flow while producing tax losses.

    I use cost segregation as a tool for drastically increasing my depreciation in the early years of a properties life.

    Example:

    A 125,000 property

    Say 105K is building and 20K is land. Without a cost segregation study the building must be deducted over 27.5 years.

    A common result in a cost study might reallocate this to:

    63,000 of 27.5 year property
    15,750 of 15 year property
    26,250 of 5 year property

    It doesn't take much to see that this would mean substantially more depreciation taken in the early years of a property.

    Also, it is easy to get caught up in using 50% as the expense allocation in a spreadsheet. Most of the time though actual expenses or more lumpy and it is possible to do some tax planning each year. Many expenses are discretionary allowing for some consideration in the timing of the expense.

  • Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    14y

    Welcome back Charles! Because of heavy use of cost segregation giving more depreciation early on, do you look to exchange into new (to you) properties after 5-7 years to keep the depreciation engine running fast?

  • Real Estate Investor · the villages, FL · Member since 2008 · 5k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    14y

    JON H.
    You are normally 100% correct Jon, but I have continued to do this for many years. As one in the business, there is no limit to the amount of depreciation I might claim.

    In your post you listed an example that was very simple to understand based on the BP 2%. However you did not go far enough.

    Here is my very simple example. I buy or build a personal residence and live in it for two years. At the end of two years I sell for a $200,000 profit. Due to the tax treatment on personal residences this $200,000 comes into my account tax-free. I think everyone would agree this is a bundle of cash.

    I now take this $200,000 and find a seller of a $2 million property with 90% of the value in the structure and 10% value in the land. On simple depreciation this home yields $65,000 worth of tax write off. This simply means I may earn net income of $65,000 and pay zero income tax.

    Remember, this is just one transaction of selling a home in one transaction of buying an additional property. Do this five times or 10 times. I would have a mountain of cash, the ability to make a ton of income which would be offset by additional depreciation. My tax return would show very little income but I would have a mountain of cash.

    There are also other ways to sell properties on an installment basis where the annual tax due is very small. When you do attempt to apply for a loan, it is imperative that you find a lender that understands how to dig into your return and find the hidden income that you are truly making. Rich

  • Investor · Union, NJ · Member since 2011 · 838 posts · 295 votes
    14y

    Nate,

    You're right the COC return is a great metric to truly identify your real returns on your own capital investment.

    That being said, I have had off years where I have had alot of repairs maintenance as well as capital improvements on one of my properties to the point I was still showing a profit, not much but something meaning I would have a tax liability. Once I added depreciation in, it brought my to a loss for that said year, which to me is one of the great benefits you get with RE investing. It is relative though your right, the more you depreciate the more you spent or more the property cost I should say...

    Then I have had great years where I am struggling to find expenses to offset my tax liability. The funny thing with depreciation is even if you don't take it you are required to "recapture" it and add it back to your cost basis when you sell your investment so even if you didn't take it for whatever reason you are stuck with it later on.

    I also cannot stand when mtg lenders look at your returns and see a loss and don't take depreciation into consideration as well as other things in the accounting world. The whole object is trying to reduce your taxable income as much as you legally can so you can be in a better tax position. While from a lenders standpoint they want to see more income then you usually show on your returns.

    This has hurt me on more then occassion.

  • Rental Property Investor · Mercer Island, WA · Member since 2008 · 22k+ posts · 14k+ votes
    14y

    To be clear, I was referring to situations where someone claimed to actually have lots of income, not cash in the bank they had accumulated from another source.

    I assume what you mean, Rich, is that you qualify as RE professional, which allows unlimited deduction of passive losses. Nobody is limited on the depreciation they can take, but the ability to offset other income is limited if you're not a RE professional.

    I do understand the tax exclusion for the sale of a personal residence. No way would my Mrs. move every two years, though. And doing a deal that would generate $200K in profit after two years would be right up there with winning the lottery. Possible, and I know it does happen, but I've never been that lucky. I've only sold three residences, and the best I did was a $10K profit after eight years. The others were losses.

    To some extent, I think I answered my own question with my third example. I continued to futz with different scenarios and I can certainly come up with numerous scenarios even considering a more realistic expense number than 33%. I do think good rental deals actually do produce taxable income where not-so-good deals will produce very little. Mediocre deals will produce "negative tax", which can provide benefits if you're in a position to use it. That is, if you have other income to offset and you avoid the limitations on offsetting.

    Even if you can't avoid those limitations (not a RE professional and too much AGI), the depreciation deduction can still offset a chunk of rental income, making income from rentals "better" than income from a W2 job.

    I totally agree the actuals are much, much lumpier than 50%. One of my rentals had the same tenant in place all year and no expenses outside taxes and insurance. "Expenses" on that one were under 10%. OTOH, my other rental (I only have two), is on its third tenant for last year. I replaced all the floors and had 1.5 months of vacancy. So, "expenses" on that one are about 55%. And that's with no property management expenses.

  • Real Estate Investor · the villages, FL · Member since 2008 · 5k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    14y

    I voted for your reply and agree with much of it. I AM a RE professional, which is 1 benefit. My wifey DID allow me to build a new home every 2 years in St George, Utah. As a builder, I built in equity, had ZERO of my own funds in home and made between 150 and 200K on EACH one(it did cause me to get one of the very first "Lifestyle" audits where I enjoyed educating the IRS).Same neighborhood and schools, so kids kept same friends etc.
    It would NOT be possible to make as much tax-free today, but still no limit to write-off allowed to one "in the Business". Yes, it is possible to have high income and pay little or ZERO Income taxes- and I'm sure there are others on BP as well that aren't as noisy and vocal as I am! Rich

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.