Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 54%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$69 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Take Your Forum Experience
to the Next Level
Create a free account and join over 3 million investors sharing
their journeys and helping each other succeed.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
Already a member?  Login here
Rehabbing & House Flipping
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated almost 9 years ago on .

User Stats

62
Posts
9
Votes
Abe Gonzales
  • Engineer
  • San Jose, CA
9
Votes |
62
Posts

Current and Non-Current Assets

Abe Gonzales
  • Engineer
  • San Jose, CA
Posted

I intend to use power tools and equipment already available at hand for rehabbing. But I needed to make sure that I am assigning and structuring the proper balance sheet with the proper organization. I currently have a potentially C-corp structured organization having missed the 75 or 90 day clause for conversion from C-corp to S-corp. My question to CPAs and valuators here is, I have hundreds of power tools, semi-heavy equipment, and a converted truck to a van. I intend to use these equipment for rehabbing. Can I assign these equipment, subject to valuation for FMV, treated as non-current asset in a balance sheet to my C-corp and then be converted as common shares stock of my C-corp? If so, how is this conversion to take place, and is it possible at all? The other question is that these non-current assets (equipment) would have depreciation value over time. A straight line depreciation seemed to give more depreciated value compared to the double line method. Under which circumstance will either be straight line or double line method be more favorable? Also, CA CPA/counsel with experience in the CA RE and construction industry may be able provide their opinions.