Skip to content
×
PRO
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
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here
Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties. Try BiggerPockets PRO.
x
All Forum Categories
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

All Forum Posts by: Jake Moran

Jake Moran has started 4 posts and replied 38 times.

Post: Are all costs prior to placing a tenant considered purchase cost?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

Fair enough! I wasn't trying to be rude, but I just bought a duplex and this question is top of mind for me and I am just hoping to find consensus. The language in the code, combined with Ashish's opinion - who is also a tax accountant - seems pretty compelling to me. 

Yours, Natalie, and Steven's opinions are also important, but none of you has given me a strong argument against Ashish's. You all just keep agreeing with each other and saying I'm wrong. And I might be wrong. I am just looking for the best answer, and there doesn't seem to be consensus.

Don't you want to give your clients as many tax benefits as legally allowed? I would assume that if I am in fact right, you would be happy about it so that you can make your clients happier. This might be a pretty significant benefit that many accountants seem to not be taking advantage of.

Post: Are all costs prior to placing a tenant considered purchase cost?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

I understand everyone's logic - that "in general," ALL costs to acquire/improve a property before it is placed in service MUST be capitalized. But everyone continues to ignore the specific exception noted not once but twice in 1.263(a)-2 (originally pointed out by ), that the de minimis rule supersedes this general requirement. You all seem to be taking a general requirement and turning it into an absolute, no-exceptions requirement.

Please, please read these words again (especially those in bold underline), and tell me how they don't apply to this discussion:

Reg 1.263(a)-2:

(d) Acquired or produced tangible property -

(1) Requirement to capitalize. Except as provided in § 1.162-3 (relating to materials and supplies) and in § 1.263(a)-1(f) (providing a de minimis safe harbor election), a taxpayer must capitalize amounts paid to acquire or produce a unit of real or personal property.

(f) Transaction costs -

(1) In general. Except as provided in § 1.263(a)-1(f)(3)(i) (for purposes of the de minimis safe harbor), a taxpayer must capitalize amounts paid to facilitate the acquisition of real or personal property.

@Linda Weygant@Natalie Kolodij, @Steven Hamilton II

Post: Are all costs prior to placing a tenant considered purchase cost?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

Where is there language that says the de minimis only applies to items AFTER placed in service?

Post: Are all costs prior to placing a tenant considered purchase cost?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15
Originally posted by @Linda Weygant:

Well that was a metric crapton of reading, but here are the nuggets I pulled out of it:  (Emphasis Mine as bold and underline)

In the link you provided, I could find nothing to back up your assertion, but found the following sections that back up mine.  Since what you linked contained almost 150 pages of information, I didn't read the whole thing word for word.  Instead, I did a couple of searches for key words and phrases (such as "prior to" and "in service" and "de minimus" and the below is what I found.

Please copy/paste the relevant sections that support a taxpayer's ability to claim a de minimus deduction for assets BEFORE they are placed into service.  I certainly couldn't find anything.  If it's true, then it's awesome and will make lots of people happy, but it would fly in the face of most other IRS Tax Code and conventions.

Example 10.

Work performed prior to placing the property in service. In Year 1, M purchases a building for use as a business office. Prior to placing the building in service, M pays amounts to repair cement steps, refinish wood floors, patch holes in walls, and paint the interiors and exteriors of the building. In Year 2, M places the building in service and begins using the building as its business office. Assume that the work that M performs does not constitute an improvement to the building or its structural components under § 1.263(a)-3. Under § 1.263-3(e)(2)(i), the building and its structural components is a single unit of property. Under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the amounts paid must be capitalized as amounts to acquire the building unit of property because they were for work performed prior to M's placing the building in service.

Example 11.

Work performed prior to placing the property in service. In January Year 1, N purchases a new machine for use in an existing production line of its manufacturing business. Assume that the machine is a unit of property under § 1.263(a)-3(e) and is not a material or supply under § 1.162-3. N pays amounts to install the machine, and after the machine is installed, N pays amounts to perform a critical test on the machine to ensure that it will operate in accordance with quality standards. On November 1, Year 1, the critical test is complete, and N places the machine in service on the production line. N pays amounts to perform periodic quality control testing after the machine is placed in service. Under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the amounts paid for the installation and the critical test performed before the machine is placed in service must be capitalized by N as amounts to acquire the machine. However, amounts paid for periodic quality control testing after N placed the machine in service are not required to be capitalized as amounts paid to acquire the machine.

V. Amounts Paid To Acquire or Produce Tangible Property Under § 1.263(a)-2

Section 1.263(a)-2T of the 2011 temporary regulations provided rules for applying section 263(a) to amounts paid to acquire or produce a unit of real or personal property. In general, the final regulations retain the rules from the 2011 temporary regulations, including general requirements to capitalize amounts paid to acquire or produce a unit of real or personal property...

 
Linda, I'm a CPA though not specifically a tax accountant. You either didn't notice or chose to ignore the best point @Ashish made, which is that the rule and examples you are quoting in your argument don't apply when you elect the de minimus safe harbor. Reg 1.263(a)-2 specifically says,

(d) Acquired or produced tangible property -

(1) Requirement to capitalize. Except as provided in § 1.162-3 (relating to materials and supplies) and in § 1.263(a)-1(f) (providing a de minimis safe harbor election), a taxpayer must capitalize amounts paid to acquire or produce a unit of real or personal property

Then it goes on to list your previously mentioned Examples 10 and 11.... the logic is pretty obvious that the de minimis exception supersedes the requirements in those examples.

How can you argue against that?

Post: BRRRR method and Capital improvement depreciation

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

Ashish, this is the exact question I am looking for an answer to. We just bought a duplex and we are re-doing the bathrooms and kitchens and a few other little things, and since we are doing it ourselves, the total cost is about $8k. Since that $8k is split over many invoices/items, I believe it would all qualify for the de minimis. 

But does the de minimis still apply before the property is placed in service? 

Sounds like you would say sure, while many CPAs would not -- do you know of any specific literature or cases related to this question?

Post: Duplex - Split in two and sell individually?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

It seems like the attractiveness of buying half a duplex depends on the perception of your area. Some of the comments above are very against the idea, but in the Washington DC area where I live, they are incredibly common. It seems like duplexes were all the rage in the past, and then at some point the area went through a phase of splitting them up. They are now called "semi-detached," and there is virtually no negative perception about them around here. Of course they're not quite as valuable as SF detached, but that's a different conversation. Point is, they are perfectly acceptable here.

If you are considering buying a duplex and converting it into two semi-detached homes, I'd simply recommend you do your homework for your area and see if there is a negative perception that would hinder demand for them.

Post: Getting started in Jacksonville, Fl

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

@Brandon Ellis Any updates? Find any neighborhoods you like? What kind of impact is COVID having down there?

Post: How to structure a flipping partnership with a contractor?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

@Greg Dickerson @Will Barnard

Made some revisions. Anything I'm missing?

Post: How to structure a flipping partnership with a contractor?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

Thanks to both of you. This makes sense. I still plan to partner with him, primarily because he is in fact providing funding (both in cash to purchase the deal as well as deferred payment for the rehab work), but also because I still believe that this significantly increases his incentive to do the job fast and well. All I ever hear is how unreliable, slow, expensive, and/or dishonest most contractors are. The extra cost of partnering with him would seem to not outweigh the benefits.

I've been trying to come up with a good formula that provides him a normal profit margin for the rehab work, plus a fair share of the profits for his investment. Would something like my outline below make sense? Hopefully you can follow what I'm doing but let me know if you need any explanation.

Also, what is the typical profit margin that contractors tack on -- is there a norm, or is it all over the map?

Possible structure:

@Will Barnard I realize this doesn't account for the value of me sourcing and negotiating the deal. I need to think more about how to incorporate that...

Post: How to structure a flipping partnership with a contractor?

Jake MoranPosted
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Posts 38
  • Votes 15

I met a contractor who did some work on my personal house, and when found out he does a flip from time to time, we agreed to work together. The roles would be:

  • I would put in some cash and do all the work aside from the rehab
  • He would put in some cash and manage the rehab

I really like this setup because it gives me a contractor who is incentivized to get this thing done quickly and done well. But my big question is, how should the profits be split? He mentioned he usually does 75/25 in his favor, which might make sense since he's doing the heavy lifting in managing the rehab. But it would only makes sense if we had an equivalent amount invested, right? So if I put in $100k cash, and he put in $20k cash plus $80k in materials and labor (excluding any profit margin), then I think I'd be okay with giving him 75% of the net profit. But should I be? What else am I not thinking about here?

My other question is on the legal side: what is the best way to do this? He already has an LLC specifically for flipping, separate from his contracting business. Would it be better to buy the house directly through that LLC? Or buy the house under both my name and his LLC? Or create a new LLC where we are the two owners, and buy the house under that entity?