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
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
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: Michael Plaks

Michael Plaks has started 104 posts and replied 5132 times.

Post: Rental Loss Question

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Sebastian Bennett:

Hi Michael, just a hypothetical. Lets say I buy a property and I intend on renovating it and then I choose to flip the home. Can I take a rental loss during the period I own the home or does the intent matter?


You keep saying "rental loss" but avoiding the issue of renting. You do not have a rental loss to talk about if you do not rent the property or at least make it completely ready for occupancy and advertise as available. 

Post: Rental Loss Question

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Sebastian Bennett:

Can I take rental loss on a property during the year of ownership if my intent is to flip the property?  What if the intent was to flip but it then does not sell and becomes a rental?


Was it actually rented or at least ready for occupancy and advertised as such?

Post: Real Estate Professional Status for Spose

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Sean Graham:
Quote from @Michael Plaks:

It is not correct, she does not need to own the properties. But it could be hard for her to accumulate the required 750+ hours when you have a management company that does the majority of the work.

It sounds like the PM company is in house so she can participate in the PM. It’s not a 3rd party. So why do you say it might make it harder for her to qualify? 

I was reading too fast, did not notice it was in-house. No problem then. 

Post: Real Estate Professional Status for Spose

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087

It is not correct, she does not need to own the properties. But it could be hard for her to accumulate the required 750+ hours when you have a management company that does the majority of the work.

Post: Bookkeeping Treatment of Postposession Holdback

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087

The best way to treat it, you ask? Not a doctor, but I'd leave it untreated, it should heal on its own.

I don't think there's a clearly prescribed (pun intended) answer. Personally, I would trea..., err, consider it current income. Post closing, your client became the owner, and the seller remained on the property essentially as a tenant. Presumably subject to eviction. I think the payment your client received is an equivalent of rent.

Interesting to hear what my colleagues think, particularly since trea..., err, recording it as a price concession is slightly more beneficial tax-wise.

Post: Cost Segregation Studies: The Hidden Passive Activity Loss Trap 🏢

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Sean Graham:
Quote from @Stephen Nelson:

As long as you satisfy these requirements—material participation, at-risk basis, and you do not exceed the yearly business loss limitation—any allowed nonpassive loss can be used against any class of income reported on your return, including portfolio income.

I’d love to be wrong here in all honesty. My firm does cost segregation, not tax prep, so it would certainly be beneficial if cost segregation can create real estate losses that can be used to offset portfolio income if someone meets REPS. 

Side note, ChatGPT will tell you whatever you want to hear and will change its answer if you push back enough. 

We're confusing multiple related concepts here, hence you're both right.

Cost segregation creates (a temporary, one must remember!) loss attached to your real property. Sean's Step 1 job is done at this point. Here's your cost segregation report, you have losses, congratulations!

Then step 2: these losses come to us accountants, and we have to apply them to your taxes. If they fit your situation, and we can apply those losses - great, you win. If they do NOT fit your situation, and we cannot apply them - oops, you did it again.

We have 3 common and distinctly different situations as to when we can or canNOT apply these cost segregation-triggered losses. Actually, more than 3 situations, but these 3 are the most common.

1. Regular rental properties, without special situations in #2 and #3. The losses are considered passive. They can only offset other passive income (if you have any), and plus you may have a restricted window to offset other income if your total income is below $150k. Since portfolio income is not the same as passive, you cannot offset portfolio income here, except maybe for that limited income-driven window.

2. Regular rental properties, but either you or your spouse qualify for REPS - Real estate professional status. Then the losses (with some conditions, of course) become nonpassive. They can offset any other income, including W2 income and portfolio income, and without income-based restrictions.

3. STRs - short-term rentals. Provided that you meet various important conditions, such as average stay, material participation and personal use - your STR losses also become nonpassive. It works similar to REPS in #2, although REPS is NOT needed with STRs. Your losses can offset any other income, including W2 income and portfolio income, regardless of your income level.

I only gave a very cursory introduction, because there's a lot more fine print, gotchas and various special situations. It's very risky to draw conclusions from such a generic overview without consulting a tax expert like me, one-on-one. Your mileage...

Post: Real estate professional while working a W2?

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Mark Delosreyes:

@Sean Graham, agree to……agree.


Sorry, this is not how this forum works. We come here to DISagree with each other. 

Post: The "in-service" date

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Gregory Wilson:
Quote from @Michael Plaks:
Quote from @Gregory Wilson:

I think you misunderstood. The offer to lease was "as is" and which is by definition in a state of readiness. Frankly, this thread should help the CPA's in the crowd understand why taxpayers often complain that their tax preparers are not aggressive enough. For my part I see this as okay. I can see a IRS Publication based approach to tax preparation. 


The offer to lease should be genuine. If it's under construction, it cannot be leased. If you want to call it "aggressive", be my guest.

A property under construction certainly can be leased. Where did you get that idea?

Not interested in arguing the obvious further. The Regs language is clear:

...Property is first placed in service when first placed in a condition or state of readiness and availability for a specifically assigned function,..

If you want to twist its meaning, go ahead, it's not my game.

PS. You may also want to review 2013 TC cases of a) Brown and b) Mears. 

Post: The "in-service" date

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Gregory Wilson:

I think you misunderstood. The offer to lease was "as is" and which is by definition in a state of readiness. Frankly, this thread should help the CPA's in the crowd understand why taxpayers often complain that their tax preparers are not aggressive enough. For my part I see this as okay. I can see a IRS Publication based approach to tax preparation. 


The offer to lease should be genuine. If it's under construction, it cannot be leased. If you want to call it "aggressive", be my guest.

Post: The "in-service" date

Michael Plaks
#1 Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation Contributor
Posted
  • Tax Accountant / Enrolled Agent
  • Houston, TX
  • Posts 5,187
  • Votes 6,087
Quote from @Gregory Wilson:
Quote from @Natalie Kolodij:

Advertising alone won't qualify unfortunately. 

It definitely helps; but the IRS looks at other pieces as well including occupancy permits, extent of renovation, etc. It's when it's ready and available for rent. 

A normal turn around time of advertising while doing finishing touches, able to be occupied within next few weeks would be reasonable. 

Advertising at the beginning of a full studs out renovation or something that will be months down the line wouldn't work out. 


None of that stuff is in the Treasury Regulation. It comes from IRS Publications which are, of course, not binding on the IRS or the taxpayers or the courts. But, moreover, it is just a timing difference and a short one at that - part of a year. And, if the taxpayer is wrong and there would be no person who would ever lease a project under construction (which I doubt) at least the timing adjustment goes the safe way for the taxpayer.

I'm with Natalie on this one. (And pretty much always.)

It DOES come from Regulations. Regs. 1.167(a)-11(e)(1)

...Property is first placed in service when first placed in a condition or state of readiness and availability for a specifically assigned function,..


So, advertising a property and "disclosing that while it is immediately available to lease it is under construction" seems to violate the Regs.