data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/647bc/647bc2bb104b71bee56faf400f23b8a83b0b0a4b" alt=""
27 November 2017 | 11 replies
That's another nagging thing - doing it that way is in essence a reverse exchange but outside the safe harbor of rev proc 2000-37.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8ae66/8ae6641eab27c6b725b5b15c2a54eaaa118271c1" alt=""
27 November 2017 | 5 replies
At the time I did not have a fixed income and could only convince my bank by buying "safe" properties.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/263a3/263a3c1cdde7598b1087c860c8e5ef4e3b4c968e" alt=""
27 November 2017 | 5 replies
Am I on safe ground having not proceeded with this application?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dc50a/dc50a960f1066afeb51939b33e916dfd01c678bf" alt=""
27 November 2017 | 5 replies
I understand 1000/yr isn’t a lot of cash flow but it seems like a decent/safe start if I continue adding more units.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d7d1f/d7d1f828dd05dd36c5bd9015e8a5b3d836a2e382" alt=""
28 November 2017 | 4 replies
@Mark Forest since it's over $2500, we can't expense under the De Minimis Safe Harbor.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0e089/0e089644492d9d81d059581d7ace99473fdcd56f" alt=""
28 November 2017 | 2 replies
I assume some portion of the plumbing / piping needs repaired so I'll say $6k to be safe.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0cfbf/0cfbf32b89f61e449608769184dc6bed4493e68b" alt=""
29 November 2017 | 12 replies
I believe the IRS issued a safe harbor at 2 years but if you don't have it as business property for 2 years that doesn't mean you are wrong, it means you are getting into the gray area.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/68e73/68e73e285166ca5d50e3b238ecd3c761c88839e9" alt=""
1 December 2017 | 5 replies
Do I treat this as an abandoned property, or do I need to file an eviction just to be safe?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/210b6/210b6cda87fa7a7d858d1e466b27ec22ca4f4f5e" alt=""
1 December 2017 | 5 replies
Yes it is, it would likely be an expense under the de minimus safe harbor election.From a business standpoint I would question why you feel you need a system for a rental though.
2 December 2017 | 6 replies
I know I cannot discriminate to any families with young children, so I know that I will have to get the lead taken care of, but curious if I can technically be safe if I only have the renters side de-leaded.