My EA for my Audit says unless expenses for looking at an investment turn into an actual investment, the IRS does not consider them an expense.   

They have much stricter reporting requirements (audited financials and semi annual reports), as well as a much lower barrier cost of entry.

If the proper reports and documentation are not completed, you run the risk of failing an IRS audit and the cost segregation not being honored.

I've heard of audit cases from the California Dept of RE to ensure PM's, but yeah, the insurance seems steep so I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have insurance.All that aside, ridiculous that they're suing both.

When properly established and utilized, a self-directed IRA or Solo 401(k) should not have any issues in the event of an IRS audit.  

I think that's going to be a tough sell to the IRS at audit.As for documentation - I've not yet represented anyone at audit where the IRS questioned the date placed in service.

So, you really need to do your due diligence in finding a mortgage broker/RMLO.Get references, then see if those references have any relationship with the LO,Look to their last state audit and compliance exam, if they never had a compliance exam, move on.Do they have the net worth to buy, at par, any loan they do that is non-compliant?

I was always impartial to having them.

Then, when you get audited you find out that the problem is an underlying matter that you failed to disclose (not knowing) when you got assistance and the IRS has no liability in giving you that assistance.

@Ian Ippolito what’s even more concerning to me is that the fed would have probably cut more than a half point but with it being so close to the election wanted to preserve its impartiality.