Taxpayers Fail To Meet Real Estate Professional Exception To Passive Loss Rule.

The petitioners, a married couple, each worked full time at their respective jobs and also owned rental properties.  However, the evidence demonstrated that they did not work more in their rental activities than they did in their non-rental activities.  Thus, I.R.C. Sec. 469(c)(7)(B) was not satisfied.  The fallback test of active participation allowing up to $25,000 in annual losses from rental real estate activities to be deducted was also not available because petitioners income exceeded $150,000.  Passive losses were not deductible.  An accuracy-related penalty was not imposed because the petitioners had reasonable cause with respect to the underpayment.  Alfaro v. Comr., T.C. Sum. Op. 2014-54.

CALT does not provide legal advice. Any information provided on this website is not intended to be a substitute for legal services from a competent professional. CALT's work is supported by fee-based seminars and generous private gifts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the material contained on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Iowa State University.

RSS​ Facebook Twitter