| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 440.1 | seems like a consensus | GRAMPS::WCLARK | Walt Clark | Wed Nov 19 1986 11:15 | 9 |
| I saw the article, and a couple reprints from business magazines
which essentially say the same thing. They feel it is not a loophole
or mistake, but intentional. The definition of second home does
include boats and motorhomes that have suitable habitation. Of
course the IRS may have a different opinion, so a few thousand of
us may end up in court in 1988 to test the code.
Walt
|
| 440.2 | More on the Sail article. | BCSE::FRENCH | | Wed Nov 19 1986 12:01 | 15 |
| The article in Sail also stated that the boat would have to have
the amenities to be "liveable" to qualify as a second home. Things
like head, sink and cooking facilities. A motor home would also
intentionally qualify, if in fact it was lived aboard (or maybe
just capable of being lived aboard). I don't remember if they addressed
the question of whether you actually had to live aboard the boat.
Another point they made was that if you owned a boat for charter
purposes and did not ACTIVELY participate in the cahrtering operaton
- like actually approving the individuals who were going to charter,
that it would not qualify as a deduction.
Bill
|
| 440.3 | | NECVAX::RODENHISER | | Wed Nov 19 1986 14:30 | 3 |
| Opinions I had heard prior to the Sail article indicated that the
criteria would include: head, stove, and sleeping quarters.
|
| 440.4 | FORBES | CURIE::DONOHUE | | Wed Nov 19 1986 14:53 | 8 |
| THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN THE BACK OF FORBES ABOUT TWO ISSUES AGO
ON THIS SUBJECT. THE ARTICLE SEEMED TO INDICATE THAT IF A BOAT
HAD A HEAD, STOVE AND SLEEPING QUARTERS, THAT THE IRS WOULD TREAT
IT AS SECOND HOME.
JOHN
|
| 440.5 | likely targets | RDF::RDF | Rick D. Fricchione | Sun Nov 23 1986 15:23 | 15 |
| Theres also a two week residency requirement.
The law seems indeed to treat it like a second home if the criteria
of a "home" are met. Now, the IRS isn't going to challenge a 51
Foot Ketch with 4 cabins and two heads. They will stand a much
better chance of getting the people with J24's,porta-potties and
coleman stoves.
The latter will be difficult to prove as a residence, even in
complete honesty.
Rick
|
| 440.6 | A BOAT HAS BEEN DEFINED AS A RWSIDENCE BEFORE | MILRAT::RUDY | | Sun Nov 23 1986 17:40 | 18 |
| How did all this happen?
Several years back the IRS defined a boat as a residence. The reason
they did this was to insure that those that bought boats for charter
could not use them more then two weeks a year and still deduct it
as a loss. Note: This was the maximum for a vacation property.
The IRS now would have a tough case to eliminate the boat as a
residence. One reason is the writers of the tax reform
bill knowingly allowed the deductiability of second homes deliberately
since they were aware of the regulation. The other is more subtle. The law
alows the deductibility of interest on two residences. It would
be pretty difficult to rule out boats only as a second residence
and not also rule out the deduction for those who live on a boat
as a primary residence.
|