Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (2) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: honeydog Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 121565  
Subject: Avoidance vs evasion Date: 3/19/2000 4:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
years past, I recall that tax avoidance was acceptable stratedgy to IRS but tax evasion was a crime. Yet for form 6252 INSTALLMENT SALE to a relative, part III, 29 e, IRS doesn't allow tax avoidance. If no reply, I assume both events are no no's.
Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheBadger Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 32129 of 121565
Subject: Re: Avoidance vs evasion Date: 3/19/2000 4:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
As general concept #1; avoidance is always okay, acceptable & expected; evasion is illegal. As general concept #2: transactions between related parties are not afforded ther same tax treatment as "arm's length" transactions under the controlling entity concept.

The controlling entity concept says that there either is a controlling entity as in a father & son relationship; or two relatives collude to control; husband & wife. In the absence of related party regulations; every adult would sell appreciated assets at a loss to one's children & buy them back at fair market value; giving dad a loss and the child a long term capital gain at a very low tax bracket.

TheBadger


Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (2) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement