Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (11) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread
Author: asmolik Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 121572  
Subject: wash sales for shares with zero gain/loss? Date: 8/12/2001 4:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I was wondering if there would be any information on whether the sale of shares with zero gain/loss could legitimately qualify as a wash sale. Put another way, when sale price equals cost basis for a sale of shares, it could be considered a loss just as correctly (or just as incorrectly) as it could be considered a gain, so the question is whether the taxpaying investor could use the benefit of the doubt to his/her own advantage. Here is an example:

100 shares of XYZ are purchased at n = $40/share on 06/01/2001.

100 shares of XYZ are purchased at $50/share on 07/02/2001.

100 shares of XYZ are purchased at $30/share on 08/01/2001.

The 200 shares of XYZ purchased on 06/01/2001 and 07/01/2001 are sold at $40/share on 08/08/2001.

The question would be (1) whether the 100 shares purchased on 08/01/2001 could be considered to have “washed away” the 100 shares purchased on 06/01/2001, hence allowing the $10/share capital loss on the 100 shares purchased on 07/02/2001 to be realized (for a total loss of $1,000), or (2) whether the 100 shares purchased on 08/01/2001 would need to be considered to have washed away the 100 shares purchased on 07/02/2001, hence disallowing the capital loss on those shares (and realizing a zero gain/loss on the 100 shares purchased on 06/01/2001).

In graphical terms, suppose that any realized gain/loss on the 08/08/2001 sale above were considered as a function of n above. There is obviously a discontinuity in such a graph at n = $40/share: as n linearly decreases from $40/share, then there is a net realized gain (all from the 06/01/2001 shares) which linearly increases from $0, but as n linearly increases from $40/share, then there is a fixed net $1,000 realized capital loss (all from the 07/02/2001 shares, assuming that the 06/01/2001 shares are to be considered the “washed away” shares for this case). So the question is whether such a graph at n = $40/share should be made to behave more like n < $40/share (to the IRS's benefit) or should be made to behave more like n > $40/share (to the taxpayer's benefit).
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (11) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread

Announcements

Disclaimer:
In accordance with IRS Circular 230, you cannot use the contents of any post on The Motley Fool's message boards to avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
Foolanthropy 2014!
By working with young, first-time moms, Nurse-Family Partnership is able to truly change lives – for generations to come.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Post of the Day:
Macro Economics

Economic Implications of Cuba
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement