The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Financial Planning / Tax Strategies

URL:  https://boards.fool.com/your-hypothetical-involves-sec-1256-contracts-so-30237256.aspx

Subject:  Re: ot: taxes/options/arbitrage? Date:  8/31/2012  8:30 PM
Author:  loopholes Number:  116562 of 129666

Your hypothetical involves sec 1256 contracts, so in your predicate case, you would not have more than a year go by before you'd have to account for the gain and loss on your respective long and short positions. You would have to MTM your positions at the end of year 1, and your gain on the one leg is 60% LT/40% ST, and your loss on the other leg is also 60%LT/40%ST.

I don't see a different result in your second example, but I'm not sure I understand the facts.

If the options were not Sec. 1256 contracts/nonequity options (see pub 550), the 60/40 rule would not apply, you would not MTM at year end, and as another poster mentioned, you'd have a straddle. The straddle rules generally prevent you from recognizing a loss on a closed out position if (and to the extent) you have not recognized the gain on the offsetting positions.

So, in the first example, if you don't have 1256 contracts and don't MTM, and you are closing out both positions in year 2 at a net gain, the loss deferral of the straddle rules don't really affect you. You'd have LTCG on the long call and STCL on the short call. On its face, that seems suboptimal. But, in a closed universe where the only capital gain/loss you recognize is from closing out these positions, you reduce your gain to $500 by netting the loss, and your tax rate on the net gain is the lower LTCG rate. Not too shabby.

In the second example (again, not sure I understand the facts), but assuming you've recognized the gain in multiple profitable trades over the course of the year, all the gain would be ST. If you also closed out the short call/loss position, the offsetting loss also would be ST. So again, assuming the closed universe, you'd net STG and STL; but in this case, your $500 net gain would be STCG. I don't see that as a better outcome than in the first example. Psychologically, it might feel better because you're not having to net your STL against low taxed LTG. But you're actually worse off, because your tax on the net gain is higher.

If I misunderstood the facts, and you actually left the loss leg unrecognized, again you don't have a straddle problem, but you also wouldn't have an offsetting recognized loss, and all your gain would be taxable STCG. That'd be really suboptimal.

Where you'd have a straddle problem would be if you decided to close out the short call/loss position, and let the gain leg ride (i.e., accelerating tax benefit of the loss but deferring tax detriment of the gain). You would not be able to take the loss to the extent of unrecognized gain in the long call, until you closed out the long call.
Copyright 1996-2019 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us