In Canada can interest and taxes be added to the ACB of a parcel of land when for 15 years there was no income
597227
did you use the interest and taxes as deductions in the past (you should not have technically)\n\non non personal property (you did not live there) that is not (has not) generated income the interest and taxes are added to the base cost of the property (this will help reduce your gain; it is not a capital gain though)\n\na property that is purchased to be sold and not rented is treated the same way as inventory would be treated (you pay income tax, it is not a capital gain)\n\nif you have a loss it is applied against your income to reduce your taxable income\n\n\n\nTaxation – Lesson 7\nCMA Canada - July 2004 Page 31\nBusiness income versus capital gain\nIn most cases, a business is readily identifiable by the nature of its activities. For example, the manufacture and development of computer chips for resale would constitute\na business. Sometimes, however, it is difficult to distinguish whether income from a transaction is business in nature or capital gain. The sale of land can be either a capital transaction or a business income transaction depending on the facts of the circumstances.\nThe distinction is important because, as you will see, business income is fully taxed whereas only one-half of capital gains are taxed. Moreover, business losses can be\napplied against all other sources of income (e.g. capital gains or employment income), whereas capital losses are only available for offset against capital gains. Business income\nis taxed less favorably while business losses are treated more preferentially. The full amount of business income is taxed in the year that it is earned while only one half of\ncapital gains are taxable, in the year in which the gain is realized. Business losses, unlike that of capital losses, can be used to offset income from all other sources.\nThe chief factor in distinguishing a business activity from a capital gain transaction is the intended use of the property on acquisition. The principal reason for the purchase and the subsequent use of the property will determine the type of income of the profit (loss)\ngenerated upon sale. If the property was acquired for the purpose of resale, then its disposition is likely business income. i.e. if the property purchased is considered\ninventory, then all profits triggered upon sale would be considered business income.\nConversely, property acquired for the purpose of providing the owner a long-term benefit is likely capital property; its disposition creates a capital gain or loss, i.e. any gains generated upon the sale of capital assets used in the course of running a business are deemed to be capital gains.
38741
None.  You're you allowed to exempt up to 250k of the gain from taxes, if you're filing single or seperately.  And 500k if you're married filing jointly.
631114
Technically yes - but only on a proportion of the total gain.  The period relating to your living there is exempt from CGT, as is a further three years (based on an old assumption that it may take you a long time to sell).  There are further exemptions depending on your circumstances - eg if you are employed abroad or working away from your home town for certain periods.  It is more complicated if you own a second home as well, in which case you should get specific advice - or put more details on here and I`ll try to help!
146388
How long have you owned the house.  If you have owned the house for more than two years, you shouldn't have to pay tax, however, this is CA law and you needed to have used the house as a residence.  Also, if you invest the money in a different property you shouldn't have to pay.  There is a transfer form.
740716
No, none.\nYou can hold the property for one year and pay capital gain rate.\n15% I believe.\nStill- if you turn too many over the IRS can come in and reclassify you as a dealer and you're owe retroactively.\n\n         The real tax bennies are in landlording.
1018721
Canadian law cannot control the laws of India. You would have to check the legality of trust in India relating to land ownership or other non moveable assets.
707493
No you cannot claim the NSC amount for the year 2006-07. But  for the year 2006-07, you can claim the accrued interest amount as 80C.
521478
Unfortunately, you can only roll it over into another investment property (Like-kind exchange)  Applying it to your residence will not work.  You have sixty days (before or after the closing) to identify another property and 180 days to close on it.  If you held the property for investment (say yes) and held if for over 12 months, you will pay tax on it at the lower capital gains rates. If you held it for less than 12 months, it is considered ordinary income and is taxed at your regular rate.  If it is less than a year, see if the buyer will wait until the year is up.  Give them soem money back at closing to compensate them for waiting.  It could be worth your while.  To see what the tax might be, use your tax software to estimate what your tax would be.  Sorry to hear about the medical problem, I hope everything works out.  Also, ANY profit is a good profit!!!!!
349198
Under the I T Act, yes you can claim benefit given to an individual if for reason of occupation he can not reside in the home he purchase. You can definitely allowed to have Interest deduction on loan borrowed.
279926
If you are non a schedule A you can take all of the mortgage interest. You can take property tax that you pd. Any donations you gave (cash and non cash)Sales tax that you pd on any big purchases(use the table for the rest)I don't know what your filing status is so I don't know if you would even be close.
170964
20 years ago I had a Keogh that was drafted by my attorney that included provisions for borrowing a limited amount of money from the plan for a real estate investment. I don't know if the laws still allow for that. I do know that there are trustees that have flexible plans that let you do straight real estate investment.\n\ncheck this website.\nhttp://www.ekeogh.com/prohibited_transactions.html
118649
if you didn't do any work there (earn any income) and don't live there (residency) you shouldn't have to.  But it never hurts to consult a tax attorney or accountant.
722317
This is when you purchase property without any deposit. Hence the 'no money down'. You would pay it off instalments as usual
285863
On a schedule D. It has to be your personal home for the last 2 years to not pay capital gains. Make sure that you add in everything you have ever done to the home while you owned it into the homes basis.(repairs, maintenance) If you are going to buy another rental home then you will fill out 8842 like kind exchanges.
207907
In general any income derived from a Canadian source will be subject to income tax in Canada even if the person receiving such income or gain  is not a resident of Canada.The question is whether there is a need to file a tax return in Canada or not.The answer depends on the nature of the transaction yielding the gain.The below link to Canada Revenue website discusses this issue in details.\nhttp://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tax/nonresidents/individuals/nonres-e.html
769611
Is this a liquidating or nonliquidating distribution?  Was the land purchased inside the partnership? Or purchased by one of the partners ten years ago and contibuted to the partnership in the ten years since purchase?\n\nSorry but we really need more information to give relevant tax issues advice.\n\nEdit:\n\nOK - so a nonliquidating (or operating) distribution - Partnership continues to exist with exact same owners and percentages after distribution as before the distribution.  \n\nYou absolutely do not want a disproportionate contribution because things can get a little ugly under IRC section 751 with that so my recommendation would be distribute based on partnership percentages.  This can be done in two ways - distribute land in 50, 40, 10 amount and have 40% partner buy 10% partners share or distribute cash and land to even up percentages. \n\nLet's start with the all land distribution - You will show land removed from books (credit land) for $100,000 the opposite side will be debits to A (50%, B (40%) and C's(10%) capital accounts for $50,000, $40,000 and $10,000.  Each of the partners will reduce their outside basis by that amount (50k, 40k or 10k) and that will be their basis in the parcel of land they own.  (CAUTION: If any of these partners has an outside basis less than the land distributed they will, as someone said earlier, have a taxable event and will need to pay capital gains on the excess distribution!!) Now C sells his land to B for the 10k basis and has no taxable event and B's basis in the land becomes $50k (the same as A's) - (Another CAUTION: If B has intentions to sell the land shortly the portion purchased from C is now SHORT-TERM and will result in ordinary income!).  You say that the land is valued at $200k so the "deferred" tax will be picked up when each of these partner's sells their land and has to pick-up capital gain.\n\nNow the second option: you will make the total distribution to the three partner's 120k.  A's distribution will be 60% of the land - book value $60k, 50% of distributions; B's distribution will be 40% of land and $8k cash - book value $48k, 40% of distributions; C's distribution will be $12k cash - book value $12k, 10% of distributions.  Once again everyone will reduce their outside basis by the distribution amount and once again there will be no taxable event as long as the distributions DO NOT exceed outside basis.  Your journal entry will be a credit to land for $100k; a credit to cash for $12k; a debit to A's partner capital account for $60k; a debit to B's partner capital account for $48k and a debit to C's partner capital account for $12k. A and B will have deferred gain on the land that will become a taxable event when they sell the land for a gain.\n\nHopefully this covers it - if you have more questions - add details and I'm sure I (or one of the other tax professionals here) can clarify. (Also if you are set on keeping the land a 50/50 split just say that and I can give you the journal entry)
340708
No that's wrong. It is 7 years for taking posession. However, just because you are using it doesn't mean you own it. If the owner is paying taxes on it, that doesn't work. The owner must have not paid for 7 years. However if you don't pay the taxes before they are 6 years late, the government will take the property. If you are talking about a right of way then it is 20 years of obvious use.