Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Amount realized, in US federal income tax law, is defined by section 1001(b) of Internal Revenue Code. It is one of two variables in the formula used to compute gains and losses to determine gross income for income tax purposes.
In order to avoid the cumbersome, abrasive, and unpredictable administrative task of valuing assets annually to determine whether their value has appreciated or depreciated, § 1001(a) of the Code defers the tax consequences of a gain or loss in property until it is realized through the "sale or disposition of [the] property."
Such notices may include the calculated amount of tax. The property owner may then contest the value. [13] Property values are generally subject to review by a board of review or similar body, before which a property owner may contest determinations. [14] After values are settled, property tax bills or notices are sent to property owners. [15]
In tax accounting, adjusted basis is the net cost of an asset after adjusting for various tax-related items. [1] Adjusted Basis or Adjusted Tax Basis refers to the original cost or other basis of property, reduced by depreciation deductions and increased by capital expenditures. Example: Muhammad buys a lot for $100,000. He then erects a retail ...
Recognition is mostly a matter of timing; the issue is not whether income or loss is taken into account, but when. The time of recognition may matter for a number of reasons, including the time value of money and the section 1211(b) limitation on capital losses in a single year.
Basis (or cost basis), as used in United States tax law, is the original cost of property, adjusted for factors such as depreciation.When a property is sold, the taxpayer pays/(saves) taxes on a capital gain/(loss) that equals the amount realized on the sale minus the sold property's basis.
The taxes representing the increase – compared to the base taxes prior to the property’s development – is the pool where a certain amount of revenue can be earmarked for reinvestment back ...
Commissioner v. Tufts, 461 U.S. 300 (1983), was a unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that when a taxpayer sells or disposes of property encumbered by a nonrecourse obligation exceeding the fair market value of the property sold, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue may require him to include in the “amount realized” the outstanding amount of the obligation ...