Contradictory IRS rules

I am confused by two IRS rules on rentals which seem to contradict one another.

Consider a person who rents a couple of rooms in his house out to tenants. He deducts a pro-rated portion of various house expenses (such as utilities, property tax, mortgage interest, depreciation, etc.) on Schedule E based on the square footage he rents out compared to the total square footage of the house. This person is not a real estate pro, and meets all the requirements for actively managing the rental and for it being passive income, etc. The rental results in a small tax loss each year of a couple of thousand dollars. The question is can he report this loss (i.e., negative income) on his tax return each year to offset his regular income from employment, etc.

On one hand, I see a rule that says you have to show a profit in 3 out of 5 years to establish that you are renting for profit. On the other hand, I see a rule that says you can deduct up to $25,000 in rental losses each year assuming you meet all the rules for passive, active, etc. Don't these rules contradict one another?

Here are the rules from Pub 527 that I'm talking about:

"If you do not rent your property to make a profit, you can deduct your rental expenses only up to the amount of your rental income. You cannot deduct a loss or carry forward to the next year any rental expenses that are more than your rental income for the year." It further states "If your rental income is more than your rental expenses for at least 3 years out of a period of 5 consecutive years, you are presumed to be renting your property to make a profit."

That seems pretty clear cut.

But in another section of the same manual it says: "If you or your spouse actively participated in a passive rental real estate activity, you may be able to deduct up to $25,000 of loss from the activity from your nonpassive income. This special allowance is an exception to the general rule disallowing losses in excess of income from passive activities. Similarly, you may be able to offset credits from the activity against the tax on up to $25,000 of nonpassive income after taking into account any losses allowed under this exception."

No mention here of having to show a profit 3 out of 5 years.

How do we reconcile these two seemingly contradictory instructions?

Reply to
JB
Loading thread data ...

The rental of rooms in your residence is probably governed by IRC 280A - the so-called "vacation home" rules - and your deductions (other than interest and taxes) are generally limited to related income. Excess deductions may be eligible for carryforward.

In such a case, neither the "hobby loss" rules (IRC 183) or the "passive loss" rules (IRC 469) are applicable. When 280A applies, it generally trumps all! :-)

MTW

Reply to
MTW

I was going to say something similar: renting a room in a personal residence is not the same as renting a dwelling. I do agree that the Pub is quite confusing on this matter and related issues. I don't fault the writers of the pub, as the tax law itself is extremely complicated in this area.

Reply to
Mark Bole

JB: When the IRS publication said ""If your rental income is more than your rental expenses for at least 3 years out of a period of 5 consecutive years, you are presumed to be renting your property to make a profit," it meant only what it actually said. It did *not* say the opposite - or is it the contrapositive? - i.e., it did *not* say that if you *don't* "show a profit" for three out of five years you are presumed *not* to be renting your property for a profit. The two statements that you've quoted don't contradict at all.

But you still need to be aware of Sections 183 and 280A, as described above.

Reply to
lotax

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.