


Ask the community...
Maybe consider keeping it until you've at least paid off the loan? Since you're underwater, you'd have to come up with cash to pay off the remaining loan balance if you sell. Plus, with the depreciation recapture, you might end up with a tax bill too. Sometimes holding an asset a bit longer can make the math work better.
Agreed. I was in a similar situation and calculated that each additional year of business use reduced my effective loss through ongoing deductions. If you continue to use it primarily for business, you can still deduct the actual expenses (gas, maintenance, etc.) or use the standard mileage rate for the business portion. Might make sense to run those numbers.
This is a tough spot to be in! One thing to consider that might help with the cash flow issue is timing the sale strategically. If you're expecting higher income this year, you might want to wait until early next year to sell so the depreciation recapture income hits in a potentially lower tax bracket year. Also, since you're underwater on the loan, you could explore trading it in toward a more fuel-efficient business vehicle rather than selling outright. The dealer might roll the negative equity into the new loan, and if you buy another qualifying business vehicle, you could potentially take advantage of bonus depreciation again on the new purchase to offset some of the recapture tax hit. Just make sure to keep detailed records of business use percentage for both vehicles if you go that route. The IRS gets pretty picky about business vehicle deductions, especially on luxury vehicles like the GLE.
Does anyone know if scholarship money affects the 1098-T reporting? I had a partial scholarship for my last semester before graduating and I'm confused about how that impacts potential tax credits.
Your 1098-T will show both your qualified education expenses (in Box 1) and any scholarships/grants received (in Box 5). For tax credit purposes, you need to subtract your scholarships from your qualified expenses to determine your eligible amount for credits. For example, if your tuition was $8,000 (Box 1) and you received $3,000 in scholarships (Box 5), you would only be able to claim education credits based on the remaining $5,000. Just be aware that if your scholarships exceeded your qualified expenses, you might have to report the excess as taxable income.
Great question! I was in a similar situation when I graduated in 2023. Yes, you'll definitely receive your 1098-T for 2024 since you paid tuition during that tax year. One thing I wish someone had told me - make sure to keep all your payment receipts and compare them to what's on the 1098-T when you get it. Also, since this is your first time filing after graduation, you might want to check if you're still being claimed as a dependent by your parents. If they're claiming you, they would be the ones eligible for the education credits, not you. If you're filing independently now, those education credits could be really valuable - the American Opportunity Credit can be worth up to $2,500. Don't leave money on the table!
This is really helpful advice! I'm actually in the exact same boat - graduated last spring and this will be my first time filing taxes independently. Quick question though - how do I know for sure if my parents are still claiming me as a dependent? We haven't really talked about it and I don't want to accidentally file incorrectly or mess up their taxes. Is there a way to check this before I file, or should I just ask them directly? I definitely don't want to miss out on those education credits if I'm eligible for them!
Has anyone actually successfully filed a superseding return electronically? I'm seeing mixed info here. The IRS publication says superseding returns can be filed electronically but it sounds like the Free File system might reject it as a duplicate filing anyway?
I successfully filed a superseding return electronically last year, but NOT through Free File fillable forms. I used one of the paid versions of H&R Block software which had a specific option for superseding returns. It was worth the $50 to avoid the hassle of paper filing, especially since I was making changes that increased my refund by over $1,000.
I actually went through this exact situation last year with Free File fillable forms. Here's what I learned from experience: The Free File fillable forms system will almost certainly reject your superseding return electronically because their duplicate detection system can't distinguish between a duplicate filing error and an intentional superseding return. The system just sees that you've already filed and blocks it. What worked for me was using the Free File fillable forms to prepare my superseding return completely, then printing it out and mailing it. The key steps are: 1. Complete your entire corrected return in Free File fillable forms 2. Print the complete return (all forms and schedules) 3. Write "SUPERSEDING RETURN" in red ink at the very top of Form 1040 4. Mail it to the processing center for your state before the deadline (including extensions) Make sure you include ALL the same forms and schedules as your original return, even if they didn't change. The superseding return completely replaces your original filing, so it needs to be complete. One important note - if you're expecting a larger refund, the IRS will typically send you the difference. If you owe more, you'll need to pay the additional amount. The superseding return essentially cancels out your original return as if it never existed. The postmark date is what counts for meeting the deadline, not when the IRS processes it, so don't wait too long to mail it if you're getting close to April 15th!
Has anyone actually tried a cost segregation study for a smaller rental property renovation? I've heard they're usually only worth it for properties worth $500k+ but wondering if it makes sense for a $15-20k remodel?
I did one last year for a $40k kitchen and bathroom remodel. Cost me about $2,500 for the study, but it identified nearly $18k in components that could be depreciated over 5 or 15 years instead of 27.5. The tax savings in the first year alone more than paid for the study. For a $15k remodel, the math might be tighter, but if you plan to hold the property long-term, it could still be worth it. Some tax professionals now offer "light" cost segregation services for smaller projects at a lower price point.
Thanks, that's helpful context. Maybe I'll ask around for those "light" cost segregation services. The property is definitely a long-term hold for me, so accelerating even some of the depreciation would be beneficial. Do you remember roughly what percentage of your renovation costs ended up being reclassified from 27.5-year to shorter depreciation periods? Just trying to get a ballpark of what might be realistic for my situation.
Great question about cost segregation for smaller renovations! I had a similar situation with a $22k rental property remodel last year. I ended up going with a "component method" approach instead of a full cost segregation study, which was much more cost-effective. Basically, I worked with my tax preparer to manually identify and separate out the personal property items (appliances, removable fixtures, etc.) from the structural improvements. We were able to reclassify about 35-40% of the total renovation costs to 5, 7, and 15-year property instead of 27.5-year. The key was having detailed invoices that broke everything down by component - sounds like you're already set up well for this with your contractor's detailed billing. Items like your kitchen appliances, some plumbing fixtures, flooring, and even things like closet systems often qualify for shorter depreciation schedules. For a $15k project, I'd suggest starting with the component method before investing in a formal cost segregation study. You might be surprised how much you can accelerate just by properly categorizing the obvious personal property items!
This component method approach sounds really practical! I'm a complete newcomer to rental property taxes and this whole thread has been incredibly helpful. One thing I'm still confused about though - when you say you reclassified 35-40% of costs to shorter depreciation schedules, does that mean you get to deduct more in the first few years, or does it actually increase your total deductions over time? I'm trying to understand if this is just about timing of deductions or if there's an actual tax savings benefit beyond the time value of money.
Connor Gallagher
Random question - if I've already certified in Robinhood but was confused about this, should I try to redo the certification? Or am I fine since I now understand what it actually means?
0 coins
Amara Eze
ā¢You're fine. If you're a US person with a US Robinhood account, then the certification you made was correct, even if you didn't fully understand the context at the time. The certification simply confirms that Robinhood doesn't need to report your account to the IRS under FATCA because you're a US person. This has no impact on your separate obligation to report foreign financial assets on Form 8938 if you meet those thresholds. So there's no need to try to redo or correct the certification with Robinhood.
0 coins
Alexander Zeus
This is such a helpful thread! I've been dealing with the exact same confusion across multiple brokerages. It's frustrating that these financial institutions use such unclear language when asking for tax certifications. What I've learned from reading everyone's responses is that there's a critical distinction between: 1. The financial institution's FATCA reporting obligations (what Robinhood's form is about) 2. Your personal FATCA reporting obligations on Form 8938 (completely separate) The certification you're making to Robinhood is essentially saying "As a US person, you don't need to report my US account under FATCA." This doesn't affect whether you need to report foreign assets on your tax return. I think all brokerages should be required to use clearer language like "I certify that this account is exempt from FATCA reporting requirements" instead of making it sound like you're claiming a personal exemption from all FATCA obligations. The current wording creates unnecessary anxiety about committing perjury when you're actually just providing routine account classification information. Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences and resources - this has been incredibly clarifying!
0 coins