The Entrepreneur Forum | Startups | Entrepreneurship | Starting a Business | Motivation | Success

I never knew how bad the system can screw someone until now

JScott

Legendary Contributor
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
FASTLANE INSIDER
Speedway Pass
Aug 24, 2007
3,893
6,664
1,511
www.123flip.com
What you call recaptured depreciation, I call a loan. If it will be paid back, it's a damn loan - minus the details you cited, which I won't go into again for the sake of brevity.
Cool, call it a loan. But, it's not JUST a loan. It's an interest free loan that actually pays you take it.

If I offered you a loan right now and told you that not only would you not have to pay interest on it, but that you would have to pay back less than what you borrowed, would you take the loan?

The IRS is offering you FREE MONEY, and you're complaining that it's not enough money to be worth it. How ridiculous is that???

Okay, I think I can make this more clear... Here's an analogy for you...

Let's say that BEFORE a big storm, your insurance company handed you $10,000 to replace the roof should it get damaged in the storm. The storm comes, the roof gets damaged, and you have your $10,000 to repair it. Great! But, what if the storm comes and doesn't damage the roof? Do you think you should be entitled to keep that $10,000? Would you complain that the insurance company gave you a $10,000 loan and is now expecting you repay it despite the fact that you didn't need it to compensate you for any loss?

This is how depreciation works. You're being compensated -- in advance -- for a loss. If you don't actually have that loss, they want their money back. That's not unreasonable.

As to your point about renting being a deduction that doesn't have to be paid back compared to depreciation which MIGHT have to be paid back is a completely separate issue. When you rent, you get no long term benefit from the property. You're literally trading money for space, end of story. This is an expense to the company that the company can never recoup, so the IRS gives you a deduction against income.

So, using the analogy above, the renting situation is the same as being 100% certain that the storm will destroy your roof. The insurance company says, "There's no way you're not going to take a loss from this storm, so we'll agree upfront that you don't have to give us the $10,000 back."

That's what the IRS is doing. They know that by renting, there is 100% guarantee of no upside. So, they tell you upfront that you'll never have to repay the deduction.

Does that clarify?
 

Become a Fastlane INSIDER to view the forum ad free.

Fassina

Contributor
Nov 13, 2018
64
76
121
22
Brazil
When we talk about systems in business we are referring to systematic actions, step by step procedures that are followed consistently to produce optimal results.

They are basically checklists for employees, you need them otherwise they can steal from you or make silly mistakes that end up costing you money.. They are necessary if you want to work less in the business and eventually sell it or just retire.
 

Real Deal Denver

Gold Contributor
Speedway Pass
Jan 13, 2018
692
1,623
468
65
Denver, Colorado
Cool, call it a loan. But, it's not JUST a loan. It's an interest free loan that actually pays you take it.

If I offered you a loan right now and told you that not only would you not have to pay interest on it, but that you would have to pay back less than what you borrowed, would you take the loan?

The IRS is offering you FREE MONEY, and you're complaining that it's not enough money to be worth it. How ridiculous is that???

Okay, I think I can make this more clear... Here's an analogy for you...

Let's say that BEFORE a big storm, your insurance company handed you $10,000 to replace the roof should it get damaged in the storm. The storm comes, the roof gets damaged, and you have your $10,000 to repair it. Great! But, what if the storm comes and doesn't damage the roof? Do you think you should be entitled to keep that $10,000? Would you complain that the insurance company gave you a $10,000 loan and is now expecting you repay it despite the fact that you didn't need it to compensate you for any loss?


This is how depreciation works. You're being compensated -- in advance -- for a loss. If you don't actually have that loss, they want their money back. That's not unreasonable.

As to your point about renting being a deduction that doesn't have to be paid back compared to depreciation which MIGHT have to be paid back is a completely separate issue. When you rent, you get no long term benefit from the property. You're literally trading money for space, end of story. This is an expense to the company that the company can never recoup, so the IRS gives you a deduction against income.

So, using the analogy above, the renting situation is the same as being 100% certain that the storm will destroy your roof. The insurance company says, "There's no way you're not going to take a loss from this storm, so we'll agree upfront that you don't have to give us the $10,000 back."

That's what the IRS is doing. They know that by renting, there is 100% guarantee of no upside. So, they tell you upfront that you'll never have to repay the deduction.

Does that clarify?
That is a very good explanation. Thanks ~
 

Post New Topic

Please SEARCH before posting.
Please select the BEST category.

Post new topic

FASTLANE INSIDERS

View the forum AD FREE.
Private, unindexed content
Detailed process/execution threads
Monthly conference calls with doers
Ideas needing execution, more!

Join Fastlane Insiders.

Top Bottom