Guru 101/Master Mason:
Why don't you reread my first post. It plainly says "to give both parties substantial additional income." It's not hard; it's in plain English.
KY Floyd:
Re: Your coin example
1. Yes, it is a gift
2. The value(or better termed, the basis for gift tax purposes) would be $112,000.
3. The gift tax due from the son(beneficiary) is $-0-; the gift tax due from the father(donor) is likewise $-0-
*recipients don't pay gift tax
*donors tax is computed:
Gift Amount $112,000
Less: Annual Exclusion ($12,000)
Subject to gift tax $100,000
Gift tax rate @45% $45,000
Unified tax credit ($45,000)
Tax due on gift $ -0-
Sir Metro/Mega Whiner:
The harm in disclosing that I have the tax benefit of a Net Operating Loss is WHAT???? I thought that honesty and full disclosure is what you self styled protectors of the common good wanted and promoted. Damned if you do; damned if you don't!!
.....keep themselves out of the red??? In the interest of fair play and open discussion, why would someone immediately criticize this and immediately characterize it as bad?? If your purpose in being involved in a forum like this is to automatically criticize and label "bad" anything you don't fully understand, why don't you just say that you only want your opinion to be heard and you want to shout down others who might have an original(good or bad) NEW idea??
I did read the "little article" you recommended. It was titled , " Examples of Financial Institution Fraud Investitigations." Unfortunately the article, as the title implied, had to do with Financial Institutions and Money Laundering, two subjects that my post had nothing to do with. If I become a bank or the post has anything to do with Money Laundering instead of a Net Operating Loss, I will certainly refer back to it.
Your comment about that " Tax Consultant " begs the question about whether your participation in the forum is to promote discussion and dialog or is it merely to see how many negative comments one can make. My statement meant EXACTLY what it said... and the incorrect characterization of the statement underscores to what length you seem to be willing to go to be able to hear yourself. If you disagree with a comment, it's perfectly permissable to say so, BUT does it all have to be nasty, personal or name calling just because YOU don't agree?
Your comment about"asking multiple people what 2 plus 2 is" is on its face silly, even if it is meant to be a rhetorical question. It certainly is not constructive, nor is it likely to promote open discussion in any form. Much more of "it's my way ot he highway" with regard to a different opinion.
Once again, thanks for the reference to the IRS on "Gifts to your spouse", but unfortunately, none of my posts, questions or comments had ANYTHING to do with making a gift TO my spouse.
May I instead make a suggestion that you review the IRS Publication 950 "Introduction to Estate and Gift Taxes" to acquaint yourself on the current Unified Credit (offset to Gift Tax) that is available to individuals in 2007. It gives a very clear explanation of how tax free gifts are made, what the limits are and the effects on the husband /wife/ individual. My comments incorporate these guidelines.
Finally, "I may wish to utilize this site as a learning tool and that is awesome and we welcome you with open arms..." Thus far, I would have to say nothing is further from the truth.
A forum is to promote discussion. Everytime you make unwarranted negative comments, mischaracterize what is being said, attack people on a personal basis, make snide remarks, you are not promoting discussion, learning or the basic purpose of a forum. You run off the very people who make forums interesting , informative and yes, even fun.
Let the people make up their own mind. They don't need you to do it for them!!