The Internal Revenue Code looks kindheartedly on homeowners who sell
at a profit. Internal Revenue Code Section 121 allows sellers to avoid
taxes on some – and perhaps all – of their gains on sales of principal
residences. The exclusion amounts are as much as $500,000 for married
couples who file joint returns and $250,000 for those who file singly or
who are married but file separately.
Revised rules allow surviving spouses more time to sell and still
qualify for the $500,000 joint-filer exclusion. This break is available
to a surviving spouse who sells within two years of the death of his or
her spouse, provided the couple jointly owned and occupied their home.
Profits above the exclusion caps are subject to federal taxes, plus
applicable state and local taxes. State and local taxes can be claimed
as itemized deductions on Schedule A of Form 1040. But the alternative minimum tax
completely disallows certain itemized deductibles, including state and
local levies, whether on income or on year-round residences, second
homes, or other kinds of real or personal property.
Sellers are able to claim exclusions only if they satisfy two key
requirements. First, they’ve owned and lived in the property as a
principal residence for periods that aggregate at least two years out of
the five-year period that ends on the sale date. Second, they haven’t
excluded gain on another sale of a principal residence within the two
years that precede the sale date.
But Section 121 is one of those trains designed to run in only one
direction, authorizing a phenomenal break for those with profits and
offering no relief for those with losses.
Back in 1997, Congress and President Clinton cut a deal to exclude
profits on sales. They flirted with allowing sellers a limited deduction
for losses, but dropped the idea. The final version of the 1997
legislation left unchanged the rule that generally bars deductions for
losses on sales of things that are considered personal assets, such as
principal residences. And contrary to what many owners mistakenly
believe, mortgage debts don’t enter into the calculation of gain or loss
on a sale.
Note also that the law empowers the IRS to use its own special method
to calculate whether a seller actually suffered a loss. It’s nowhere as
simple as, say, comparing the $650,000 you received when you sold your
home with the $700,000 you paid for it in 1996, thereby arriving at a
loss of $50,000. You’ll need a calculator whenever there’s also a
tax-deferred gain from a previous home sale before May 7, 1997, when the
current rules took effect. Should that be so, you must subtract the
deferred gain from your present home's cost to determine its adjusted
basis at the time of sale.
Let's say the place that costs $700,000 was actually your fifth home,
and four prior sales generated a cumulative profit of $600,000. The
meaning of those numbers: You reduce that place’s basis downward to
$100,000 – the difference between the $700,000 cost and the $600,000
postponed profit. Consequently, under the IRS method, the $650,000 sale
doesn’t cause a loss of $50,000. Rather, it results in a gain of
$550,000 – the $650,000 sales price minus the $100,000 adjusted basis.
Suppose, instead, that the only dwelling you’ve owned is the one
purchased for $700,000 and unloaded for $650,000. The IRS agrees you do
have a $50,000 loss, but one that’s nondeductible.
The IRS and the courts are adamant in their refusal to make any
allowances for extenuating circumstances. For instance, an IRS ruling
barred a deduction for a loss caused by a doctor-recommended move from a
two-story to a one-story home to allow a child the maximum use of his
wheelchair.
It matters not that a homeowner is out of pocket because a job
relocation triggered by a layoff, illness, death, divorce, or the like
compelled a sudden sale before a home appreciated sufficiently to offset
brokerage commissions, legal fees, and other expenses involved in
buying and selling. Likewise, a loss isn’t deductible when you move to
take a new job or are transferred to a new location.
What if your employer reimburses you for the loss? No offset of an
otherwise nondeductible loss against the reimbursement because they’re
separate transactions. The loss stays nondeductible. Nor is it
permissible to include the reimbursement as part of the selling price
and avail yourself of the exclusion. The reimbursement counts as income,
says the IRS.