Hacker Read

rdlecler1 · 2019-09-19 17:55:53

The IRS may see that differently.

X6S1x6Okd1st | karma 2465 | avg karma 2.21 · | 2019-10-09 21:31:52+00:00

the IRS sees it differently.

tjr225 | karma 2462 | avg karma 2.01 · | 2022-05-24 21:56:29

I don’t think that is the way the IRS views things.

singleshot_ | karma 1059 | avg karma 1.21 · | 2024-04-02 18:11:44

It would make a difference to the IRS, wouldn’t it?

mellavora | karma 3837 | avg karma 2.61 · | 2021-11-16 03:37:23

The IRS might look at this strategy differently, and they might have more resources than your (ex) partner.

charlesdm | karma 4113 | avg karma 1.89 · | 2016-07-26 12:27:10+00:00

That doesn't mean the IRS won't take you to court to change the interpretation. Proceed with caution..

underwater | karma 6604 | avg karma 3.92 · | 2019-02-17 00:17:51+00:00

I don't think the IRS would be impressed with that logic.

dubcanada | karma 4308 | avg karma 3.03 · | 2014-01-14 01:17:11+00:00

You may want to take the IRS seriously...

wizzwizz4 | karma 5694 | avg karma 1.61 · | 2021-06-24 20:57:13+00:00

That's not the IRS's problem.

avinashv | karma 636 | avg karma 3.09 · | 2010-03-05 10:44:39

This. Not my finest wording, but as an unbiased observer, that is how it looks. And you can be sure that if the IRS is going to be biased, it sure as hell isn't going to be in your favor.

fapjacks | karma 3671 | avg karma 1.36 · | 2017-09-12 20:36:45

But but that doesn't fit the narrative the IRS is peddling.

jaywalk | karma 7082 | avg karma 2.71 · | 2021-10-21 12:16:39

Yes, in any regard that matters. The IRS cannot just decide to start doing this. They have to follow the law.

tawayway | karma 94 | avg karma 2.47 · | 2018-12-10 09:07:22

The IRS?

jkepler | karma 482 | avg karma 1.17 · | 2019-10-09 20:27:08+00:00

Your interpretation makes sense to me. However, the problem is that the IRS didn't actually state that in their limited guidance.

AJ007 | karma 7528 | avg karma 3.9 · | 2019-11-25 08:55:47

Couldn’t this involve the IRS as well?

Beejeepa | karma 36 | avg karma 1.38 · | 2017-12-09 13:23:21

The IRS is wrong.

jude- | karma 1156 | avg karma 1.66 · | 2021-05-19 05:03:59+00:00

You seem certain that the IRS has never considered this possibility before.

foolswisdom | karma 635 | avg karma 4.12 · | 2024-03-01 20:47:00

It matters though because they didn't change their designation before acting differently, which would make them liable. Not sure to whom they'd be liable though, other than the IRS.

dragonwriter | karma 118260 | avg karma 2.17 · | 2021-02-13 04:32:52

Yes, its possible, and, yes, they actually do. And the IRS is fine with it.

tvanantwerp | karma 3714 | avg karma 6.35 · | 2017-12-09 14:06:32

Can't promise the IRS would see it that way. This is just something I'm not sure about, but my wife was an immigrant to the US and they weren't shy about asking her about foreign assets.