Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:56:04 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [198.36.178.141] (HELO stoel.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c2) with ESMTP id 794827 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:35:34 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=198.36.178.141; envelope-from=CSLEWIS@stoel.com Received: from sea-mx1.stoel.com ([172.17.103.4]) by gateway1.stoel.com with ESMTP id <334130>; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:44:49 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C52996.07932ECC" Subject: RE: [LML] Re: IRS Question X-Original-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:34:39 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [LML] Re: IRS Question Thread-Index: AcUpjBAatyEXZnqzR42c+SPJHkFI8gACD+GQ From: "Lewis III, Charles S." X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52996.07932ECC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Allan: =20 Probably there has been more than enough speculation on this, but for = what it's worth, I would note the following: =20 1. The 10% of Adjusted Gross Income floor that currently applies to = casualty losses is usually a real limitation on something like this. =20 2. The loss is the decrease in value caused by the casualty. =20 3. Repair cost in some circumstances is evidence of the amount of the = decrease in value, but it may either more or less than the actual loss. = Less, because the value of the aircraft, engine and propeller may be = less than it was when it had no damage history, despite the repair = having be done. More, because the repair may have improved the value of = the aircraft, engine or propeller (rebuilding a nearly timed-out engine = after a prop strike would be an easy example). =20 The bottom line is that the amount of the loss is a question of fact, = and most of our thinking about the subject is really around considering = how to prove that the amount claimed is correct. Repair cost is part of = the answer. =20 Carl Lewis Legacy=20 N14CL -----Original Message----- From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of = MikeEasley@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 10:23 AM To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: [LML] Re: IRS Question Allan, =20 I would think with an aircraft with large numbers in the field, you = could get a good number for a no damage history vs. a damaged aircraft. = I would guess on a new Mooney, the reduction in value would be = considerably more than the repair cost. If you could get a certified = appraiser to work up some numbers, those should hold up with the IRS. =20 Not even close to being a CPA, but it makes sense to me. =20 Mike ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52996.07932ECC Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Allan:

Probably there has been more than = enough=20 speculation on this, but for what it's worth, I would note the=20 following:

1. The 10% of Adjusted Gross = Income=20 floor that currently applies to casualty losses is usually a real = limitation on=20 something like this.

2. The loss is the decrease = in value=20 caused by the casualty.

3. Repair cost in some = circumstances=20 is evidence of the amount of the decrease in value, but it may either = more or=20 less than the actual loss. Less, because the value of the = aircraft, engine=20 and propeller may be less than it was when it had no damage history, = despite the=20 repair having be done. More, because the repair may have improved = the=20 value of the aircraft, engine or propeller (rebuilding a nearly = timed-out engine=20 after a prop strike would be an easy example).

The bottom line is that the amount = of the=20 loss is a question of fact, and most of our thinking about the subject = is really=20 around considering how to prove that the amount claimed is = correct. Repair=20 cost is part of the answer.

Carl Lewis

Legacy

N14CL

-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair = Mailing List=20 [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of=20 MikeEasley@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 10:23=20 AM
To: Lancair Mailing List
Subject: [LML] Re: IRS = Question

Allan,

I would think with an aircraft with large numbers in the field, = you could=20 get a good number for a no damage history vs. a damaged = aircraft. I=20 would guess on a new Mooney, the reduction in value would be = considerably more=20 than the repair cost. If you could get a certified appraiser to = work up=20 some numbers, those should hold up with the IRS.

Not even close to being a CPA, but it makes sense to me.

Mike

------_=_NextPart_001_01C52996.07932ECC--