User talk:Solomon

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search
Leave a message for Solomon

This page is where you can leave a message for Solomon. Solomon will be notified of messages the next time they access TaxAlmanac.

Please make sure to sign your message by adding four tildes: ~~~~ at the end of your message.

If you are actually Solomon, this is your page. Feel free to edit your discussion page to add or remove anything you'd like.

Leave a message for Solomon by clicking here



Excellent! Thank you for all of your hard work!!

By the way... I see that you've discovered that when you add headings with the equal signs that it automatically adds the little table of contents box. If you have less than 4 headings, it won't put that on the page. If you want to force it to have one anyway, or if you want to tell it exactly where to put it, just type __TOC__ (two underscores on each side) and it'll put the table of contents right there.

- Tim Doyle, TaxAlmanac Moderator - Talk to me 20:14, 15 January 2007 (CST)

Good response

Solomon: Your surgical exposition of the tax law is a joy to behold, your advice is appreciated, and right on. But, I must say that your response to L-7, in your display of unerring precision, and pregnancy of meaning, is unmatched in my experience with this site. Way to go!
Forum Award
This user has been recognized as a top contributor of high-quality replies in the TaxAlmanac Discussion Forum.
CrowJD 22:42, 17 September 2007 (CDT)

Equitable or Beneficial Ownership

Nice article Solomon. It amazes me how much I "thought" I knew last season about mortgage interest and ended up learning about. Skhyatt 23:03, 16 October 2007 (CDT)

Section 121 - Building a house

Hi Solomon,

Thank you for your input in regard to my Section 121 question. Now, I can understand Reg. 1.163-10T(p)(5) may qualify taxpayer's home as his/her qualified residence during those 24 months construction period. But how can I utilize this rule to substantiate the 2 years "use" test under Section 121? Is there any court case(s) that I might refer to? Your help is highly appreciared. Thank you again.


love your name and the bible so true!

Thank you for your advice

Call for your funny tax stories!

Hi Solomon,

My name is Vanessa Piccinini and I work at Intuit's Public Relations agency. We came across your below funny story and would like to share it with an accounting Web site interested in running stories like yours during the busy tax season to give readers a good laugh.

In order to participate, just reply to this message giving your permission. We will not share your story unless you respond giving us permission to do so. Additionally, we will give your avatar credit for it, since we do not have your real name and even if we did, we would not probably not include it to ensure client confidentiality (though the chances of your client reading the accounting publication in question may be very slim.)

This is the story we're interested in sharing: Single mother with one child but did not have prior year return or the child's social security card with her. She assured me the child's number she gave me was correct. Return was rejected because of incorrect social of the child. After calling her to advise her of this problem, she said "just a minute while I look." Seconds later she got back on the phone and gave me the correct number with the following comment: "It was only off by one number so why does that matter?"

Thank you in advance for your attention!

Vanessa Piccinini

first time home buyer credit with brothers

In the case I presented, does the fact that B is only buying one-half and A is retaining 50 % ownership preclude B from taking the credit.

Rhencek 11:02, 8 July 2009 (CDT)

respons for investment loss of real estate. by TAX CAT

Thanks for your response. After reading 1234 A. Is it correct then to say that the way to account for the lost deposit is to increase the cost basis of the property by the amount of the deposit lost on form 4797?TAX CAT 09:18, 9 July 2010 (CDT)


Thanks for your replies. Dave Fogels second thread does help clarify.



I may have messed you up on the Watch Goodwill discussion.

Sorry -

I combined the two discussions, thinking that it was too confusing to only get the link to the prior discussion AFTER much of the other Q&A. The new one seemed to be a continuation of the original, and so that seemed to be the best route. I was also hoping to indicate to Neil that he should post follow-ups on the same discussion as the original story (he tends to change the facts a little with each new attempt at answers, and that leads him and others astray).

I see you're trying to revert to how it originally looked when you linked to the old discussion earlier - but I've since deleted that one. I will only be around about 10 min after I post this note to you, but if you feel strongly that they should be two separate discussions, let me know. If I don't see that response before I leave, it'll be an hour or two before I can restore the old one and revert my other changes.

Trillium 15:10, 11 September 2010 (CDT)

PS - I should also have added: I did also delete your post where you'd linked to the prior discussion - when I moved the contents of that discussion over to the new one, and deleted the old one, your link was then a broken link. I will go back and try to document my changes a bit better in that thread; I was quite rushed earlier and in retrospect I didn't do enough in terms of notation and notification. Thx, Trillium

pig icon to denote and incorrect or iffy post

Solomon, Funny, but when my kids were little, I'd post a chart on the refrigerator and put a stamp of a pig face on it to indicate they'd done wrong, and we called him the "Naughty Pig." Later, I realized POSITIVE reinforcement was better. : )

If we all knew it all, we wouldn't need these forums. If I post something 'iffy', give me the PIG...with a little SMILEY FACE after him.... I 'crush' easily!  ; ) Thanks! chris OCNumberz 17:19, 28 September 2010 (CDT)

Dependent not able to claim himself


As I understand it if a college student can be claimed by his parents but they don't claim him, then he cannot claim himself but he could claim his college expenses.

What I don't understand is why he couldn't claim himself if his parents could but didn't? Just wondering if you knew why that rule is like that?




Thanks for your response.

hi solomon:

In regards to my question on 1256 contracts carryback, the instructions do not provide any information if the election to carryback was not made on the taxpayers original return. I just need to know was the due date of the return the deadline for making the election.


JimJimbo073 11:22, 15 November 2010 (CST)

You think the Congress will do something?

I'm not holding my breath for the Congress to fix that Tax Court decision.

It's the one thing you will never hear preached in the average church today is a sermon on idolatry. The people have forgotten what it is; well for that matter most of the ministers don't know what it is. CrowJD 18:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

And a Parsonage in a Pear Tree

Solomon, I think we might need to change the words to the Christmas song if these "movie star" ministers keep doing so well on their parsonages. I was thinking today the IRS would probably not acquiesce to this case. As I say every day when I wake up: What next?  :) CrowJD 00:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Exemptions of children for divorced parents

Solomon, thanks for the reply. Parents are still divorced but have reconciled and are living together. Divorce decree says each can claim one of the children which we have been doing each year. Mother has been giving 8332 each year to the father. In 2010, father is in AMT and getting very little benefit for exemption. If he transfers exemption to mother via 8332, her refund increases by over $1,000. I don't know if I can transfer this exemption using the same logic that is used for EIC where person with higher AGI gets the EIC in a household where both kids are qualifying children of either parent. I am afraid if IRS would question this, they would claim he should take both exemptions because he has the higher AGI which would mean the mother would lose the exemption.

Lumexx 19:39, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Grain of salt

I should not have said that O'Reilly was evil. I don't know the man's heart.

But there's only around four of us liberals around here surrounded by a sea of conservatives and I have to spice up my writing to compete.

(Crow) Gazoo 22:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I had done it

I had already done it at the end of my last post.

But I can't bear to go back and edit what I said. I'm not that perfect! lol. Gazoo 22:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Making Work Pay Credit 2009

Your post "Does anyone know why the IRS is only allowing one $250 payment?" No double dipping permitted - Economic Recovery Payment received.

I assume you mean one payment per person. Husband on soc. sec. got his $250 via check. Wife is retired state employee - claimed her $250 on return. IRS now (2/17/12) is asking for it back with interest.

Another client in exact same situation got similar IRS letter some months ago - she just paid it. Then a couple months after that IRS sent her a $250 refund.

End of the forum

You may have heard by now that the Tax Almanac ( ) web site forum is permanently closing its doors effective June 1. Perhaps you have seen the pink bombshell “Important Service Announcement” when logging in.

Long-time TA user ChrisV2 has volunteered to set up a new website where TA users may continue the discussion. The site is up and running now and has an active base of contributors.

We invite you to take a look and join your fellow TA refugees.

Frankly (TA member and new member of TaxProTalk)

Frankly 18:36, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Personal tools