What is the basis of an asset that is never depreciated?
That's tricky, actually. First, as the section 1015 that you've referred to in your other question says - you take the lowest of the fair market value or the actual donor basis. Why is it important? Consider these examples: So, if the relative bought you a brand new car and you're the first title holder (i.e.: the relative paid, but the car was registered directly to you) - you can argue that the basis is the actual money paid. In essence you got a money gift that you used to purchase the car. If however the relative bought the car, took the title, and then drove it 5 miles to your house and signed the title over to you - the IRS can argue that the car basis is the FMV, which is lower because it is now a used car that you got. You're the second owner. That may be a significant difference, just by driving off the lot, the car can lose 10-15% of its value. If you got a car that's used, and the donor gives it to you - your basis is the fair market value (unless its higher than the donor's basis - in which case you get the donor's basis). You always get the lowest basis for losses (and depreciation is akin to a loss). Now consider the situation when your relative is a business owner and used the car for business. He didn't take the depreciation, but he was entitled to. IRS can argue that the fact that he didn't take is irrelevant and reduce the donor's basis by the allowable depreciation. That may bring your loss basis to below the FMV. I suggest you take it to a tax professional licensed in your state who will check all the facts and circumstances of your situation. Your relative might be slapped with a gift tax as well, if the car FMV is above certain amount (currently the exemption is $14000).
I'm not a finance guy by trade, I'm an accountant, so I'm not 100% sure, but I'm going to say no.   EBITDA is your accounting profit before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. So it's already free of many non-cash items, and is closer to a cash-basis measure of profit, but still includes many non-cash revenues.   As far as I know, the discounting is to take the time value of money into account so you can make a decision on whether the present value of the expected future cash flows are greater than the present value of the cash outflow being asked today. If it is, then you buy. If not, then you don't. Disclaimer: I’m not an expert.  This is my basic understanding, which I’m sure someone will be glad to tell is horribly wrong...  You need an LLC.  Many people in my area create an LLC management company, then create individual LLCs for each investment property.  Laws vary by state.  YMMV  Then you start researching properties.  Commercial loans typically require a higher equity position than home ownership.   Assume minimum 30%.  For ease of this conversation let’s say you’re making the horribly poor decision to put that towards a single property.   You’d be looking for a property in the 175-200k value range, because you’ll need to account for settlement expenses (attorney, broker, consultants) and a cash reserve.  You’d be also be looking for what the average cap rate is for your market.  In simplistic terms cap rate is the expected rate of return after expenses.  So if the average market cap rate in that region for comparable properties is 5%, you can expect around 5% return on your investment, after you pay fees, maintenance, taxes, insurance, interest, etc.  Buy a property and hold that property for a few years, making money every year, and claiming deductions on your earnings for something called depreciation.  Fast forward 5 years and you’re ready to sell, the value of your property went up because you made improvements along the way, brought in some better tenants who are paying higher rents, and now you can offer a better cap rate than your competitors.  You sell in the blink of an eye, and double your investment.  Say you have $500k now sitting in the bank in you LLC’s name, in cash.  You can either choose to cash out 100% and pay capital gains tax on your earnings above your basis (at 15% I think?)... OR you can quickly find a new property with that $500k, purchase it, and file a 1031, which says you don’t have to pay ANY capital gains on those earnings.  You just increased income significantly without ever paying taxes on the underlying increase in value of your assets.  Rinse and repeat for 25 years, develop a portfolio of properties, create a management company so you can stop paying others a percentage of your earnings, and you too can have the problem of too much money.  I welcome anyone with actual knowledge of the topic to please expound on, or correct me. Your capital gain is about $40K, which (assuming your total income is under $250K) is taxed at 15% long term capital gains rate. Additional depreciation recapture of approximately $5K is taxed at 25%. So this gives us rough estimate of $7250 tax. This is Federal tax, AZ rates are somewhere between 2% and 4%, so you'll be looking at some $1.6K additional tax to AZ. If you have accumulated rental losses or other expenses, it will lower the total amount of your gain (and, accordingly, the taxes). This is all very rough estimates, and you shouldn't rely on this but verify on your own or with a professional. I suggest using professional services because while being costly, they will probably save you more in taxes than you'll have to pay them because of the knowledge of what exactly of your expenses can be deducted and how to calculate the cost basis correctly. (edit from JoeT - the home exclusion requires occupancy for 2 of prior 5 years. For the OP, the prorated $125k exclusion 'might' cover the gain, it depends when the increase in value occurred, if the gain was during the time rented, it's taxable, I believe.) First, you should probably have a proper consultation with a licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State). In fact you should have had it before you started, but that ship has sailed. You're talking about start-up expenses. You can generally deduct up to $5000 in the year your business starts, and the expenses in excess will be amortized over 180 months (15 years). This is per the IRC Sec. 195. The amortization starts when your business is active (i.e.: you can buy the property, but not actually open the restaurant - you cannot start the depreciation). I have a couple questions about accounting - should all the money I   spent be a part of capital spending? Or is it just a part of it? If it qualifies as start-up/organizational expenses - it should be capitalized. If it is spent on capital assets - then it should also be capitalized, but for different reasons and differently. For example, costs of filing paperwork for permits is a start-up expense. Buying a commercial oven is a capital asset purchase which should be depreciated separately, as buying the tables and silverware. If it is a salary expense to your employees - then it is a current expense and shouldn't be capitalized. Our company is LLC if this matters.  It matters to how it affects your personal tax return. I thought the same. Money as a transferable item is against future items, and debt is a transferable item against future money, which is also seen as a much farther into the future item.  Money = tomorrows item. Debt = tomorrows money = (tomorrows item)(time +1); or longer if we agree to pay it off over 20 years  Interestingly I have seen a writeup on why gold is the material of choice.   If someone can find this it would be great but I will try write from memory, Google is not helping. The story is something like this:  Essentially when trading a material for jewellery we had difficulty finding what material to use. Obviously it must be something hardy and tough, but not common. Metals are the obvious choice, although crystalline structures like gems and opals are useful. The reason for metals are that they can easily and repeatably be shaped into a form that will be aesthetically pleasing and hold its shape.   But which specific metal is to be chosen; obviously it must be chemically stable, so potassium magnesium and those metal like elements are removed from contention. It must be rare so items like lead, iron and copper are too common, although not worthless.  The most stable, malleable and rare materials are Platinum, Silver and Gold.   Platinum requires too high a melting point to be suitable; the requirements to smelt and handle it as a material are too high. Not to deny the value but the common use it prohibitive.   Silver is easier to handle, but tends to tarnish. Continuous upkeep is required and this becomes a detraction of its full value.  Finally Gold, rare, low melting point, resistant to tarnishing and oxidation, rare, malleable and pretty. A sweet spot of all materials. First, the basis is what was paid for the house along with any documented upgrades, any improvements not consider maintenance. Any gain from that point is taxable. This is the issue with gifting a house before one passes. It's an awful mistake. The fact that there was a mortgage doesn't come into play here nor does the $15K given away. Your question is great, and the only missing piece is what the house cost. Keep in mind, depending on the state, you MIL may have gotten a step-up on the passing of her husband.  On a very personal note - my grandparents bough a family house. 4 apartments. 1938 at a cost of $4000. My grandmother transferred 1/2 share to my father well before she died. And before my father's death it was put into my mother's name. Now that she's in her last years, I explained that since moved it to my sister's name already, there's no step up in basis. This share is now worth over $600,000, and after 4 deaths, no step up. When my sister sells, she will have a gain on nearly 100% of the sale price. In my opinion, there's a special place in hell for lawyers that quit claim property like this. For a bit of paperwork, the house could have been put into a trust to avoid probate, avoid being an asset for medicaid, and still get the step up. Even a $2000 cost for a good lawyer to set up a trust would yield a return of nearly $100,000 in taxes avoided. (And as my sister's keeper, I'd have paid the $2,000 myself, no issue that she gets the house. She needs it, I don't. And when the money's gone, I'm all she has anyway.) Generally banks will thoroughly check to make sure there is a market for the item before they take it as collateral. After that they will say it's only worth 40-80% of its value to avoid price volatility. So while it is rediculous to take a Andy Warhol painting as collateral, banks will be pretty conservative on its value (usually). A lot of these answers are strong, but at the end of the day this question really boils down to: Do you want to own things? Duh, yes. It means you have: By this logic, you would expect aggregate stock prices to increase indefinitely.   Whether the price you pay for that ownership claim is worth it at any given point in time is a completely different question entirely.