Tax considerations you MAY NOT KNOW about short term rentals

Tax considerations you MAY NOT KNOW about short term rentals

Accountant · San Diego, CA · Member since 2019 · 1k+ posts · 552 votes

In the realm of real estate investments, the short-term rental loophole offers a unique opportunity, subject, however, to certain rules and regulations. According to passive activity loss rules, every business is obligated to adhere to specific criteria, especially when it comes to short-term rentals. One crucial stipulation is that the property must be rented for 7 days or less on average. While this may exempt it from being classified as a rental activity, active participation remains a requirement, necessitating compliance with three tests: spending 500 hours on the property, dedicating at least 100 hours (and more than any other participant), and performing all the necessary work needed.

Additionally, long-term viability and consideration of depreciation recapture are important concerns. Excess business losses are capped for single individuals at $250,000 and for married individuals at $500,000, with any surplus being suspended and carried forward. Notably, short-term rentals are categorized as non-residential properties. If over 50% of guests stay on a transient basis, the property is subject to depreciation over 39 years. Bonus depreciation and Section 179 allowances for improvements can be utilized, with the latter, however, capped at zero to prevent negative losses. Determining whether the venture falls under a service or rental business hinges on the provision of substantial services; for instance, if a bed and breakfast service is offered, it must be reported on Schedule C, triggering a 15.3% self-employment tax.

Moreover, personal use plays a crucial role in the classification of the property. If used for 15 days or more or 10% of the rental days at fair market value, it becomes a residence, subject to specific regulations. The REPS-9 election prohibits grouping short-term and long-term rentals, emphasizing the need for careful strategic planning. Notably, personal visits for maintenance purposes do not contribute to personal use calculations. The involvement of onsite management, often seen as a potential red flag, can lead to the property failing crucial qualification tests. Understanding these rules is essential for investors seeking to capitalize on the short-term rental loophole while maintaining compliance with tax regulations.

2Reply
55 views

Most Popular Reply

Real Estate Agent · Emerald Coast, FL · Member since 2016 · 820 posts · 486 votes
2y

If it's allowed, it's not a "loophole". ;  )

See this reply in the discussion

11 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Real Estate Agent · Emerald Coast, FL · Member since 2016 · 820 posts · 486 votes
    2y

    If it's allowed, it's not a "loophole". ;  )

  • Accountant · San Diego, CA · Member since 2019 · 1k+ posts · 552 votes
    2y
    Quote from @January Johnson:

    If it's allowed, it's not a "loophole". ;  )


    Depends on how you view it I suppose :P 

    Since we are (in many people's views) "gaming" the material participation test laws here, I would consider it a loophole. On the contrary, something like real estate professional status is NOT a loophole, since its directly mentioned in the tax law and is heavily litigated. 

  • Alpharetta, GA · Member since 2024 · 6 posts · 0 votes
    2y

    You state “The involvement of onsite management, often seen as a potential red flag, can lead to the property failing crucial qualification tests.”

    Can you elaborate or refer me to any ruling or tax code that addresses this?

    I am looking at a condotel investment in a tourist resort, which for all intents and purposes would be treated as a STR and I do not plan to personally use the unit. From gross rentals, a license fee (to use a well known brand hotel), and a management fee are deducted before I would receive my net rental income, which would pay for the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and HOA costs.

    I am trying to figure out if this setup would be treated as a substantial service subject to schedule C, or if I could use Schedule E. I would also like to understand your comment above before deciding whether this investment makes sense for me. 

    Thanks in advance for any help you can provide 

  • Accountant · San Diego, CA · Member since 2019 · 1k+ posts · 552 votes
    2y
    Quote from @Dean Shahriari:

    You state “The involvement of onsite management, often seen as a potential red flag, can lead to the property failing crucial qualification tests.”

    Can you elaborate or refer me to any ruling or tax code that addresses this?

    I am looking at a condotel investment in a tourist resort, which for all intents and purposes would be treated as a STR and I do not plan to personally use the unit. From gross rentals, a license fee (to use a well known brand hotel), and a management fee are deducted before I would receive my net rental income, which would pay for the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and HOA costs.

    I am trying to figure out if this setup would be treated as a substantial service subject to schedule C, or if I could use Schedule E. I would also like to understand your comment above before deciding whether this investment makes sense for me. 

    Thanks in advance for any help you can provide 

    Hey Dean! 

    For context around this: The material participation test easiest and most practical to qualify for when it comes to short term rentals is the "100 hours and more then anyone else" test. 

    Recall we have three ways to pass the material participation test: 
    1. 500 hours of material participation 
    2. 100 hours of material participation and more then anyone else
    3. More then anyone else. 


    For just one or even a few rentals, 1 is hard to do without stretching things. 
    2. is the most practical, since your going to have cleaners coming in and a repair here and there. If you have full time property management, it is hard to say you were the one doing "more then anyone else" since the management company is taking care of everything. We know this from historical tax court cases. 

    I hope that clears things up! 
  • Alpharetta, GA · Member since 2024 · 6 posts · 0 votes
    2y
    This is very helpful!

    I have a couple of questions about your response:

    Is the “more than anyone else” interpreted as more than any one individual person, or more than everyone else combined? Or, perhaps, is the property management company that employs many individuals considered one person in the eyes of the IRS.  I can imagine a situation where the employees of the condotel management company provide services for all the units in the building and no one individual spends more time on your unit than you do.  

    You mention historical tax court cases. Can you provide one or more for me to look at?  

    Thanks!
     

    Quote from @Account Closed:
    Quote from @Dean Shahriari:

    You state “The involvement of onsite management, often seen as a potential red flag, can lead to the property failing crucial qualification tests.”

    Can you elaborate or refer me to any ruling or tax code that addresses this?

    I am looking at a condotel investment in a tourist resort, which for all intents and purposes would be treated as a STR and I do not plan to personally use the unit. From gross rentals, a license fee (to use a well known brand hotel), and a management fee are deducted before I would receive my net rental income, which would pay for the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and HOA costs.

    I am trying to figure out if this setup would be treated as a substantial service subject to schedule C, or if I could use Schedule E. I would also like to understand your comment above before deciding whether this investment makes sense for me. 

    Thanks in advance for any help you can provide 

    Hey Dean! 

    For context around this: The material participation test easiest and most practical to qualify for when it comes to short term rentals is the "100 hours and more then anyone else" test. 

    Recall we have three ways to pass the material participation test: 
    1. 500 hours of material participation 
    2. 100 hours of material participation and more then anyone else
    3. More then anyone else. 


    For just one or even a few rentals, 1 is hard to do without stretching things. 
    2. is the most practical, since your going to have cleaners coming in and a repair here and there. If you have full time property management, it is hard to say you were the one doing "more then anyone else" since the management company is taking care of everything. We know this from historical tax court cases. 

    I hope that clears things up! 

  • Accountant · San Diego, CA · Member since 2019 · 1k+ posts · 552 votes
    2y
    Quote from @Dean Shahriari:
    This is very helpful!

    I have a couple of questions about your response:

    Is the “more than anyone else” interpreted as more than any one individual person, or more than everyone else combined? Or, perhaps, is the property management company that employs many individuals considered one person in the eyes of the IRS.  I can imagine a situation where the employees of the condotel management company provide services for all the units in the building and no one individual spends more time on your unit than you do.  

    You mention historical tax court cases. Can you provide one or more for me to look at?  

    Thanks!
     

    Quote from @Account Closed:
    Quote from @Dean Shahriari:

    You state “The involvement of onsite management, often seen as a potential red flag, can lead to the property failing crucial qualification tests.”

    Can you elaborate or refer me to any ruling or tax code that addresses this?

    I am looking at a condotel investment in a tourist resort, which for all intents and purposes would be treated as a STR and I do not plan to personally use the unit. From gross rentals, a license fee (to use a well known brand hotel), and a management fee are deducted before I would receive my net rental income, which would pay for the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and HOA costs.

    I am trying to figure out if this setup would be treated as a substantial service subject to schedule C, or if I could use Schedule E. I would also like to understand your comment above before deciding whether this investment makes sense for me. 

    Thanks in advance for any help you can provide 

    Hey Dean! 

    For context around this: The material participation test easiest and most practical to qualify for when it comes to short term rentals is the "100 hours and more then anyone else" test. 

    Recall we have three ways to pass the material participation test: 
    1. 500 hours of material participation 
    2. 100 hours of material participation and more then anyone else
    3. More then anyone else. 


    For just one or even a few rentals, 1 is hard to do without stretching things. 
    2. is the most practical, since your going to have cleaners coming in and a repair here and there. If you have full time property management, it is hard to say you were the one doing "more then anyone else" since the management company is taking care of everything. We know this from historical tax court cases. 

    I hope that clears things up! 


     We see "anyone else" meaning any entity, so a company would count. As far as the reference docs, I'm struggling to find them as we revisited this a month or so back... googling "tax court cases short term rentals" maybe useful

  • Accountant · Austin, TX · Member since 2016 · 72 posts · 72 votes
    2y

    The 1.469-5T(b)(iii) tax code that defines the material participation tests uses the word "individual".  Pretty much any time the tax code uses the word "individual", it means one human being (unlike "person", which usually includes other legal entities).  Having said that, I'm not aware of any tax court cases where that was challenged.  But I think it's safe to consider each cleaner as separate for counting their participation hours. 

    David Orr
    Tax Modern

  • Accountant · San Diego, CA · Member since 2019 · 1k+ posts · 552 votes
    2y
    Quote from @David Orr:

    The 1.469-5T(b)(iii) tax code that defines the material participation tests uses the word "individual".  Pretty much any time the tax code uses the word "individual", it means one human being (unlike "person", which usually includes other legal entities).  Having said that, I'm not aware of any tax court cases where that was challenged.  But I think it's safe to consider each cleaner as separate for counting their participation hours. 

    David Orr
    Tax Modern


     Great perspective David, ill have to share that with our team 

  • Attorney · Boston, MA · Member since 2023 · 140 posts · 75 votes
    2y

    @Zachary Jensen transient rentals are directly addressed in the tax code. Loophole is a fun term, but its really just applying tax law correctly. Did they intend this? Who knows, but these laws have addressed transient rentals since the 80s.

    There is a case where the judge actually applied the "loophole" which hurt the TP as they wanted to use STR hours as REP hours. So it works both ways sometimes!

  • Accountant · San Diego, CA · Member since 2019 · 1k+ posts · 552 votes
    2y
    Quote from @John Malone:

    @Zachary Jensen transient rentals are directly addressed in the tax code. Loophole is a fun term, but its really just applying tax law correctly. Did they intend this? Who knows, but these laws have addressed transient rentals since the 80s.

    There is a case where the judge actually applied the "loophole" which hurt the TP as they wanted to use STR hours as REP hours. So it works both ways sometimes!


     I think the reason why people view it as a loophole is that it is taking the material participation test and applying it to a more "passive" type of business. 100% you are correct, nothing shady or ill-intended going on here 

  • Alpharetta, GA · Member since 2024 · 6 posts · 0 votes
    2y
    Quote from @David Orr:

    The 1.469-5T(b)(iii) tax code that defines the material participation tests uses the word "individual".  Pretty much any time the tax code uses the word "individual", it means one human being (unlike "person", which usually includes other legal entities).  Having said that, I'm not aware of any tax court cases where that was challenged.  But I think it's safe to consider each cleaner as separate for counting their participation hours. 

    David Orr
    Tax Modern

    That is how I would read the law when seeing “individual” vs “person.”  

    That said, given my fact pattern of a condotel- how do I even try to allocate each individual who might be employed by the management company vs the number of units in the building.

    For example- if there are 2 front desk employees per shift and 3 shifts per day (so 48 hours per day overall), and there are 200 units in the building, is it fair to allocate 0.24 hours per day (87.6 hours per year) to my unit? If so, that is still divided among 6 people (assuming no turnover in staffing or temporary staffing).  

    With respect to cleaning crews- I suspect the analysis would involve the number of actual stays per year, the average time per cleaning and number of people in the crew to get an appropriate number of hours dedicated to my unit. 

    I have to imagine the individuals who are “competing” with me for most time spent are the cleaning crew and front desk personnel, but there are others that are involved- e.g., maintenance personnel, other resort/hotel staffing, management company employees, etc. 


     None of these people are likely to have over 100 hours per year dedicated to my unit. That was part of the reason I would like to see the case law- it might helps clarify how the IRS and court interpreted it. 

    I can see, however, if you have a small management company where one person does everything (e.g., cleaning, restocking, shopping for stocked items, maintenance, billing), the Taxpayer would have a hard time proving no one had more time spent on the business. 

    I also wonder what activities of mine would qualify if typical investor-type activities are not counted. So, is my time spent posting a link to the unit on a third-party website for additional traffic acceptable? Also, is my time dealing with the management company to reserve my own unit for my third-party-website booked stays allowed? Is my keeping a ledger of income from all sites and sources included? What about prepping my records for my CPA?

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.