ILNews

Tax breaks for 2009

Rebecca Berfanger
January 6, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus


While taxes aren't due until April 15, it's never too early to consider what to discuss with a tax professional or what might be worth a little research before filing for 2009.

Those who bought new homes, new cars, office equipment, and/or have children may benefit from some of these credits if they have a qualifying income and meet other requirements.

First-time homeowners

For anyone who has bought a new home in 2009, they were likely already aware of the $8,000 tax credit, according to Kevin Sullivan of Katz Sapper & Miller, an Indianapolis accounting firm. Sullivan is an accountant and an attorney.

Some of the important aspects of this credit, he said, include that in early November 2009 it was expanded to include those who buy their first home after the original deadline of Nov. 30, 2009, to April 30, 2010.

According to IRS.gov, another change is a new credit for "long-time residents" of up to $6,500.

"To qualify this way, a buyer must have owned and used the same home as a principal or primary residence for at least five consecutive years of the eightyear period ending on the date of purchase of a new home as a primary residence," according to IRS.gov.

Sullivan suggested individuals bring certain materials, such as closing documents, to meetings with their tax professionals when discussing whether they qualify for either of these credits.

And while the $8,000 credit requires the homeowner have the home as a principal residence for at least three years, he said it was worth considering whether this would be an issue for the homeowner if he or she might be moving in the next three years.

There are also other conditions, including income. For those who purchased after Nov. 6, 2009, homeowners can make a modified adjusted gross income up to $125,000 for single filers, or up to $225,000 for joint filers. A reduced credit is available to those with MAGI between $125,000 and $145,000, or $225,000 and $245,000 for joint filers.

The previous MAGI limits apply to those who bought a new home before Nov. 6, 2009: "the full credit is available to taxpayers with MAGI up to $75,000, or $150,000 for joint filers. Those with MAGI between $75,000 and $95,000, or $150,000 and $170,000 for joint filers, are eligible for a reduced credit," according to IRS.gov.

The value of the home also determines the credit - it is 10 percent of the purchase price of the home up to $8,000 for those with the lower incomes, so if someone were to buy a house for $50,000, they would only get $5,000 of the potential $8,000 they might otherwise qualify for. No credit is available if the purchase price of the home is more than $800,000.

New car owners

Another large purchase that may result in a tax break is a new car.

Tax attorney Gregory J. Cagnassola, of DeFur Voran in Fishers, said anyone who bought a new car in 2009 who meets the income restrictions can deduct state and local sales and excise taxes.

Individuals qualify if they make up to $125,000, and then the credit is phased out for those who make up to $135,000 as individual filers. The income limit is $250,000 for joint filers, and is phased out for those who make up to $260,000 as joint filers.

He suggested that individuals bring their receipts when meeting with tax professionals. This credit applies to individuals who bought cars between Feb. 16, 2009, and Jan. 1, 2010, according to IRS.gov.

Parents

Individuals with children may also be able to receive more money this year.

The refundable portion of the child tax credit was increased for 2009 and 2010, and parents of children who are in college also have a couple incentives to address the cost of education, Cagnassola said.

For parents who claim college-age children as dependents, he suggested looking into whether the Hope Education Credit, now known as the American Opportunity Credit, would now apply because income levels have increased, and the credit was also extended to include four years of post-secondary education, as opposed to the previous two-year limit. The maximum amount, depending on expenses and income, is $2,500.

"Along the same lines for education, qualifying beneficiaries of 529 Plans can use tax redistribution to help pay for computers," he said. "Everyone needs a laptop in college, and this is a way to take a little bit of a bite out of the cost."

Small firms

For solo practitioners and attorneys with home offices, there are a few tax breaks worth looking into, Cagnassola and Sullivan said.

For instance, how one can consider if they can claim the depreciation of new equipment has changed, and Cagnassola added the IRS has become more accepting of home office claims in recent years.

While neither tax professional had a reason for an individual to not claim a credit, Cagnassola said he used to caution clients when claiming tax credits on home offices because they'd be more likely to be audited. Now that doesn't happen as often as it used to.

Both tax professionals also highly encouraged anyone to seek help from a tax professional, but recommended looking for 2009 tax information on the IRS' Web site, www.irs.gov. Sullivan also recommended www.CCH.com, the Web site of Commerce Clearing House, which he said is often referred to by tax attorneys and accountants when they want more information.

Depending on how one feels about who is eligible for tax credits, Sullivan said, "It's Congress' way of trying to target the deduction to who they have in their minds as people who can benefit from the credit and ... how the economy will benefit from a particular class of tax payers. The limitations and phase outs are determined by Congress to achieve those objectives. Whether it'll be effective or not, we'll leave it to them to figure that out."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT