Original Message:
Re: Has anyone ever donated a timeshare for a tax write-off? (by Mike N.):
ken1193 wrote:=========== Ken, I possess those same fine typing qualities. Now, I've resorted to typing my comments in a Word document, then running spell check.Dr. Ken Rich states/ asks, quoted only in pertinent part:RE: >> It is conceivable that the timeshare owner could park across the street, set up a for sale sign, and make his timeshare available for the same price as the resort owner.<<
Not really. The resort developer is involved in the "initial" (i.e., immediately following construction) sales, in which the resort construction and marketing costs must first be recouped in order for the developer to make a profit (which is why he built the place at all). Hence, the extravagant (some might even say hallucinatory) prices consistently associated with developer sales. The hypothetical "guy across the street" is, by definition, involved in a (post developer sale) "resale". His prices must ALWAYS be MUCH less than those of the developer (or he won't be across the street for very long....). =====================================
Re: >> Thus the same market is open to both sellers if they wished to use them.<<
Not exactly so, for the reasons detailed above. One is, by definition, a "second hand" resale, the other is not.
Believe me when I tell you that CPA Dave M. from TUG(whose input has been kindly quoted here by jayjay) knows this arena inside and out. Personally, I would take (and I have taken) his word as the gospel truth. He definitely knows whereof he speaks (not always the case on the Internet, where any fool with a keyborad can just "weigh in" with opinion and misinformation). =====================================
Re: >> I would greatly love to see a copy of the old IRS ruling you speak of. It would help all of us here to be able to see how it applies. If you could find a reference for us, I, for one, would do my best to find and read it.<<
With all due respect, that's reaching into the man's livelihood. If he was to respond (and I personally have no reason to believe that he even visits RedWeek at all) , I'd fully expect that it would (justifiably) be on a "billable hours for consultation" basis.
My personal opinion is that if you want to contest or lock horns with regulatory, IRS or tax input or opinions from Dave M., you should be fully prepared to just get summarily "gored"....... whiich, of course, is certainly your choice and prerogative to do.
P.S. My apologies for several edits, undertaken immediately after posting, only to correct typo errors which I didn't see until re-reading the post (i.e., no change in actual content). I'm just a lousy typist, I'll readily admit that.....