|
|
 |
GO BACK to
List of Articles »

The Home Sale Exclusion and current
events
By Zev Landau
Tax rules react to what happens in society,
and the principal residence exclusion is an example. The September
11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the war in Iraq, high unemployment, and
the changing economic climate are all reasons to be more familiar with
the circumstances that allow the exclusion of a large amount of gain
when taxpayers sell their principal residence.
On October 10, 2002, the Wall
Street Journal advised homeowners: “If you are considering
selling your house, sooner rather than later might be the way to
go. Home prices have increased at least twice as fast as household
income in more than 100 U.S. cities since 1998… then and now,
many economists fret certain areas could be poised for a tumble.” On
April 1, 2003, the Wall Street Journal wrote
about “Making the Transition Back to Local Work after an Overseas
Job.” The uncertain employment and international environments
explain why IRC section 121, addressed by this article, is more important
than ever.
Since May 7, 1997, the home sale exclusion is
no longer a once-in-a-lifetime exclusion; it can be repeated in future
sales (but as a general rule, home sellers must wait two years before
being eligible to exclude any gain on the next sale of another principal
residence). Under the old law, if home sellers that were 55 or older
wanted to defer gain (which was not the same as excluding it permanently),
they were required to purchase a new and more expensive residence by
reinvesting the proceeds from the sale of their old residence. If the
new residence was less expensive, they could defer part of the gain.
Under the new law, a taxpayer’s age is
no longer a factor, taxpayers do not have to purchase a replacement
residence, and the exclusion is much larger. Single taxpayers and married
taxpayers filing separately can exclude up to $250,000. For spouses
filing jointly, the exclusion can be up to $500,000.
The Three Tests
If a taxpayer wishes to be eligible for the
maximum $250,000 gain exclusion, there are three important tests homesellers
must pass: ownership, use, and prior exclusions. There are three questions
to be asked:
- For how long did the taxpayer own the home
during the five years that ended on the date of the sale? The taxpayer
must own the principal residence for at least two years during the
five-year look-back period.
- How much time did the taxpayer use the home
during the five-year look-back period? In addition to the ownership
requirement, the taxpayer must have used the principal residence
for at least two years during the five-year look-back period.
- Has the taxpayer claimed exclusion during
the two-year period that ended on the date of sale of the present
principal residence? Under the general rule, the taxpayer is allowed
to have only one exclusion during the same two-year look-back period.
If the taxpayer passes all three tests, she
is eligible for the exclusion. The same tests apply to spouses that
file joint returns with a maximum exclusion doubled to $500,000. The
double exclusion is available if:
- Either spouse has owned the principal residence
for at least two years during the five-year period ending on the
date of sale.
- Both husband and wife have used the home
as their principal residence for at least two years during the five-year
period ending on the date of sale.
- Neither spouse took advantage of the home
sale exclusion relating to a sale of another principal residence
during the two-year period ending on the date of sale.
The Circumstantial Exceptions
If the two-out-of-five-years ownership and use
requirements are not satisfied, any realized gain on the sale or exchange
must be recognized. In addition, if there was any other applicable
sale or exchange by the taxpayer during the two-year period ending
on the date of the sale or exchange, no exclusion is allowed.
But there are exceptions. According to the American
Bar Association (ABA):
Where the home is sold after less than two years
of ownership, there is usually an unexpected reason for the sale. In
such situations, the owner is often unlikely to generate a gain from
the sale due to the short ownership period and the costs of selling
the home. However, in certain real estate markets, a gain may result.
In light of the otherwise ameliorative nature of IRC section 121, requiring
an individual to pay capital gain taxes on top of the other costs of
selling, moving, and dealing with the personal issues that compelled
the sale of the home would seem to deviate from congressional intent.
Thus, in drafting guidance on ‘unforeseen circumstances,’ a
broad view should be taken of the personal circumstances that may unexpectedly
require an individual to sell a home owned for less than two years.
[As reported in the Real Estate Journal (October
3, 2001).]
When it issued the proposed regulations, the
IRS requested guidance concerning what types of “unforeseen circumstances” would
justify a reduced exclusion. Potential unforeseen circumstances identified
by commentators such as the AICPA included: financial hardship, such
as when an individual loses his job or is required to take a substantial
cut in pay or faces increased living expenses; the loss of income of
a family member who pays the costs of maintaining the home; divorce,
separation, or breakup of a long-term nonmarital relationship; death
of a co-owner or co-occupant of a home; a health change of a nonowner
of a home or a family member not in the household; and changes in usability
of a home due to environmental concerns.
On December 24, 2002, the IRS issued new temporary
and proposed regulations on the reduced exclusion of gain when taxpayers
fail to qualify for the full exclusion because they did not meet the
three aforementioned tests.
The taxpayer’s primary reason for the
sale or exchange is determined based on the facts and circumstances.
The temporary regulations provide a list of factors that may be relevant
in determining the taxpayer’s primary reason. These factors are
suggestive only. No single fact or particular combination of facts
is determinative of the taxpayer’s entitlement to the reduced
maximum exclusion.
In addition, for each of the three grounds that
allow taxpayers to claim a reduced maximum exclusion amount (change
in taxpayer’s place of employment, health, or unforeseen circumstances),
the temporary regulations provide a general definition and certain
safe harbors. If a safe harbor applies, the taxpayer’s primary
reason for the sale or exchange is deemed to be a change in place of
employment, health, or unforeseen circumstances. The temporary regulations
provide that the primary reason for the sale is deemed to be a change
in place of employment, if the new place of employment of a qualified
individual is at least 50 miles farther from the residence sold or
exchanged than was the former place of employment. If the individual
was unemployed, the distance between the new place of employment and
the residence sold or exchanged must be at least 50 miles.
If the any of the three exceptions apply, the
maximum exclusion of $250,000/ $500,000 is no longer available. Instead,
the maximum exclusion is prorated to a fraction. The numerator is the
smallest of the following period of time:
- The number of years, months, or days that
the taxpayer owned the property.
- The number of years, months, or days that
the taxpayer used the property.
- The number of years, months, or days between
the most recent sale with an exclusion (if applicable) and the current
sale.
The denominator is equal to the required period
of ownership and use (i.e., either two years, 24 months, or 730 days).
Example 1.
Twelve months after purchasing a principal residence, Jane Smith
sells the house due to a change in her employment. She did not exclude
gain on a prior sale or exchange of property during the two years
prior to the sale. Jane is eligible to exclude up to $125,000 of
the gain from the sale of her house (12 months/24 months x $250,000).
Example 2.
Bill Jones owned and used his principal residence since 1996. On
January 15, 1999, he got married and his spouse Mary began to use
the house as her principal residence. On January 15, 2000, Bill sold
the house due to a change in the couple’s employment. Neither
he nor his spouse excluded gain on a prior sale or exchange of property
between January 16, 1998, and January 15, 2000.
The Joneses filed a joint tax return, but must
separately calculate the maximum allowable exclusion because Bill owned
and used the principal residence for the entire period preceding the
date of sale. Therefore, Bill’s share in the exclusion is $250,000,
because the ownership and use period exceeded two years and it was
his first sale of a principal residence; thus the requirement of one
exclusion does not apply to him.
Between January 16, 1995, and January 15, 2000,
Mary did not own the house, but this does not matter because only one
spouse is required to own the house for two years. Mary moved because
of a change in job location. She used the house for only 12 months
(from January 16, 1999, to January 15, 2000). Therefore, the spouse’s
share in the exclusion has to be prorated and is equal to $125,000
(12 months/24 months x $250,000). The combined maximum exclusion is
$375,000, instead of $500,000.
GO BACK to
List of Articles »
GO TO TOP
|
 |