<p>It's possible to show a $20,000 loss but suspect. Rent in minus expenses including insurance, mortgage interest, taxes, etc. minus the depreciation. Ideally as someone said most people for tax purposes, want to break even after that or show a loss. But I do believe the loss is capped, too, and excess carried over or something like passive loss - I'm no expert. A negative number reduces the AGI, a positive number increases the AGI so it might depend on how or what the OP is using for the income number. But I thought an asset (such as rental property) was still "an asset" on the FAFSA as the market value minus the mortgage. This place would have a value unless the mortgage was greater than the market value (which could be happening in certain parts of the country of course) thus would not inpact the FAFSA but could inpact income if not properly accounted for is my best guess. It could be how the OP is interpreting the questions on the FAFSA model vs. the questions related to the IS method. You could be "asset rich" and "income poor" I supose due to inheritance which could screw up one or the other aid models especially if you show losses on the asset (income -expenses-depreciation by keeping the rents low too) No one monitors what you charge in rents so you can manipulate the tax impact that way, also, especially if you need the income thrown off in a particular year which could possibly become more transparent on the IM model. But yes, the OP needs another set of eyes on the calculations cptofthehouse.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>It is not unusual for rental income to be negative the first year a house is purchased.>></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>If this is the FIRST year this family has owned a $400K rental property, no wonder finaid is questioning everything. HOW did they find the money to buy a $400K home with their modest income? Something about this story is not adding up.</p>
<p><<so my="" parents="" bought="" a="" second="" house="" in="" our="" own="" neighborhood="" few="" years="" ago="" to="" rent="" off="" and="" hopefully="" make="" some="" money="" of="" it...a="" wise="" investment="" they="" thought="" because="" houses="" area="" had="" skyrocketed="" value="">></so></p>
<p>How on earth does an appreciated home value mean the property is good for rental income. I would think just the opposite. You have to cover your costs so if you paid alot for it, you have to charge alot to live there.</p>
<p>I think most of the advice given so far is accurate. </p>
<p>As to WHY someone would want to "lose" 20K a year......... I have a relative that has a lot of rental properties. To my knowledge of talking to him, the math could look like this;</p>
<p>400K house
360K loan
40K down payment</p>
<p>24K yearly income (2000 month)
-15K depreciatioin (not cash flow item)
-28K payment, taxes, etc
=19K "loss" for tax purposes
(4K ACTUAL loss)</p>
<p>BUT, in the RIGHT market, you also have maybe 4% Appreciation........so add 16K of unrealized gain</p>
<ul>
<li>4K actual loss
+16K unrealized apreciation
=12K long term gain on a 40K investment = 30% annual return.</li>
</ul>
<p>This ONLY works IF you can cash flow the 4K negative cash flow, and you keep it rented (or can cover empty months out of other cash flow), and you have the time and patience for it.</p>
<p>Hope this makes it clearer of WHY someone would want to do this. Many people also dont realize how a rental will affect FASFA until it is too late.</p>
<p>DJD</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Hope this makes it clearer of WHY someone would want to do this. Many people also dont realize how a rental will affect FASFA until it is too late.>></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Thanks for the example djd. This does make it easier to understand. BUT I still say, this is not for a family who is not making ends meet AND has college expenses looming. It's one thing to own a lot of rental properties AND have the resources to take a small loss for tax purposes. I know many folks who do this as it offsets taxes related to other income they have.</p>
<p>However, is it me...? This does not seem fiscally responsible money management for a family that does not have the resources to support it. Like I said earlier...that $20K loss could be used to fund college.</p>
<p>I know nothing about the financial aid process, but I do know about taxes. If you are ending up with a $20,000 loss on a rental, my first thought is that you are expensing major repairs, and not amortizing them over the IRS recovery period for various assets. If you were to sell or "transfer" this property you would be hit with section 1250 and capital gain taxes.</p>
<p>"So my parents bought a second house in our own neighborhood a few years ago...because of the mortgage crisis, my parents are losing instead of gaining money on this second house and cannot afford to sell it as of yet because of the lease of the renter and the extremely heavy loss they will have to take."</p>
<p>It's unclear how long the house has been rented but possibly not all 12 months last year. If parents are losing actual money (not just equity) due to mortgage crisis it sound like the mortgage itself may have increased rates. Selling doesn't sound like an option they can or should take in this market.</p>
<p>If his FM is zero, as in post #14, and it's a big issue, shouldn't he just apply to FAFSA only schools? And maybe if he would qualify for one of the need-tested things, like reduced school lunches, even though they file 1040? Wouldn't that eliminate the whole asset question?</p>
<p>I'm not sure this student qualifies for the simplified needs test. That is when you don't report assets. To be eligible for this, your family MUST be eligible to file a 1040 EZ or 1040A. Rental income is not reported on these forms...it must be reported on the 1040 long form...no simplified needs test when you do the long form 1040. </p>
<p>So...if the family had to do a 1040, then no...it would not eliminate the asset question to apply to a FAFSA only school.</p>
<p>Thumper - Unless I'm seriously misreading this (see page 4), the requirement is either a 1040A/ez OR participation with a needs tested program, AND then meets an AGI limitation of $49,999. I didn't think the reference to where to find the AGI meant it can ONLY come from those two forms (in which case the either/or scenario doesn't make alot of sense) but I could be mistaken and will definitely make some inquiries. Have you had experience otherwise with this clause?
<a href="http://ifap.ed.gov/eannouncements/attachments/0809EFCFormulaGuide.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://ifap.ed.gov/eannouncements/attachments/0809EFCFormulaGuide.pdf</a></p>
<p>Being in certain means tested programs does offset the need for the 1040a/1040ez. But as the OP originally stated that his parent's income (before the 'loss' on rental income) is @ $40k I doubt they would qualify for means tested benefits. That is speculation on my part as I am not sure exactly the criteria used for such awards but most needs tested benefits are fairly hard to qualify for and require very low incomes - it seems that someone with a primary home, earned income in the $40k region and a rental property valued in the $400K+ region would be unlikely to qualify. Just by doing a quick search i see that for Food stamp eligibility you must meet gross income and net income and have below $2,000 in resources excluding the primary home - with both their income and the investment property they would be ineligible. </p>
<p>I still think there is some part of the picture we are not seeing here.</p>
<p>I don't think simplified needs is only if you are eligible to file short form- but if you actually did.
We filed long form because we itemize- but otherwise qualified for short form
Still because we did so- did not qualify for simple needs.</p>
<p>Emerald - if you itemize you are not eligible to file 1040a or 1040ez. FAFSA does ask if you are eligible to file a 1040a/1040ez because sometimes people file 1040s even though they are eligible to file shorter forms. Itemizing actually makes you ineligible for the short forms (I had to convince my husband it was worth not itemizing and paying a little more tax to qualify for simplified needs - definite cost/benefit ratio in our case - but for an ex accountant paying any more in taxes than necessary was just unheard of ;) )</p>
<p>
[quote]
34. Eligible to file a 1040A or 1040EZ. If you (and your spouse) are eligible to file a 1040A or 1040EZ for 2007, indicate your eligibility to file one of these forms (even if you file a 2007 IRS Form 1040). For instance, tax preparers often file a Form 1040 or an electronic 1040 on behalf of a tax filer, even though that person's income and tax filing circumstances would allow him or her to file a 1040A or 1040EZ.</p>
<p>In general, you are eligible to file a 1040A or 1040EZ if you make less than $100,000, do not itemize deductions, do not receive income from your own business or farm and do not receive alimony. You are not eligible to file a 1040A or a 1040EZ form if you itemize deductions, are self-employed, receive alimony or are required to file Schedule D for capital gains. If you filed a 1040 only to claim Hope or Lifetime Learning credits and you would have otherwise been eligible to file a 1040A or 1040EZ, you should answer "Yes" to this question. If you filed a 1040 and were not required to file a tax return, you should answer Yes to this question.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It is easier to qualify for reduced price lunch than food stamps. I can't quite open the link but, according to another site, the 2008-2009 figure for a family of 4 (and this family could be larger) is $39220 and I don't think they look at assets. </p>
<p>Income</a> Eligibility Guidelines</p>
<p>Frankly, I'm also wondering if they're doing their taxes wrong-- like not declaring the rental income as income. Or there could be more than 1 in college. It is also possible that they qualified for that mortgage because they made more $ a few years ago or because of an inheritance or maybe they just took out an extra mortgage on their house to fund the deposit on a 2nd house thinking it was a good investment. It's hard to tell.</p>
<p>SCM - I don't know about the other needs tested programs, but it seems like the school lunch program might be within the realm of possibility. There doesn't appear to be an asset limit and income levels are based on the number of people living in the household, including non-relatives. A family of 3 earning $32,560 or less qualifies, and it jumps by $6660 for each additional person, (5=$45880; 6=52540, etc.) so not what many would consider very low income. Whether this family would qualify and is below the FAFSA AGI ceiling for simplified needs is unknowable of course!</p>