![]() |
|
Didn't mean to start a cat fight.....was kinda hoping Carl would lighten up just a little!
I can endure cat fights all day on chit(ty)-chat(ty)-(catty) forums if i so desire! Oh, by the way......What's with all the EMIRATES ads on the top right? Puhleese! Is APC that desperate? |
Originally Posted by Ferd149
(Post 1709809)
May wanna ask some Minnesota boys about claiming to live somewhere vs where they really lived:eek::D
Don't know if they got jail time (no memory anymore) but I think the ones in Hennipan County got tagged with a felony. I've always been talked out of claiming commuter hotels. I was told its a grey area. It wouldn't flag an audit but I would probably lose it in an audit if I got tagged for something else. The CPA who told me that did lots of pilots when I lived in Dallas. Ferd |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1709838)
...and another one is currently a chief pilot.
Say, didn't I read something once about Delta's values-driven culture? |
You CANNOT deduct commuting expenses. The only time you can deduct expenses for commuting is if you get temporarily assigned duty involuntarily outside of your tax home and you reasonably expect that it will last less than a year. You can then deduct the expenses for a year. After that, the IRS says it is no longer temporary and expects you to move and will not allow any deductions for commuting. Any good tax guy will tell you this and it is not really a grey area.
About the only thing you can deduct is parking costs if Delta won't pay for them. (I commuted from Houston and had to pay for parking and that could be deducted). The stupid thing about it is if you live in say IAH and are based in ATL and can bid trips so that every layover is in IAH, you can deduct meals and incidentals for all of your layovers in the city you live in. That's how stupid the IRS rules are. |
Originally Posted by illini90
(Post 1709814)
Thanks for the input! I'm not trying to claim a state I don't live in to save on taxes, I am just curious on the IRS definition of a Tax Home, as stated in their regs. If it's where I live, then I can deduct commuting. If it's ATL, then I can't. Unfortunately, you can read it either way, so I was hoping somebody had some experience with it. You can call the IRS, but I don't think you can email them. I suppose that's so they can't be held to one advisor's interpretation of the rule. It would be nice to actually have something chiseled in stone (or email) from them.
Publication 463 (2013), Travel, Entertainment, Gift, and Car Expenses Tax Home Different From Family Home If you (and your family) do not live at your tax home (defined earlier), you cannot deduct the cost of traveling between your tax home and your family home. You also cannot deduct the cost of meals and lodging while at your tax home. See Example 1 , later. If you are working temporarily in the same city where you and your family live, you may be considered as traveling away from home. See Example 2 , later. Example 1. You are a truck driver and you and your family live in Tucson. You are employed by a trucking firm that has its terminal in Phoenix. At the end of your long runs, you return to your home terminal in Phoenix and spend one night there before returning home. You cannot deduct any expenses you have for meals and lodging in Phoenix or the cost of traveling from Phoenix to Tucson. This is because Phoenix is your tax home. |
Originally Posted by Ferd149
(Post 1709809)
May wanna ask some Minnesota boys about claiming to live somewhere vs where they really lived:eek::D
Don't know if they got jail time (no memory anymore) but I think the ones in Hennipan County got tagged with a felony. I've always been talked out of claiming commuter hotels. I was told its a grey area. It wouldn't flag an audit but I would probably lose it in an audit if I got tagged for something else. The CPA who told me that did lots of pilots when I lived in Dallas. Ferd |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1709910)
She did lots of pilots? What's her name? Is she fat?
Carl |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1709721)
Hey I have to defend Carl here. I think that he was correcting several misrepresentations. For starters it was well known that the NWA/Republic fence was 20 years. I'm not sure where the 18 year assertion came from.
Second, the NWA pilots did have lifetime reinstatement rights. Third, the Red Book merger committee filed a grievance in 2005 that argued that the end of the fences would cause them to possibly lose their positions so they wanted lifetime displacement protection from their fenced positions. The arbitrator was Dana Eischen, one of the arbitrators for the DAL/NWA arbitration and he mentioned that arbitation during the hearing. So what I said was correct. I am sorry if this is turning into a food fight, but if Carl says it's important to correct the record, then we should correct the record. |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1709498)
why is it DALPA guys keep bringing up the DPA? why are you obsessing about this Seeham guy? Are you setting him up as an excuse for more negotiating incompetency from DALPA on C15? Giving MD some wiggle room on his promise of an "historic" contract?
"Well, we really wanted to negotiate an historic C15...we tried our best, but the DPA and this Seeham guy prevented it." Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and *** the prom queen. |
Originally Posted by Starcheck102
(Post 1709939)
Oh, you found my weakness. I can't possibly refute a Sean Connery quote.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:31 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands