1lauber
Susie King Taylor 360x1000
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 360x1000
299
1confidencegames
2confidencegames
AlexRosenberg
11632
Margaret Fuller 2 360x1000
1lookingforthegoodwar
Thomas Piketty2 360x1000
Maurice B Foley 360x1000
5albion
9albion
Gilgamesh 360x1000
1defense
1trap
Samuel Johnson 360x1000
Susie King Taylor2 360x1000
6confidencegames
storyparadox2
2trap
LillianFaderman
3albion
Mary Ann Evans 360x1000
Anthony McCann2 360x1000
1lafayette
13albion
Learned Hand 360x1000
4albion
George F Wil...360x1000
2theleastofus
2paradise
Anthony McCann1 360x1000
Margaret Fuller 360x1000
Richard Posner 360x1000
Office of Chief Counsel 360x1000
199
lifeinmiddlemarch1
8albion'
Maria Popova 360x1000
3theleastofus
Margaret Fuller4 360x1000
2gucci
2lookingforthegoodwar
2jesusandjohnwayne
Thomas Piketty1 360x1000
Margaret Fuller2 360x1000
Edmund Burke 360x1000
Margaret Fuller5 360x1000
2lafayette
5confidencegames
Margaret Fuller1 360x1000
10abion
11albion
Mark V Holmes 360x1000
1gucci
Tad Friend 360x1000
3confidencegames
1madoff
3paradise
2falsewitness
499
1albion
Lafayette and Jefferson 360x1000
7confidencegames
1falsewitness
James Gould Cozzens 360x1000
Betty Friedan 360x1000
lifeinmiddlemarch2
2albion
1theleasofus
1transcendentalist
Stormy Daniels 360x1000
storyparadox3
6albion
2defense
Spottswood William Robinson 360x1000
Storyparadox1
1empireofpain
4confidencegames
Brendan Beehan 360x1000
2transadentilist
1paradide
Margaret Fuller3 360x1000
3defense
1jesusandjohnwayne
399
Adam Gopnik 360x1000
George M Cohan and Lerarned Hand 360x1000
7albion
Thomas Piketty3 360x1000
12albion
14albion
Originally Published on forbes.com on July 31st, 2011
______________________________________
A C corporation is a taxable entity.  Distributions that it makes to its shareholders are also, generally, taxable to them.  People who don’t want to pay tax twice on the same income will make an S election.  The shareholders are taxed on whatever the earnings are regardless of distributions.  Distributions of those earnings will generally not be taxable.  It’s pretty easy if the corporation made the election effective day one of its existence.  Former C corporations have other problems.  If too much (more than 25%) of its income is “passive” the corporation pays a tax on that income.  If that continues for three years, it loses its S election.
Included in passive income is “rents”, but not all rents.  If the corporation is doing enough to manage the property then the rent is not passive.  The corporation in this ruling was doing enough:
X employs b full-time employees who directly perform services relating to the Properties. X also contracts with independent contractors to provide various services. X, through its employees or through the independent contractors, provides certain services with respect to the Properties, including: property inspection, common area maintenance and repair, including carpeting and painting; janitorial and cleaning services; maintenance and repair of building structural components, including roofs and facades; upkeep and repair of building systems (heating, air conditioning, plumbing, water and sewer, electrical and lighting); parking lot maintenance; landscape maintenance; snow removal; trash collection; pest control; providing security personnel; and the approval and supervision of capital improvements. X, Sub 1, Sub 2, and LLC or independent contractors also perform leasing and administrative functions, including: purchasing and developing new properties; negotiating and drafting individual leases; showing properties to prospective tenants; andhiring and supervising personnel assigned to perform theproperty management functions.
So the rental income of an S corporation that actively manages the real estate is not passive ? That is what the ruling says, but be sure not to make that statement in isolation.  It is valid for the S corporation sting tax and not losing an S election because of “passive” income.  There is also Code Section 469, the passive actvity loss rules. Those rules require us to put our trade or business activities into different buckets.  Losses from an activity in the passive bucket are suspended unless there is income from other activities in the same bucket (Losses are released when an activity is entirely disposed.)  Under those rules rental activities are “per se” passive.  There are, of course, exceptions to that rule involving items rented for very short periods or where the rental includes a lot of additional service, but that is not what is going on in this situation.  So the activity will still be “passive” for purposes of the passive activity loss rules.