Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course a buyer is allowed to accept their commission if they're licensed. However, the smarter thing to do is reduce the sales price by the amount of the commission so they're not having to pay taxes on it as income, nor give any split to their broker. That's what I've done for my last 3 houses.
Why wouldn't the price reduction instead of receiving a sales commission be subject to taxes? Wouldn't that be a form of tax evasion? Seems foolish admitting to it on a public forum.
Why wouldn't the price reduction instead of receiving a sales commission be subject to taxes? Wouldn't that be a form of tax evasion? Seems foolish admitting to it on a public forum.
No, it is not tax evasion. There is no income. There is no deduction of overhead costs, business expenses.
It is just a lower price on the home.
No, it is not tax evasion. There is no income. There is no deduction of overhead costs, business expenses.
It is just a lower price on the home.
So, if the buyer is also acting as the buyer's agent, where is the commission? The agent was enriched nonetheless through the transaction. Sort of reminds me of those with foreclosures that are faced with paying taxes on what they save by walking away from the property.
I didn't intend for this to be become the "tax cop" thread!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.