On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:01:34 -0500, Ignoramus17245
wrote:

On 2008-08-27, Leon Fisk wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:41:43 -0500, Ignoramus17245
wrote:

On 2008-08-27, Jon Anderson wrote:
Talk to an enrolled agent, you might be better off leasing
the equipment to the business. Being a lease, the cost is a
write off.

But Grant would get rental income, which he would need to report, it
is a wash.

Jon

From what Grant has said in the past his type of work has risk
involved, ie being sued. If the company owns the equipment an
unfavorable outcome from a lawsuit could easily take all the
equipment/tools that he owns.

And if the business owner mixes private and corporate business, then
his corporate veil may be pierced and personal assets taken anyway.

It takes a substantial effort to maintain enough separation. Something
that I decided is not worth doing and is unlikely to succeed, for me
(I had a corporation for appx. 10 years). My own approach is to avoid
things that could expose me to big liability.

i

It was always questionable if it would actually work as
intended. There was also "estate planning" involved, which I
understood added some more protection.

One never really knows about this kind of stuff until
actually tested by a suit. Just about everything has some
sort of liability though. If it appears that you have lots
of money, the greater are the chances someone will try and
make an issue of it (shrug).

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email