iseedit - 4/23/2017 10:13

Well, it may not help the owner at sale time, but a person (land owner) could die - then the adjusted basis kicks in - if I'm not mistaken ?

Really, the capital gains isn't all that bad, considering what it used to be.

If the land has natural resources - those could be priced separately, sold and the overall value of the land reduced - BUT, the resource values would be taxed at regular income rates (more then capital gain rates) . . . . .

Capital gains are a better deal then regular income tax rates . . . . .

1031 trades can be a good deal, but - who knows what the future of cap gains will bring when that asset is sold/liquidated.

Many of the Large intercity skyscrapers/buildings are investments for the future (very little if any return the first 25yrs), the investors make they money off the cap gains at the time of sale (25 yrs or longer up to 100 yrs later). I'm not sure how all that works, the investors seem to like such investments. Of course location, location, location . . . .

What I'm getting at is - capital gains isn't bad, just pay it and put that money back to use earning more, if you can't 1031 into something that will "work" at retuning similar returns . . .. . . . .

Edit: On a side note: during the 2008 depression land / building blow up - I know of 5 guys that went bankrupt. Why, they didn't want to pay capital gains . . . . multi-millionaires (had holdings of 10plus million), lost it all. All because they didn't want to pay capital gains on the sales before everything blew up.