Thu, Apr 17, 2014, 9:38 AM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 6 hrs 22 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Inergy, L.P. Message Board

lizahuang54321 758 posts  |  Last Activity: 17 hours ago Member since: Mar 20, 2010
  • lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 3:09 PM Flag

    That is correct, I believe. But it is no big deal to enter the few numbers.
    If you are entering the K-1 anyway, how much extra time does it take to enter the 13T numbers?
    Maybe one extra minute

  • Reply to

    K1 question about ETP, APU, and SXL

    by circuitest1 Mar 13, 2014 3:27 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 3:02 PM Flag

    You can file however you want, just be aware that doing it that way is not strictly correct and is against the explicit instructions. However I hardly imagine that the IRS would check beyond the main K-1 boxes so very slim chance you would ever get questioned on it.

  • Reply to

    K1 question about ETP, APU, and SXL

    by circuitest1 Mar 13, 2014 3:27 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 3:00 PM Flag

    since you asked me, I will just say that arbtrdr has given you the correct answer.
    It is not that K-1s are getting more complex, rather that a few MLPs are getting into convoluted ownership structures with one MLP owning an interest in another MLP. I don't get an ETP K-1 however have had this same issue with EPD before. Arb gives you the correct answer. I chose to keep it simple and just use the consolidated numbers which is not strictly correct but in my case hardly made any difference since the subsidiary MLP amounts were all very small. Furthermore I figured there is no way the IRS has any automated checking beyond the main boxes of the K-1 so extremely unlikely to be any consequence for my not doing the strictly correct way.

  • Reply to

    K1 question about ETP, APU, and SXL

    by circuitest1 Mar 13, 2014 3:27 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:56 PM Flag

    You probably won't get called on it, but that's not the correct way to do it and is in contradiction to specific instructions in the K-1. Just so long as you are aware you are willfully doing it wrong and disregarding the instructions.
    I have taken the same approach with EPD where the same issue arises. And I was aware that I was deliberately doing it wrong although the end result is hardly much different as the subsidiary MLP amounts were tiny.

  • lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:52 PM Flag

    they still predict EPB distribution unchanged at 65c for the next year (and in my opinion a few years).

  • Reply to

    ECT is better

    by wrgrace88888 Mar 4, 2014 7:50 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:49 PM Flag

    I mean the part about going into an ice age. I agree with the discounted cash flow approach. What I referred to as wacko was using the possibility of going into an ice age as an investment rationale.

  • Reply to

    K-1 and taxes

    by marklibera Mar 6, 2014 7:45 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:46 PM Flag

    If you held CMLP through the merger you get 2 K-1s: 1 for the old CMLP (final K-1) and one for the new one. But what marklibera was talking about was transferring suspended losses from one to the other - that is part of your individual tax situation and not something that is shown on the K-1. If it were a disposition via a sale, the tax software should free up those suspended losses and apply them automatically. However since this was not a sale, unless you do it manually those deferred losses would be lost. I manually move them to the new K-1 carryover section in Turbotax.

  • Reply to

    K-1s

    by redwandblue Mar 12, 2014 8:38 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:39 PM Flag

    they have been available online for some time already

  • Reply to

    I purchased this on June 12,2012

    by myyddogal Mar 10, 2014 11:06 AM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:37 PM Flag

    "We [USA] will soon become one of the largest exporters of LNG"

    Largest? Meaning 'in the world'? Sorry, no way.
    There will be exports but nowhere near largest in the world.

  • lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:35 PM Flag

    Best reason for going down is that the yield is very low even after the drops. That may mean that not everyone has internalized that distributions are going to be at the new rate for quite a few years. As people give up on distribution increases the price may fall further.
    I don't really see if going up for some time (couple of years) but the best reason is probably that the DCF is much higher than the new distribution level.
    My guess is that BWP stays in this range or drifts slowly lower (not considering any major events in overall markets) for quite some long time, like a couple of years. If anyone is interested in buying, they probably have a buying opportunity lasting several years. And since the yield is so low, why would you feel any need to hurry.

  • lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:29 PM Flag

    Very bad advice since this is an MLP not a stock.
    If you do that you unlock tax recapture at ordinary gain rates on all the distributions you have received while you were a holder. So if you owned a short time that might be OK, but if you owned for years you might end up with a big tax payable by doing this, just the opposite of what you expect. You need to learn the difference between stocks and MLPs.

  • Reply to

    4th Qtr Results

    by kohlbanjo Mar 12, 2014 3:43 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 16, 2014 2:02 PM Flag

    In addition people complaining about the price performance of BTE all forget the exchange rate factor. Less than a year ago the CDN:US $ rate was about 1.10. Now it is about 0.90.
    That's good for BTE and many canadian producers if they sell their product at US $ linked priced while their costs may be in CDN $. However the flip side is that for US holders the price as well as the distributions have dropped close to 20% purely due to exchange rate fluctuations.
    To look at the actual price performance of BTE, you really need to look at the TSX listed security priced in Canadian dollars

  • Reply to

    Gas Pipeline Not Needed ?

    by barebuttbob2015 Mar 5, 2014 10:18 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 6:02 PM Flag

    No, they just have to issue permits for the relevant export facility.
    They have been permitting quite a few recently.

    You are getting confused with crude oil, however there are loopholes in that ban.

  • Reply to

    BBEP's Current Position - My Thoughts

    by nosweat82 Mar 13, 2014 12:15 AM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 6:00 PM Flag

    I believe she has changed her yahoo ID. She is probably here using a different ID.
    Look for someone very knowlegable on partnership tax matters, invests/trades in upstream MLPs and only has posts dating back 2 or 3 weeks.

  • lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 5:46 PM Flag

    I guess the huge drop in gasoline supplies doesn't count?
    Total commercial petroleum inventories decreased by 1.6mb in this report.
    Hint: shoulder season. Happens every year around this time.

  • Reply to

    wheres Lisa after the large build

    by pobres Mar 12, 2014 11:20 AM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 5:44 PM Flag

    Build?
    "Total commercial petroleum inventories decreased by 1.6 million barrels last week."

    Not to mention Cushing down by another 1.3mb to 30.8mb compared to 49.3mb a year ago.

  • Reply to

    We will screw Russia with oil price!!!

    by nvdarocks Mar 12, 2014 10:39 AM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 5:41 PM Flag

    There have been several releases from the SPR under Obama's administration, however never followed by any restocking. How long till the SPR is to oil as Fort Knox is to the nation's gold?

  • Reply to

    K1 question

    by circuitest1 Mar 11, 2014 6:55 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 5:15 PM Flag

    "Next year (or maybe the year after; I forget when MLPs will be subject to basis reporting by the brokers), things may be different,"

    but how will they be able to do it without knowing the basis adjustments and the ordinary gain from the MLP. Wouldn't this require brokers getting the K-1s which they currently do not get?

  • Reply to

    K1 question

    by circuitest1 Mar 11, 2014 6:55 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 5:12 PM Flag

    The answer is that you do not enter the sale in your tax software in the same way as you enter sale of stock. Turbotax has a section in the K-1 interview where if you tick the box labelled "this partnership ended in 2013" will open a subsequent screen that allows you to enter your sale price, adjusted basis, ordinary gain and AMT adjustments. Then it automatically populates both form 4797 as well as schedule D. I know that Turbotax handles this correctly. If you are not using Turbotax then I cannot help you, however you should look for somewhere where it allows you to enter 'sale of business property'. Do not just enter it as a normal stock sale.

  • Reply to

    oh man

    by sshippersanremo Mar 10, 2014 6:36 PM
    lizahuang54321 lizahuang54321 Mar 14, 2014 5:02 PM Flag

    If you are using Turbotax it does handle it correctly. The ordinary gain part gets populated into form 4797.

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.