SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: cyesp who wrote (97815)3/11/2008 5:59:29 AM
From: Ed Ajootian  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 206372
 
cyesp, thanks, it looks like, before depletion expense, they had slightly higher taxable income than the amount of distributions.

Not sure what the depletion expense would be. Not sure what to make of your entry "20w3 total sust depl $218". Per the IRS instructions to K-1, Box 20, code "W", line 3 is supposed to represent "basis in qualifying advanced coal project property". Somewhere in the materials they sent you they should have given you your share of the partnership's gross income from oil & gas, your share of the partnership's cost basis of its oil & gas properties, and your share of the amount of "cost depletion" that could be taken for the year. Generally your depletion expense is the greater of your share of the cost depletion or 15% times your share of the partnership's gross income from oil & gas.

As things are turning out for me, at least for this year, I am indifferent regarding what amount of taxable income will be generated by my investment in DMLP, since it now appears that I will generate more than enough investment interest expense to soak up any such income in any event. Usually I like to preserve my investment interest expenses to soak up STCG, but as of this point those seem to be few & far between. I have some big wins in the portfolio (BPZ the biggest of course) but most of those are either already LTCG or soon to turn into LTCG.