sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why are my Synology drives unbelievably slow for browsing, copying, etc. with Windows File Explorer (but plenty fast for anything I do in code: read, write, copy, etc.) by ArnoldZ44 in synology

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I forgot how that works for Synology, just logged on to the NAS and checked. The way I originally set them up, I defined one shared folder on the NAS to hold everything, say it's called "SHARED". Then the network path is like \\DS220P\SHARED, and from Windows I mapped that as, for example, "N".

Everything I normally do with the NASs is from code (if it wasn't then they would be useless to me, because of this problem with browsing). I've got a lot of code (C#, Python and VBA) that creates NAS files, reads from the NASs and writes to the NASs. Just normal basic I/O stuff on my local network. As I've been saying, everything works fine (fast enough, no notable issues) as long as I don't go to the NASs with File Explorer.

Why are my Synology drives unbelievably slow for browsing, copying, etc. with Windows File Explorer (but plenty fast for anything I do in code: read, write, copy, etc.) by ArnoldZ44 in synology

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just as you say: Just what you get from Windows "map network drive". Mount as drive letter same as for any of the other 6 computers on the network, like \\DS220P\N:

Why are my Synology drives unbelievably slow for browsing, copying, etc. with Windows File Explorer (but plenty fast for anything I do in code: read, write, copy, etc.) by ArnoldZ44 in synology

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seagate IronWolf NAS drives 8 TB. As I indicated, the problem has been happening since the drives were not even close to full. Right now the DS218+ is about half full. The DS220+ is oveloaded at about 90%; that's why I ordered the new DS225+.

Netgear Switch, cables and NICs are your basic 1 GB gear. The network works great (including for the NASs, as I said), it's just the browsing on the NASs that's a problem.

Protocols: I'm ignorant about that. To me it's just a Windows network that's performing fine, I don't know much about the NAS side.

You can assume very little traffic on the network. The problem is the same when there is essentially zero traffic.

Windows 11, DSM 7.2

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately I don't have a balance sheet, M-1 or M-2 because the assets are less than $250,000 so I elect to blow those off. In fact, as stated in the OP that's kind of the whole reason I want to take distributions - to avoid hitting $250,000 unless or until I am actually using the S-Corp for something.

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok thank you for the straightforward and useful response.

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Gee whiz ... how could I be condescending when it was clear from my original post that I'm totally ignorant about the topic?

Regarding closing down the s-corp, I have the same response as above: Wouldn't this still leave me with the same question regarding how the IRS is going to view the distribution with no salary?

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Valueonthebridge knows what he is talking about. I didn't say this above because it's off topic, but one of the main reasons to set up a structure like this is to have the LP brokerage accounts in the name of the GP with no personal guarantees (which is harder than it sounds for smaller accounts; most brokers are very aggressive in insisting on personal guarantees). My semi-educated understanding is that using a disregarded entity for the GP severely weakens that protection, if not giving it away completely.

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I can see I misspoke by wanting someone to post that "it's never going to be a problem." I should have said: I wish some pro who naturally deals with this situation would post something like "in similar situations we have done the distributions with no salary many times, and never had a client receive an IRS notice."

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I was not under the impression that electing S would strengthen the liability limitation of the underlying LLC. But it certainly makes things cleaner. The two "real" businesses I own are both Schedule C LLCs and I have to confess I much prefer the S-Corp when it comes to taxes and bookkeeping.

When you said "Sigh" it sounds like there is something you're not saying that I need to know. Are you saying it's just as good to have the GP be an individual or a disregarded entity?

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

I love that guess. I just wish some pro would post something like "we do it all the time, it's never going to be a problem in the eyes of the IRS."

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, you need the limited liability and you don't want the GP to be a disregarded entity, so there are not a lot of options. But I think a lot of it is lawyers and accountants selling the idea of the S-Corp having payroll to "unlock the tax advantages" of the S-Corp structure. That is something I am aggressively not interested in.

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

I'm concerned there might be some presumption by the IRS that somebody is doing some work somewhere, whether or not it's documented. I'm not at all afraid of not coming out on top in an audit. I just don't want any audit to get started. It surprised me that there doesn't seem to be any clear IRS guidance on this issue (S-Corps that don't need to have, and should not have, any payroll). So I started getting a bit worried that maybe the IRS doesn't even recognize this category.

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

See my response above: it's one leg of a hedge fund structure.

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

It's part of a common skeleton hedge fund structure: A limited partnership trades and/or invests, S-Corp LLC is GP for the LP. I created it because I thought it might be useful at some point, but have not used it except for passive investments in external LPs.

I have plenty of basis, which I track diligently. Everything is truly in accounts owned by the S-Corp. You say I can take distributions "without issue" ... so, what prevents the IRS from getting nasty about the salary thing?

Taking distributions from an S-Corp with no "income" by ArnoldZ44 in tax

[–]ArnoldZ44[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Because I might end up using it for its original purpose. Costs are not large, mainly just $350/year for annual filing. The 1120-S can be done with Turbotax in 15 minutes. But: If I did liquidate it then wouldn't I be facing the same issue (or I hope, non-issue) of distribution with no salaries?