I agree regarding the first point and do not identify myself with the tone used in the explanation. Regarding the second point, I must add that I am not a lawyer but once its established legally that "shall" can mean "may" (<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="
https://legaldictionary.lawin.org/shall">https://legaldictionary.lawin.org/shall</a>), the term shall being mandatory seems debatable. Based on my interactions with a few CPAs, I have heard different arguments about the election being applicable to the foreign rental property. While making the choice for new rental its easy to select 40 years. However, if the property is already under GDS does it really need to be converted to ADS along with prior amendments and form 3115 considering the language could be permissive. It looks like lots of people are in the similar situation so clearly there are CPA professionals interpreting it as a permissive language. Is there an official way to confirm this with AICPA?
