@Carl wrote:
I am still preoccupied with these purported "court decisions" that specify some sort of time constraint.
I've looked for something pertaining to that off and on for the last 2-3 days now and also find nothing.
I think what they may be alluding to is this:
If the closing date on the sale is in fact, more than three years after the property was no longer your primary residence, then there's no way to meet the base requirement of it being your primary residence for 2 of the last 5 years you owned it, counting back from the date of the sale.
Whether they are alluding to "court decisions" or not, the fact of the matter is that the safe harbors in the applicable Reg has no requirement for the sale to happen shortly after the circumstances, as @AmeliesUncle stated in an earlier post, which would indicate that the taxpayer could qualify for a partial exclusion.
If a court decision has interpreted the Code and Reg otherwise, I would certainly appreciate a cite to that decision.
[note that, quite obviously, if on the closing date of the sale more than three years have passed since the taxpayer has used the property as a principal residence, the typical taxpayer will not qualify for the full exclusion - and the full exclusion is not at issue here]
