 So let's say this is a 15 year loan as opposed to a 30 year loan. We may be able to just say, okay, I'd like to just do a straight line method. And then I'm just gonna populate over 15 years. So if I go back on over, that's another item that we might have included. So now we've got the amortization of the points that we're dealing with. And again, it's a fairly small amount of 61. It would be even smaller if it was a 30 year loan. I wanted to make it 15 so it doesn't look like we're amortizing it over like the 27.5 years similar to the building, but rather according to the life of the loan. All right, and so the next thing that we might have depreciation related to, so if I go back to my schedule E, are things like equipment or stuff like that, that's not improvements, but we're gonna put them in there as three year property, five year property, seven year property. Again, from our standpoint, if I can allocate something as repairs, more repairs, I would like to do that. If not, I would like to not call it improvements, but rather call it three, five or seven year property if I'm able to do that because I'm depreciating over a shorter life, getting the expense sooner and possibly able to use a 179 special deduction and or the accelerated depreciation methods. So if I do that, let's go over and say that we had something like equipment or something that we're using for our rental business or whatever. It's gonna be going to three and then we're gonna say this is going to be machinery and equipment, let's say, and we're gonna say, let's say this is going in as of 707.1522, and let's say that it is 8,000 for the equipment. So now I'm gonna say this is five year property. So if it's five year property, we gotta be careful with the auto limits. I'm not gonna choose the straight line. Usually I'm gonna choose maker's five year property because that gives me a double declining. I could opt to use a straight line if I wanted to, but usually you would want the maximum that is default because that's gonna give you the double declining method. Now also note that if I just do that and I pull over here and I go into my depreciation schedules and let's see the full schedule. So now we've got amortization, building improvements, land, and we have page number. Where's my equipment? And the equipment, there it is, the scroll down is quite slow. So we've got the equipment and by default, it took the 179 special, so it allows us to depreciate all of it upfront. Great, usually that's quite good oftentimes. So if you can get the special depreciation or 179, that's usually beneficial. If you can't do that, then you might be able to take the 179 deduction. So if I was to say instead of the special, I'm gonna take the 179, 8,000 on the 179. If I'm able to do that, you have a similar kind of scenario which in essence allows you to kind of expense it upfront. Basically allows you to just expense it. Why didn't you just let me, why don't you just let me call it repairs or expense or machinery expense or whatever if you're gonna let me do that. But so you can get into the weeds and nuances of the 179 and the special depreciation, but you would think as time passes, those are more political things that are trying to manipulate the economy and make people look good and stuff like that. So you would think that those may come and go, but then the underlying depreciation will remain. So let's remove that just to look at the maker's depreciation. And see it that way. So I've now elected and basically the way it works is that if you have the 179 deduction, you take that and then if you don't take that, it'll default to the special deduction. And then if you elect not to take the special deduction, which you wouldn't normally do unless you expect future years to have more revenue than the current year, in which case you're gonna say, hey look, I'd rather get the benefit in future years when my tax rates will be higher due to the progressive tax system. But then we can see we get this double declining. So you can compare this. This one up here is the straight line mid month convention, 27 and a half years. This is a 200 DB double declining method. In essence, HW half year convention that we have for five years. And so if I was to calculate that, then it would be something like, okay, 8,000 divided by five. That would be the straight line rate it matches, but this is for six months. This is for a full year. So if I was to say, okay, if I divide this by the 8,000, the rate is 2%, which I can also get by taking one over five, double the rate times two, because we're doubling it 40% times 8,000. That would be the amount for the full year. If it was for 12 months rather than six months, then I divide it by two to get the six months. That's where that 1,006 is. It looks the same as straight line, but it's not. And we could see in year two, what we would have to do is take the 8,000 minus the 1,600 is that times the 0.4, which is 2,5, and so we could see that calculation over here for year two. There's the 2,560 in year two. So it's a little bit of a, well it's a much messier calculation than the straight line, although the half year is a little bit smoother than the mid month convention. Now the other common issue that you have is the same kind of issue with the schedule C and that's gonna be the auto and travel. So the question there is, are you gonna be using a mileage method or are you gonna be using a direct method? If you use a direct method, then you have some limitations for the auto oftentimes, because they don't wanna allow you as big a deduction up front with the auto limits. So if you're using auto, then three, it's gonna be automobile. It was in 0,2, 0,3, 2,2. Let's say it was 20,000 auto and we're gonna say then we've got the straight line makers five year auto limits. So that's the main thing that you wanna note here that we have those, the auto limits in place. So I don't wanna dive, I don't wanna go into them in a lot of detail but you can imagine the same kind of problems with the auto that we have with the schedule C, which is that do I wanna use the percentage method? Do I wanna use the direct method? If I use the direct method, I've got the depreciation and I still have to think about, do I need to allocate it between the rental and the personal kind of situation? Also which of those two methods are gonna be most beneficial for me to take? And that will depend on not just the current year which oftentimes will be the direct method but if you use the direct method and the current year it could lock you into using the direct method because the iris is skeptical of you taking more depreciation in period one and then switching to the mileage method because then you'd be taking a big lump sum up front and then you'd get the added benefit of the mileage method which is supposed to even everything out. So that's where you're a little bit limited, you gotta plan out into the future as to whether or not which method would be better, direct method or the mileage method.