A taxpayer with some rental properties comes into a nontaxable major windfall and decides to do some long-needed work on these properties. He spends $100,000 on significant renovations to each property, completely overhauling all of them at the same time for a signficant increase in their value and usability. He tries to take this $100,000 against the rental income as an expense and his return is later selected for audit. Why? 

a. The IRS have a "thing" against landlords. 

b. He tried to take an expense without considering that tax free income cannot be used in any circumstance to generate an expense against taxable income. 

c. Significant overhauls and massive changes to property with long usable lives should likely be mostly, if not all, capitalized and depreciated instead of being deducted in total. 

d. All expenses over $75,000 are immediately eligible for audit as a statutory protection against fraud.