Final answer:
The at-risk rules correctly prevent the inclusion of nonrecourse debt in tax basis, and the passive-activity loss rules rightfully prevent deducting losses from passive activities against active income. Rental income is taxed to the owner of the property, not the person receiving the checks on their behalf.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement about the at-risk rules is True. These rules are designed to prevent taxpayers from writing off nonrecourse debt in their tax basis, meaning if there's no personal liability for the debt, it cannot be counted as part of the investment which the taxpayer is "at risk" for.
Regarding the passive-activity loss rules, this statement is also True. These rules prevent taxpayers from using losses incurred from passive activities to offset other non-passive income, like wages, thus aiming to make sure that losses are deducted only against income generated from similar types of passive activities.
For the scenario involving rental income being sent to the taxpayer's daughter, the statement is False. The tax liability for income generally follows the owner of the income-producing asset – in this case, the taxpayer who owns the apartment building – not the person who merely receives the checks.