All States 1031 Exchange Facilitators logo
1031 Exchanges Construction Exchanges Reverse Exchanges Tenants in Common 1031 Exchange News & Events

Archive for the ‘1031 Exchange Basics’ Category

Like-kind exchange relief for those snared by QIs in bankruptcy or receivership

Wednesday, March 10th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

The IRS has at long last granted relief for taxpayers who were unable to timely complete a like-kind exchange because their qualified intermediary (QI) entered into bankruptcy or receivership. IRS will not treat taxpayers as being in actual or constructive receipt of exchange proceeds if they cannot complete an exchange because of a default of a QI in bankruptcy or receivership. Affected taxpayers may use a special safe harbor method to report gain or loss.

The IRS received many comments on this issue and has been promising action on it for a long time.  As far back as 2007, when the real estate market started heading south in many areas, the IRS wrote Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) to say that IRS was considering whether it was appropriate for it to extend relief where QIs went bankrupt.  In substantially similar letters written to a number of Washington legislators in mid-2009, the IRS again said it was considering relief measures.

Background.  In general, no gain or loss is recognized on the exchange of property held for productive use in a trade or business or for investment if the property is exchanged solely for property of a like kind which is held either for productive use in a trade or business or for investment. (Code Sec. 1031)  Under Code Sec. 1031(a)(3), for a deferred exchange to be treated as tax-free, a taxpayer must identify the replacement property within 45 days of the transfer of the relinquished property and must acquire the replacement property by the earlier of 180 days after the date on which the taxpayer transfers the property relinquished in the exchange, or the due date (determined with regard to extensions) of the taxpayer’s federal income tax return for the year in which the transfer of the relinquished property occurs.  Absent relief, if the statutory timing requirements are met, a taxpayer would have to treat the relinquished property as having been disposed of in a taxable sale or exchange.

The regulations allow a taxpayer to use a QI to facilitate a like-kind exchange. (Reg. §1.1031(k)-1(g)(4))  When a taxpayer uses a QI, generally he will transfer the relinquished property to the QI, who sells the property to a buyer.  The QI then takes the proceeds of the sale of the relinquished property, buys the replacement property, and transfers the replacement property to the taxpayer. If the taxpayer receives the replacement property within the period in Code Sec. 1031(a)(3) and meets the other Code Sec. 1031 requirements, he is treated as having engaged in a like-kind exchange of property with the QI and he will not recognize gain on the exchange.

Victims of the recession and the troubled real estate markets. In Rev Proc 2010-14, IRS says it is aware of situations in which taxpayers initiated like-kind exchanges by transferring relinquished property to a QI but were unable to complete the exchanges within the statutory time period solely due to the failure of the QI to acquire and transfer replacement property to the taxpayer (a “QI default”). In many of these cases, the QI enters bankruptcy or receivership, thus preventing the taxpayer from obtaining immediate access to the relinquished property’s sale proceeds.

The IRS says it’s generally of the view that in such situations, a taxpayer should not have to recognize gain from the failed exchange until the tax year in which he receives a payment attributable to the relinquished property.

Who is entitled to relief. A taxpayer is entitled to relief under Rev Proc 2010-14 if he:

(1) Transferred relinquished property to a QI in accordance with Reg. §1.1031(k)-1(g)(4).

(2) Properly identified replacement property within the identification period (unless the QI default occurs during that period).

(3) Did not complete the like-kind exchange solely because of a QI default involving a QI that becomes subject to a bankruptcy proceeding or a receivership proceeding under federal or state law.

(4) Did not, without regard to any actual or constructive receipt by the QI, have actual or constructive receipt of the proceeds from the disposition of the relinquished property or any property of the QI before the QI entered bankruptcy or receivership. For purposes of this condition, relief of a liability under the exchange agreement before the QI default, either through the assumption or satisfaction of the liability in connection with the transfer of the relinquished property or through the transfer of the relinquished property subject to the liability, is disregarded.

Relief provisions. Rev Proc 2010-14, Sec. 4, provides that a taxpayer meeting the above conditions recognizes gain on the disposition of the relinquished property only as required under the safe harbor gross profit ratio method, and only as he receives payments attributable to that property.

Under the safe harbor gross profit ratio method, the portion of any payment attributable to the relinquished property that is recognized as gain is found by multiplying the payment by a fraction, having the taxpayer’s gross profit as the numerator, and having the taxpayer’s contract price as the denominator. For this purpose:

  • A payment attributable to the relinquished property means a payment of proceeds, damages, or other amounts attributable to the disposition of the relinquished property (other than selling expenses), whether paid by the QI, the bankruptcy or receivership estate of the QI, the QI’s insurer or bonding company, or any other person. Unless it exceeds adjusted basis, satisfied indebtedness is not a payment attributable to the relinquished property.
  • Gross profit means the selling price of the relinquished property, minus the taxpayer’s adjusted basis in it (increased by any selling expenses not paid by the QI using proceeds from the sale of the relinquished property).
  • The selling price of the relinquished property is generally the amount realized on its sale, without reduction for selling expenses. But if a court order, confirmed bankruptcy plan, or written notice from the trustee or receiver specifies, by the end of the first tax year in which the taxpayer receives a payment attributable to the relinquished property, an amount to be received by the taxpayer in full satisfaction of his claim, the selling price of the relinquished property is the sum of the payments attributable to the relinquished property (including satisfied indebtedness in excess of basis) received or to be received and the amount of any satisfied indebtedness not in excess of the adjusted basis of the relinquished property.
  • The contract price is the selling price of the relinquished property minus the amount of any satisfied indebtedness not in excess of the property’s adjusted basis. Satisfied indebtedness means any mortgage or encumbrance on the relinquished property that was assumed or taken subject to by the buyer or satisfied in connection with the transfer of the relinquished property.

Rev Proc 2010-14, Sec. 4, has detailed rules covering situations involving satisfied indebtedness exceeding adjusted basis, recapture income, and imputed interest.

A Code Sec. 165 loss deduction may be claimed for the amount, if any, by which the adjusted basis of the relinquished property exceeds the sum of (1) the payments attributable to that property (including satisfied indebtedness in excess of basis), plus (2) the amount of any satisfied indebtedness not in excess of basis. Those claiming a loss deduction may also claim a Code Sec. 165 loss deduction for the amount of any gain recognized in accordance with Rev Proc 2010-14, Sec. 4, in a prior tax year.

Illustration: Mr. Able, a calendar year taxpayer owned investment property (Property 1) with a fair market value of $1.5 million and an adjusted basis of $500,000.  He entered into an agreement with QI to facilitate a deferred like-kind exchange. On May 6, Year 1, Able transferred Property 1 to QI and QI transferred the property to a third party in exchange for $1.5 million. Able intended that the QI use the money held by it to acquire Able’s replacement property. On June 1, Year 1, Able identified Property 2 as replacement property. On June 15, Year 1, QI notified Able that it filed for bankruptcy protection and could not acquire replacement property. As a result, Able failed to acquire Property 2 or any other replacement property within the exchange period. As of December Year 1, QI’s bankruptcy proceedings are on-going and Able has received none of the $1.5 million proceeds from QI or any other source.

On July 1, Year 2, QI exits from bankruptcy and the bankruptcy court approves the trustee’s final report, which shows that Able will be paid $1.3 million in full satisfaction of QI’s obligation under the exchange agreement. Able receives the $1.3 million on August 4, Year 2 and does not receive any other payment attributable to the relinquished property.

Under Rev Proc 2010-14, Able is not required to recognize gain in Year 1 because he did not receive any payments attributable to the relinquished property in that year. He recognizes gain in Year 2, as follows:

… His selling price is $1.3 million, i.e., the payments attributable to the relinquished property (the amount specified by the trustee before the end of the first tax year in which he receives a payment attributable to the relinquished property).

… His contract price also is $1.3 million because there is no satisfied or assumed indebtedness.

… His gross profit is $800,000 (the selling price of $1.3 million less his $500,000 adjusted basis).

… His gross profit ratio is 80/130 (gross profit over the contract price).

… Able’s recognized gain in Year 2 is $800,000 (the $1.3 million payment attributable to the relinquished property multiplied by the gross profit ratio (80/130)).

Even though the payment attributable to the relinquished property ($1.3 million) is less than the $1.5 million that the QI received, Able is not entitled to a Code Sec. 165 loss deduction because the payment attributable to the relinquished property exceeds his adjusted basis in the relinquished property ($500,000). (Rev Proc 2010-14, Sec. 4.10, Ex. 1)

Rev Proc 2010-14 carries four other detailed examples illustrating nuances of the new safe-harbor relief.

Effective date of relief. Rev Proc 2020-14 is effective for taxpayers whose like-kind exchanges fail due to a QI default occurring on or after January 1, 2009.  A taxpayer who is within the scope of Rev Proc 2020-14 may, subject to the Code Sec. 6511 limitations on credit or refund, file an original or amended return to report a deferred like-kind exchange that failed due to a QI default in a tax year ending before January 1, 2009, in accordance with Rev Proc 2010-14.

What do I do if my TIC is in trouble?

Saturday, February 20th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

Alexandra L. Hart, CES® and I have been asked this question almost every other day for the past several months.  With the national commercial real estate and financial markets in turmoil, many investments that seemed solid only a year or two or three ago are now floundering.  Lenders are beginning foreclosure proceedings or are negotiating with the owners to take back a deed in lieu of foreclosure.  Buildings are being sold in so-called short sales.  And, lenders are selling off the promissory notes at deep discounts.  In other instances, the banks are not taking any immediate action, but the sponsors are offering to buy out investors for the amount of their investment.  Sometimes, individual investors are concerned and want to sell their interests, thus giving the other co-tenants an opportunity to buy a larger percentage for a small amount.tic-foreclosure

The question that we are continually asked is “What is my tax exposure?”  As a tax lawyer, I have been trained to answer “Well, it depends.”

In every TIC I know of, the property is encumbered by non-recourse debt.  Non-recourse debt is a loan made by a lender (could be a bank, an insurance company, a pension plan or some other type of lender) which debt is secured only by the property.  The key feature of non-recourse debt is that no one is personally liable for the debt and the lender can look only to the property for repayment.  As long as the rents are able to cover the expenses of the property and make the mortgage payments, then the lender typically feels comfortable.  However, if the cash flow only covers the expenses and the investors do not receive any distributions, then the investors are not comfortable.  Once the cash flow fails to cover the expenses, then the trouble really begins. 

Sometimes the sponsor or property manager will make a cash call.  If one or more of the owners is not willing or able to contribute enough cash, then the tenant-in-common agreement generally provides that the non-contributing owner either has to sell his or her interest, or the property has to be sold.  In any event, if there is insufficient cash to cover the expenses, the lender will eventually take action.

In most of these cases, the TIC investors do not contribute additional cash.  Thus, the lender starts the process of taking back or selling the property.  Because the debt is non-recourse, the lender cannot go after the TIC owners, and cannot force the TIC owners to pay any money.  So, the TIC owners generally lose the property, and their investment, but that is the extent of their losses.

These investors are convinced that they have sustained a loss for tax purposes.  In almost every instance, that is not the case.  For tax purposes, if a property that is encumbered by non-recourse debt is foreclosed upon or transferred back to the lender by a deed in lieu of foreclosure, the investor is treated for tax purposes as if he or she sold their interest in the property for their share of the non-recourse debt.  For tax purposes, this is known as the amount realized.  Taxable gain is calculated as the amount realized minus the adjusted tax basis of the property.

So, the next issue is to determine the investors’ adjusted tax basis in the property.  Most of the TIC owners acquired the TIC interest as a replacement property in a 1031 exchange.  If so, then their adjusted tax basis in the TIC interest is determined, in whole or in part, based on their adjusted tax basis in the property or properties that they sold in the 1031 exchange(s).  If the investor traded up in value on the 1031 exchange, then the investor may have added to his or her adjusted tax basis.  Any investor facing this dilemma should consult a qualified CPA or tax attorney who can make these complicated calculations.

Non-recourse debt that is forgiven does not result in cancellation of indebtedness income (”COD income”).  COD income can be generated only from recourse debt.  COD income is subject to a completely different set of tax rules.  So, investors should not become confused with how the COD income rules operate.

The character of the gain on the foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of a TIC interest is likely to be capital.  The holding period of the TIC interest is determined, to some extent, based upon the holding period the investor had in his or her relinquished property or properties from the 1031 exchange.  However, if the investor traded up in value, he or she could have a split holding period.  In order to enjoy the lower long-term capital gains tax rates, the property has to have been held for more than twelve months.  In calculating the 12-month holding period, the investor may be able to tack on the holding period from his or her relinquished property.  Again, any investor in this situation needs to consult a qualified CPA or tax attorney.

Remember also that there is no bright-line test for how long a property has to be held to qualify as “held for investment” for purposes of section 1031.  There is no 2-year rule, 1-year rule or any other hard and fast rule.

In summary, the investor is treated as having sold the TIC interest in an amount equal to his or her share of the non-recourse debt.  The investor will recognize gain or loss on this deemed sale based on his or her adjusted tax basis.  In addition, the investor must determine his or her holding period.

The good news is that for investors facing a large tax bill, they may be able to defer the tax by effectuating another 1031 exchange.  Click here for more information about “coffin or “no equity” exchanges.

For more information about these issues, or to ask questions about a specific scenario, please contact Alexandra L. Hart, CES® by e-mail at AHart@AllStates1031.com or by phone toll-free at 877-395-1031 ext. 217.

How To Purchase 1031 Replacement Property at an Auction

Monday, February 15th, 2010 by Moore McLaughlin

Alexandra L. Hart, CES® at All States 1031 Exchange Facilitator, LLC has been asked several times recently about how to buy replacement property at an auction.  While there is certainly nothing in section 1031 that specifically prohibits or disqualifies such replacement property, the real problem lies in the process and logistics of the auction process.  Most of the auctions are being held in connection with a mortgage foreclosure.

AuctionAt most auctions, the bidders must show a certified check in a certain minimum amount, such check being evidence of the ability to make a deposit payment.  Other than proof of ability to pay, and proof of identification, very little is required.  Standard purchase and sale agreement are not typically used.  The issues affecting the 1031 exchange include meeting the identification rules, assignment to the qualified intermediary of the right to buy the replacement property, and potential constructive receipt and boot issues.

In many auctions outside the 1031 arena, the bidders will bring a certified check payable to themselves.  If they are the successful bidder, they will endorse the check to the seller or the auctioneer.  In the 1031 world, if the QI issues a certified check payable to the exchanger, and then the exchanger endorses the check to the auctioneer, the IRS will likely assert that such amount was received by the exchanger and taxable as boot.  Furthermore, the payment could possibly disqualify the entire exchange as a distribution in violation of the specific restrictions (known as the g(6) limitations (see Treasury Regulation Section 1.1031(k)-1(g)(6)) on payments from the exchange account.  In other words, issuing a check payable to the exchanger is not a good idea.

One alternative is, prior to the auction, ask the auctioneer for the name of a title company they trust and have the QI place the exchange funds with them subject to the acceptance of the bid.  The exchanger can take blank assignment of contract documents with them to the auction to be executed in the event that they are the successful bidder.

Another alternative is to have a certified check issued by the QI to the auctioneer to be used in the event of a successful bid.  Otherwise, the check is returned to the QI.

Or, if the exchanger is trading up in value, the exchanger can use his or her own funds.

Other solutions could be found in particular situations.  If you are contemplating purchasing a replacement property through the auction process, be sure to contact Alexandra L. Hart, CES® or F. Moore McLaughlin, Esq., CPA, CES® to determine the best alternative.  You can reach Alexandra at AHart@AllStates1031.com or toll-free at 1-877-395-1031 extension 217.


1031 Exchanges Become More Valuable in Rhode Island

Sunday, December 13th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

1031 exchanges gained significant value recently in Rhode Island thanks to the state legislature and the Governor.  The leaders of Rhode Island determined that raising the Rhode Island tax rate on capital gains from 1.67% to 9.9% was good for the economic viability of the state.  These leaders did not really explain the basis for such a determination, they just passed the bill.  This enormous rate increase will take effect for sales after December 31, 2009.

So, in order to avoid this additional tax, a 1031 exchange should be considered.  See our website for the basics of 1031 exchanges and the types of properties that are eligible.  But, for the right types of properties and for the right investor, the 1031 exchange will allow the Rhode Island tax to be deferred.

For more information on the Rhode Island tax, contact All States 1031 Exchange Facilitator, LLC owner F. Moore McLaughlin, IV, Esq., CPA, CES at 877-395-1031 or by e-mail at fmm@AllStates1031.com.

Non-Resident Tax Withholding and 1031 Exchanges

Monday, November 23rd, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

Because we handle 1031 exchanges in every state, we are frequently asked about the tax laws of individual states.  Alexandra L. Hart, CES® and I always encourage exchangers to seek tax and legal advice from their own professionals, who are generally more knowledgeable about local laws and the exchangers’ particular circumstances.  One of the most frequently asked questions involves non-resident tax withholding.Non-Resident Withholding

In many states, when an individual or entity that is not a resident of the state is selling real property, the state may impose a capital gains tax or other income tax.  Because the seller is not a resident of the state, the state assumes that the seller will not file a tax return for that state.  Once the property has been sold, the seller may have no further contacts within the state.  If the seller does not voluntarily file a tax return and pay the tax, the state may never collect the tax. 

As a measure to make sure all taxes are collected, most states have implemented a mechanism whereby the closing attorney or escrow company is required to withhold a portion of the sales proceeds and remit them to the state.  In most cases, the amount required to be withheld is based on the gross selling price, not the actual amount of the gain.  The reason for this technique is to make sure the taxes are collected, but without requiring an inquiry into the tax basis and other tax attributes of the seller.  If too much is withheld, the seller can file a non-resident income tax return and claim a refund, if one is due.

Many states recognize 1031 exchanges and adopt the federal tax rules.  As a result, exchangers who complete a valid 1031 exchange, with no boot, will owe no taxes to the state.  If taxes are withheld and then later returned to the exchanger, then such amounts could be treated as boot, and subject the exchanger to tax; which is quite a bad outcome.

To ameliorate this Catch-22 scenario, states typically allow an exchanger to provide a statement or certificate at the closing which relieves the closing agent from the requirement to withhold any amounts for taxes.  In Rhode Island, the form is known as Form 71.3.  Other states have similar forms or processes.  Some states require the seller to request the certificate days or weeks in advance of the closing.

So, if you are selling real estate located in a state in which you or the selling entity is not a resident, call us or check with your tax professional to determine whether non-resident withholding is required and, if it is, whether an exception exists for 1031 exchanges. Please click here to find some of the state non-resident withholding forms. Or click here for links to the various state websites.

Please contact us with any questions you may have.  You can reach Alexandra L. Hart CES® at 877-395-1031 or by e-mail at AHart@AllStates1031.com.

Exchanging Real Estate Intangibles

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

When exchanging real estate, the exchanger must acquire property that is like-kind to the property that was sold.  Like-kind in connection with real estate is defined as “all other real estate.”  The types of property that qualify are very broad.  For example, raw land will be like-kind with improved real estate.  An office building is like-kind with an apartment building.  Real estate in Massachusetts or Rhode Island is like-kind with real estate in Florida, Texas or Arizona.conservation-easement

Further, a partial or fractional interest in real estate is like-kind to a full or fee simple interest in real estate.  So, an exchanger could sell a fee simple interest in real estate and purchase a tenant-in-common interest in real estate.

Recently, a series of rulings have been issued by the IRS which confirms that certain intangible interests in real estate are like-kind to fee simple interests in real estate.

Conservation Easements

In Private Letter Ruling (PLR) 9621012, the IRS ruled that the exchange of a “perpetual scenic conservation easement” (PSCE) for a fee simple interest in land that was either timberland, a ranch, or a farm qualifies for tax-free treatment under section 1031.  A PSCE means any limitation in a deed in the form of an easement, restriction, covenant, or condition, the purpose of which is to retain land predominantly in its natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, forested, or open-space condition.  Under a PSCE, the subject property remains as scenic open space in perpetuity, and its owner is not able to develop the property.  The ruling is based on a state’s civil code, which provides that a conservation easement is an interest in real property voluntarily created and freely transferable in whole or in part.  Assuming the PSCE is, by virtue of state law, an interest in real property, the exchange of the PSCE for the proposed replacement property qualifies as an exchange of like-kind property for purposes of Section 1031.

In PLR 9232030, the IRS ruled that an agricultural conservation easement on a farm is of like kind to a fee simple interest in real estate.

In PLR 200201007, the IRS ruled that a taxpayer’s exchange of a perpetual conservation easement (PCE) on a ranch for other ranch property that would be subject to a PCE upon receipt by the taxpayer qualifies for like-kind exchange treatment under Section 1031.

In PLR 200651018, the IRS ruled that a perpetual stewardship easement as described in the ruling is of like-kind to fee interest in other real property, and use of proceeds from relinquished perpetual stewardship to purchase one or more fee interests in real property to be held by taxpayer for productive use in trade or business or for investment will not disqualify transaction from tax deferred exchange treatment.

Development Rights

The IRS ruled in PLR 200901020 that residential density development rights to be transferred by taxpayer as relinquished property were for Section 1031 purposes of a like-kind to a fee interest in real estate, leasehold interest in real estate with 30 years or more remaining at time of the exchange, and land use rights for hotel units. The land use rights that were a part of the put option addressed in this PLR and the restrictive covenant (collectively referred to as Development Rights) constituted interests in real estate under state law. Taxpayer intended to exercise the put option and use the sales proceeds from the Development Rights (the relinquished property) to acquire like kind replacement property. Taxpayer’s replacement property included a fee interest in real estate, a leasehold interest in real estate with 30 years or more remaining, and land use rights for hotel units.  The IRS ruled that the Development Rights to be transferred by Taxpayer as relinquished property were of like kind, for purposes of Code Sec. 1031, to a fee interest in real estate, a leasehold interest in real estate with 30 years or more remaining at the time of the exchange and land use rights for hotel units (which Taxpayer would receive if the Development Rights it transferred were for more than a certain number of residential units). The new rights for hotel units were to be applied to property Taxpayer already owned. The Development Rights were in perpetuity and were directly related and requisite to Taxpayer’s interest, use and enjoyment of the underlying land. The Development Rights were also interests in real property under state law. In effect, Taxpayer exchanged one set of Development Rights (pertaining to residential density) for other development rights (pertaining to hotel development). Some of the Development Rights were also to be exchanged for another fee interest in land, and another long-term leasehold interest in additional real property.

IRS has also ruled recently that development rights were like kind to the fee interest in property that a taxpayer relinquished in the exchange. The swap involved a complex exchange set up through a qualified intermediary (QI). In the PLR, Taxpayer was a C corporation that owned Property 1 and Property 2 located in City, State Z. It intended to transfer its fee interest in Property 1 (”Relinquished Property”) to a QI under an exchange agreement. QI wwould sell the Relinquished Property to a third-party purchaser in an arm’s-length transaction. QI would use part of the cash proceeds from this sale to buy Development Rights (”Replacement Property”) from a third-party seller. QI would transfer Development Rights to Taxpayer, who would cause Development Rights to be recorded with respect to Property 2. They would permit Taxpayer (or its lessee) to develop Property 2 with greater floor space than would otherwise have been allowed if Property 2 did not have Development Rights. Sections of State Z Tax Statute (and the corresponding sections of State Z regulations), defined “real property” to include “every estate or right, legal or equitable, present or future, vested or contingent, in lands, tenements or hereditaments, including buildings, structures and other improvements thereon, which are located in whole or in part within [State Z].” Sections of State Z Tax Statute further defined an “interest in real property” to include “title in fee, a leasehold interest, a beneficial interest, an encumbrance, development rights, air space and air rights, or any other interest with the right to use or occupancy of real property or the right to receive rents, profits, or other income derived from real property.” Whether property constitutes real or personal property generally is determined under state or local law.  In this case, Taxpayer proposed to acquire Development Rights as its replacement property and to transfer such rights to Property 2, which Taxpayer already owns. The IRS has previously noted that for purposes of Code Sec. 1031(a), it is not material that the property acquired by the taxpayer as the replacement property is on property already owned by that taxpayer so long as it is acquired in an arm’s-length transaction. For purposes of determining if Taxpayer’s proposed transaction qualifies as a like-kind exchange, IRS said it is thus immaterial that Development Rights to be acquired by Taxpayer will be used merely to enhance the real property already owned by it. More important is whether Development Rights constitute interests in real property under the state and local laws of State Z.  Although it is unclear whether Development Rights were treated as interests in real property for all purposes of State Z law, it is clear that Sections of State Z Tax Statute and the regulations thereunder did treat Development Rights as an interest in real property. Moreover, the various sections of the local Ordinances provided that Development Rights are as-of-right and not discretionary, meaning that they exist permanently rather than at the discretion of a city agency or other decision-making authority. As such, these rights appear to be analogous to perpetual rights. In addition, a deed transfer is similar to the perfecting of Development Rights, which involves an actual transfer of rights from one property to another. Thus, while the Tax Statutes of State Z do not explicitly state that Development Rights are granted in perpetuity, IRS concluded that such rights do arise out of an interest in the underlying real estate. Moreover, City Ordinances did not set an expiration date for Development Rights, and thus they were effectively perpetual in nature. Thus, IRS concluded that Development Rights that Taxpayer intended to acquire as replacement property were like kind to the fee interest in Relinquished Property.

The point of this discussion is to alert all potential exchangers to the borad definition of real estate and what will qualify under Section 1031.  For more information or questions about specific scenarios, please contact Moore McLaughlin, Esq., CPA, CES, owner of All States 1031 Exchange Facilitator, LLC at fmm@AllStates1031.com or Alexandra L. Hart, CES at AHart@AllStates1031.com.

Dealer Property defined in Oregon case

Sunday, October 18th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

In order for property to qualify under section 1031, the property must be held for productive use in a trade or business or held for investment.  Property that is held primarily for sale is disqualified under section 1031.  One of the most uncertain areas of the law under section 1031 is whether a particular piece of property is held for investment.  The IRS has never given any hard-and-fast rules.  Taxpayers must rely on a hodge-podge of cases and rulings.

A recent case from a state court in Oregon addresses the issue of whether a parcel is held for investment or held primarily for sale. In Bahr v. Oregon Department of Revenue, Oregon Tax Court - Magistrate Division, TC-MD 080525B (2009), the Oregon Tax Court ruled that a bulk sale of raw land, originally acquired for investment, which was subdivided into lots, partially improved and sold to a builder was held as an investment and therefore qualified for tax deferral under Oregon law which follows IRC §1031 for state income tax purposes.Oregon

In Bahr, taxpayers (a husband and wife) were in an informal partnership with their sister and brother-in-law.  In 1996 the partnership acquired five acres of raw land in a §1031 exchange for a duplex.  At the time of this initial exchange the partnership was considered an investor in the property.   In 2001-2002 the other partners built a personal residence on a portion of the property.  In March 2004 partnership applied to subdivide the land into 27 individual lots.  At the time this application was submitted, the partnership agreed to sell 22 of the lots to a developer.  The partnership’s subdivision application was approved in 2004.  Pursuant to their agreement with the developer, the partnership immediately began infrastructure improvements on the lots including placing roads, underground utilities, excavation, engineering, permits and other indirect costs.  The first lots were sold to the developer in early 2005.  The decision implies that the taxpayers acquired replacement property in an otherwise valid §1031 exchange to defer gain on the lots sold to developer. 

The Oregon Department of Revenue argued that the partnership’s investment intent changed after it received the offer from the developer and subdivided the land into individual lots.   Accordingly, it asserted that the land was held “primarily for sale” as opposed to for “investment” thus disqualifying it from §1031 treatment.

In determining whether the land was held primarily sale the court listed factors considered in §1221 (capital gain) cases: (1) purpose for which the property was initially acquired; (2) purpose for which the property was subsequently held; (3) extent to which improvements, if any, were made to the property by the taxpayer; (4) frequency, number and continuity of sales; (5) extent and nature of the transactions involved; (6) ordinary business of the taxpayer; (7) extent of advertising, promotion or other active efforts used in soliciting buyers for the sale of the property; (8) listing of the property with brokers; and (9) purpose for which the property was held at the time of sale.  The court concluded based on the length of time the property was held and the taxpayers’ lack of experience in subdividing and selling lots that these factors weighed in favor of investment intent.  The court appeared to weigh heavily that the taxpayers engaged in the development activities to maximize their return on their initial investment and that they only did the minimum necessary to complete the sale.

Because the case was decided by the Oregon Tax Court this decision cannot be used as authority in IRS audits, and it is presumably of little precedential value outside of Oregon.  However, it does show that according to this court at least, subdivision of land, even coupled with substantial land improvements, is arguably not enough to convert a property owner from an investor into a dealer where there was no actual building, active marketing of the subdivided property, or establishment of a sales organization.

Please contact attorney F. Moore McLaughlin, owner of All States 1031 Exchange Facilitator, LLC, by e-mail at fmm@allstates1031.com or Alexandra L. Hart by e-mail at ahart@allstates1031.com for more information about this case or about a particular scenario.

Dispelling 1031 Myths, part 5

Monday, October 12th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

MermaidIn our continuing effort to help investors understand the rules of 1031 exchanges, we present two more common myths.  Avoiding these myths and misconceptions will allow investors to maxmimize the return on their investments by reducing the amount of taxes they pay.

Myth No. 9

I only have to reinvest my gain.  Or, I only have to reinvest my cash proceeds.

If Alexandra and I have heard this once, we have heard it a million times.  The general rule of 1031 exchanges is that the exchanger must buy a replacement property that is equal to or greater in value than the relinquished property.  The 1031 rules require the exchanger to reinvest their adjusted sales price, not just their gain or cash equity.  The reason is because Section 1031 requires an exchanger to receive like-kind property.  Luckily, all United States real estate is like-kind to all other United States real estate, regardless of the type or grade. Non-like kind property (called boot) typically consists of cash or debt relief.  To the extent that an exchanger trades down in value (i.e. buys a replacement property of less value than the relinquished property), than the exchanger receives boot, in the form of cash or debt relief equal to the amount of the trade down. Net boot received will always be taxed, to the extent of the taxpayer’s gain. However, often times, paying some tax is better than paying all the tax if no exchange is completed.

So, the easy rule to remember is for the exchanger to buy a replacement property or properties of equal or great value than their relinquished property or properties.  The good news, though, is that once these rules are understood, the exchanger realizes that he or she can trade down in value a little without blowing up the whole exchange.  Instead, a small amount of gain is recognized, while the balance of the gain is deferred.  Thus, the 1031 transaction is still worth doing. To learn more about partially tax-deferred exchanges or taking some cash at the closing, please click here.

Myth No. 10

I can exchange my primary residence tax-free under section 1031.

A primary residence does not qualify under section 1031.  In order for a property to qualify under section 1031, the property must be held for the productive use in a trade or business or held for investment.  Under these rules, a primary residence is held for personal use, therefore it is not deemed to be held for investment.  Thus, a primary residence generally does not qualify under Section 1031.

However, Section 121 provides for gain exclusion on the sale of a principal residence, if certain criteria are met.  If these criteria are satisfied, up to $250,000 of gain may be excluded (up to $500,000 for joint returns).  The basic rule of section 121 requires that the seller own and occupy the property as a primary residence for at least 2 out of the previous 5 years.  However, if the property was acquired as part of a previous 1031 exchange (and the taxpayer converted it from a rental property to their primary residence), than the taxpayer must own the property for 5 years and live there as a primary residence for at least 2 out of the 5 years before they may be eligible for the 121 exclusion. Furthermore, effective January 1, 2009, an amendment to the 121 exclusion will affect the amount of gain exclusion allowed for primary residences with a rental history (AKA “non-qualifying use”). In the event that the gain exceeds this exclusion amount, capital gain must be recognized and cannot be deferred even if a replacement primary residence is purchased.  If you are interested in learning more about the tax consequences of the sale of your home, you should consult an experienced tax attorney or CPA to learn more about section 121. It is especially important to consult with your tax advisor if your primary residence has or had an investment or business-use component (i.e. a home office or rental unit). Certain combination or consecutive use properties may allow for the combination of section 121 and section 1031, thereby maximizing the potential tax exclusion and deferral.

So, even for those lucky homeowners who say “…but my home is the best investment I ever made,” I say, “That may be true, but generally, it does not qualify under section 1031.” We continue dispelling as many 1031 myths as we can.  Stay tuned for more 1031 myths in the near future; or call us toll free at 877-395-1031 or contact Alexandra L. Hart by e-mail at ahart@allstates1031.com.

Dispelling 1031 Myths, part 4

Monday, September 28th, 2009 by Moore McLaughlin

Loch Ness MonsterAlexandra Hart and I are still amazed that we hear so many of the same myths and misconceptions every week about 1031 exchanges, what properties qualify and how exchanges work.  Unfortunately, many of the myths result in someone not exchanging when a 1031 would have saved a significant amount of taxes.  Here are two more myths that we hear as reasons not to do an exchange.

Myth No. 7

In order for a 1031 exchange to work, I have to find someone who has property I want and who wants my property.

Not true.  The IRS has allowed so-called delayed or deferred exchanges for many years.  For a number of years, no guidance existed on how to handle deferred exchanges.  In the late 1970’s, the Starker case held that a 1031 exchange did not have to be simultaneous.  Subsequently, the tax law was changed which allowed deferred exchanges, subject to certain limitations.

Now deferred exchanges are the norm.  We very rarely see direct swaps of property, although they are certainly allowed.  Most exchanges are effected by exchangers who sell their relinquished property to an unrelated third-party buyer and then purchase the replacement property from someone who is unrelated to either the exchanger or the buyer of the relinquished property.  In fact, in many cases neither the buyer of the relinquished property nor the seller of the replacement property are doing 1031 exchanges.  Although, in many cases they are.

The deferred exchanges must meet several simple rules.  The exchanger must acquire the replacement property within the earlier of 180 days from the sale of the relinquished property or the due date of the tax return (including extensions).  The exchanger must identify the potential replacement properties within 45 days from the sale of the relinquished property.  And, lastly, the exchanger should use a qualified intermediary (QI) or other safe harbor to avoid receipt of the sales proceeds from the sale of the relinquished property.  Following these rules, and a few others, will ensure a valid 1031 exchange.

Myth No. 8

If I fail to identify property within 45 days or if I fail to acquire sufficient replacement property during the exchange period, I will lose my money or be hit with severe penalties by the IRS.

Failure of an exchange results in no penalties and you will not lose your money.  An exchanger who fails to identify any property during the 45-day identification period will have his or her exchange proceeds returned on Day 46.  Likewise, an exchanger who fails to acquire any property during the exchange period will receive the exchanges funds on Day 181.  Please click here to read more about at what points during the exchange period the exchanger is allowed to get their money back.  The only economic loss is the fee charged by the intermediary, which is typcially minimal compared to the potential tax savings.

A failed 1031 exchange is treated merely as a sale of the relinquished property, subject to whatever taxes would have been imposed had a 1031 exchange not been attempted.  Even better, the exchange that begins in one tax year and fails in the subsequent tax year is treated as an installment sale with the possibility of significant tax deferral.  Click here for more information on the tax treatement of a failed exchange.

In any event, once sellers become aware of these realities, most realize that they have nothing to fear from a failed exchange and decide to enter into the exchange to preserve the right to defer taxes.

Stay tuned for more posts exposing the myths of 1031 exchanges that keep investors from saving taxes.

For more information on 1031 exchanges, contact Moore McLaughlin by e-mail at fmm@allstates1031.com or Alexandra L. Hart at ahart@allstates1031.com or by call toll-free at 877-395-1031.

IRS Update: Exchanges of Intangibles

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009 by Alexandra Hart

Good news for franchise or business owners! The IRS recently reversed their position on personal property exchanges, thereby allowing 1031 tax-deferred treatment of most intangibles.

intangible3

The IRS previously issued Technical Advice Memorandum (TAM) 200602034, which concluded that the registered trademarks and trade names of a business entity could not be of like-kind to the trademarks and trade names of another business entity because they were “closely related to (if not a part of) the goodwill or going concern value of a business.” Under Regulation § 1.1031(a)-2(c)(2), the goodwill or going concern value of a business is not of like kind to the goodwill or going concern value of another business.

Using the rationale set forth in TAM 200602034, the IRS later issued Field Attorney Advice (FAA) 20074401F, which concluded that (like the trademarks and trade names discussed in TAM 200602034) newspapers’ mastheads, advertiser accounts, and subscriber accounts were closely related to (if not a part of) the goodwill and going concern value of the newspapers, and therefore were not of like kind under Regulation § 1.1031(a)-2(c)(2).  In reaching the conclusion, the FAA reasoned that Newark Morning Ledger Co. v. U.S., 507 U.S. 546 (1993), which holds that an intangible asset is not goodwill for purposes of the depreciation rules if it can be separately described and valued apart from goodwill, is not relevant to the determination of whether intangibles are of like-kind under § 1031.

In a March, 2009 legal memorandum, the IRS reversed its position. In ILM 200911006, the IRS states that it has concluded that the analysis of Newark Morning Ledger Co. does apply in determining whether intangibles constitute goodwill or going concern value within the meaning of Regulation § 1.1031(a)-2(c)(2). Accordingly, intangibles such as trademarks, trade names, mastheads, and customer-based intangibles that can be separately described and valued apart from goodwill can, in fact, qualify as like-kind property under § 1031 (provided the properties satisfy the other requirements of § 1031 including the nature and character rules of Regulation § 1.1031(a)-2(c)(1)).  The IRS also states that, in the IRS’s opinion, except in rare and unusual situations, intangibles such as trademarks, trade names, mastheads, and customer-based intangibles can be separately described and valued apart from goodwill. Accordingly, the IRS will not follow the position in TAM 200602034 and FAA 20074401F on this issue.

If you or someone you know is considering selling a business (even if they don’t own the real property), they should consider the tax consequences of the sale of their personal or intangible property. F. Moore McLaughlin, Esq., CPA, CES® is the owner of All States 1031 Exchange Facilitator, LLC and McLaughlin & Quinn, LLC, where he advises business owners and investors on a daily basis. As a tax attorney, Moore’s mantra is, “It’s not what you make, it’s what you keep that counts.” Be sure to plan ahead if you are anticipating a sale so that you can keep as much of your hard earned profit as possible. A 1031 tax deferred exchange is the only legal way to ensure that all of your profit continues to work for you. For a complimentary consultation, please call Moore toll free at (877) 395-1031 or email: Exchange@AllStates1031.com