|
By
Albert Rush
Senior Vice President - National Counsel
First American Title Insurance Company
Santa Ana, California
Welcome to our short course on 1031 exchange practice.
This is for anyone wanting a basic understanding of
tax-deferred exchanges of real property. Here you will
find a description of common exchange procedures, a
brief history explaining how modern exchange practice
came to be, as well as laws and Regulations you need to
know.
1. Why Do a 1031 Exchange?
Here are some pros and cons:
Pro: Defer Payment of Taxes-Indefinitely-Without Penalty
or Interest.
By doing a 1031 exchange, a taxpayer may dispose of
"property held for productive use in a trade or business
or for investment" (which we'll call "income or
investment property"), and acquire replacement income or
investment property, without recognition of capital gain
in calculating the taxpayer's income tax. By avoiding
recognition of capital gain, the taxpayer defers payment
of income taxes, indefinitely at the taxpayer's
discretion, without any penalty or interest coming due
to the IRS or state tax authorities.
Pro:
Leverage.
By deferring payment of taxes, the taxpayer has
additional funds currently available for investment. The
effect of this on a taxpayer's investment choices should
be obvious, and will be discussed later.
Pro:
Make Government an Investment Partner.
Really just a restatement of the first two points, but
some folks think this says it best. By deferring payment
of taxes, the taxpayer has use of "the government's
money" to pursue personal income or investment goals.
Pro:
Taxes Avoided by Death.
They say you can't take it with you, but here's how
taxes deferred now can become taxes avoided forever.
Under Internal Revenue Code § 1014, upon death all
property in the decedent's estate is entitled to a
stepped-up basis for purpose of calculating the heirs'
capital gain upon a subsequent sale. Under this rule,
property is valued as of the date of the decedent's
death for purposes of determining its "basis," without
regard to when the property was originally acquired or
its original basis. This allows an heir to avoid tax
liability for all capital gains during a decedent's
lifetime. While in some cases the benefits of this rule
may be lessened by federal estate taxes or state
inheritance taxes, potential for "stepped-up basis" is
an important factor to be considered in anyone's estate
planning.
In sum, the 1031 exchange is an
attractive vehicle for deferment of taxes, maximization
of income, and accumulation of assets and wealth. This
vehicle permits deferment of taxes until a later time,
such as retirement, when the taxpayer may be subject to
lower tax rates, or after death, when taxes may be
avoided by the "stepped-up basis" rule.
So, what
are the cons?
Con:
Need Tax Advisor.
Each taxpayer's decision to do, or not to do, a 1031
exchange must be made in the context of his or her
investment goals and overall estate plan. This decision
begins with consideration of the taxpayer's current tax
liabilities and potential capital gain upon sale of
given property. Likewise, the decision must be made in
light of the availability of suitable replacement
property. Since these decisions may be complicated, and
require technical or legal or accounting expertise,
taxpayers are cautioned against attempting a 1031
exchange without the guidance of a knowledgeable tax
advisor, such as a tax attorney or certified public
accountant.
Con:
Must Follow Rules and Regulations, and Meet Deadlines.
Current 1031 exchange practices have evolved from
federal statutes and court decisions, culminating in
Regulations issued by the IRS. These Regulations were
written to strike a balance between the competing
interests of taxpayer and tax collector, by establishing
procedures, deadlines and protocols which, if observed,
will cause the taxpayer's transactions to enjoy
"nonrecognition" or tax-deferred status with the IRS.
Con:
May be Increased Costs of Transaction.
As explained below, the taxpayer's observance of IRS
Regulations in connection with the 1031 exchange will
involve additional transaction costs. In addition to a
tax advisor, the taxpayer will need to retain an
intermediary, an exchange escrow holder or trustee and,
in many cases, an appraiser. If a reverse exchange is
done, the taxpayer will also need to arrange for the
services of an exchange accommodation titleholder.
2.
Taxes on Capital Gains
Motivation for doing a 1031 exchange is supplied by
capital gains tax liability. The following graphs
illustrate how a hypothetical taxpayer's capital gains
tax might be calculated.

In this first example, our
taxpayer acquired property 15 years ago for $800,000,
making a down payment of $240,000 ("equity") and giving
a purchase money mortgage for $560,000 ("debt"). Today,
the property is being sold for $2,000,000. Mortgage
payments have reduced the loan balance to $500,000. The
taxpayer expects to receive $1,500,000 in cash from the
sale. In calculating his (or her) capital gain, we will
assume the taxpayer has made no capital improvements
during ownership and, therefore, the tax "basis" will be
the acquisition price ($800,000). Subtracting $800,000
from the sale price of $2,000,000 yields a capital gain
of $1,200,000. This capital gain is multiplied by the
maximum federal capital gains tax rate of 15% to arrive
at a tax due of $180,000.
Since the taxpayer expects to
receive $1,500,000 in cash from the sale, his net sale
proceeds (after payment of taxes) total $1,320,000.
Remember, this is a calculation
of federal tax only. In many states additional taxes
would be due to state authorities.

In our second example, the facts
remain the same except the taxpayer has refinanced
during his ownership, so that at the time of sale the
mortgage loan balance is $1,700,000 (an 85%
loan-to-value ratio). Now the taxpayer expects to
receive $300,000 in cash from the sale.
The capital gain and tax
calculations remain the same, but because the taxpayer
has much less equity his net sale proceeds (after
payment if the tax due) total $120,000.

In this third example, the facts
remain the same except that during his 15 years'
ownership the taxpayer has both refinanced and claimed
tax deductions totaling $260,000 for depreciation in
value of improvements. The capital gain tax calculation
remains the same, but now the taxpayer is also assessed
for depreciation recapture at the rate of 25%, so the
tax due is $245,000. Since the taxpayer expects to
receive only $300,000 in cash from the sale, he will
receive $55,000 after payment of the federal tax due.
3.
Internal Revenue Code Section 1031
Internal Revenue Code § 1031 (26 U.S.C. section 1031)
traces its origins to the 1920's. The essential language
of § 1031, as amended, is as follows:
§1031.
Exchange of property held for productive use or
investment
(a)
Nonrecognition of gain or loss from exchanges solely in
kind -
(1) In
general, - No gain or loss shall be
recognized on the exchange of property held for
productive use in a trade or business or for
investment if such property is exchanged solely for
property of like kind which is to be held either for
productive use in a trade or business or for
investment.
Now let's examine this language
phrase-by-phrase.
"No gain or
loss shall be recognized on the exchange…"
The key concept here is
"nonrecognition." Let's revisit our hypothetical to see
how nonrecognition benefits the taxpayer.

Here, the taxpayer's net sale
proceeds (after payment of taxes due) totaled
$1,320,000. If these proceeds are reinvested as a 30%
down payment on replacement property, the replacement
property value will be about $4,400,000. If, on the
other hand, the taxpayer defers payment of tax (through
nonrecognition) he has an exchange value of $1,500,000
(net sale proceeds of $1,320,000 plus deferred tax of
$180,000) to reinvest in replacement property. If
$1,500,000 is reinvested as a 30% down payment, the
replacement property value will be $5,000,000.
This is called "Leverage." This
is good.

Now recall the second example.
Because of refinancing the taxpayer expects net sale
proceeds of $120,000. If these proceeds are reinvested
as a 30% down payment the replacement property value
will be $400,000.
If the taxpayer defers payment
of taxes, he will have an exchange value of $300,000
(net sale proceeds of $120,000 plus deferred tax of
$180,000) to reinvest. If the exchange value of $300,000
is reinvested as a 30% down payment, the replacement
property value will be $1,000,000.
In this example, nonrecognition
allows the taxpayer to acquire an apartment building,
instead of a duplex.

Our third example was the
taxpayer having both refinanced and taken deductions for
depreciation. After payment of taxes, he has $55,000 to
reinvest.
If he defers payment of taxes he
will have an exchange value of $300,000 (which was the
amount of his equity in the property being sold for
$2,000,000). If this exchange value is reinvested as a
30% down payment, the replacement property value will be
$1,000,000.
For this taxpayer, the benefits
of nonrecognition are most dramatic: He is still a
player.
"...of
property held for productive use in a trade or
business or for investment..."
This phrase tells us that only
property with certain characteristics, which we have
called "income or investment property," will qualify for
nonrecognition treatment under § 1031.
For example, an exchange of the
taxpayer's personal residence doesn't qualify for
nonrecognition treatment. (See, however, Internal
Revenue Code § 121, "Exclusion of gain from sale of
principal residence.")
A taxpayer's "stock in trade or
other property held primarily for sale" doesn't qualify
for nonrecognition treatment. (See 26 United States Code
§ 1031(a)(2)(A).)
This exception to nonrecognition
treatment may be, at least for some taxpayers, difficult
to interpret.
For example, a taxpayer owning
ten acres of raw land may assume that his property will
qualify for nonrecognition treatment as "held for
investment." But if the taxpayer subdivides the land
into 20 lots, to increase its value, does the land then
become "stock in trade" or "held primarily for sale," so
as to bring it within this exception making it
unqualified for nonrecognition treatment? The answer may
depend on other factors, such as whether the taxpayer
has actively marketed or sold any subdivided lots before
doing an exchange with unsold lots.
Taxpayers may be comforted to
know that the IRS has not been overly aggressive in
using this exception to disqualify exchanges involving
land which has been subdivided or improved by the
taxpayer prior to an exchange. The exception most
clearly applies to developers seeking to exchange unsold
inventory of homes or condominium units, but in less
obvious cases where this exception might conceivably
apply the taxpayer should proceed only with the
assistance of a qualified tax advisor.
For further discussion of this
exception, see Long and Foster, Tax-Free Exchanges
Under § 1031, published by Clark-Boardman-Callaghan
(Customer Service: 1-800-328-4880), 2001, § 2:05
A taxpayer's interest in stocks,
bonds or notes does not qualify for nonrecognition
treatment. (See 26 United States Code § 1031(a)(2)(B).)
A taxpayer's interest in a
partnership doesn't qualify for nonrecognition
treatment, even if the sole asset of the partnership is
income or investment real property which itself would
qualify for nonrecognition treatment. (See 26 United
States Code § 1031(a)(2)(D).)
In addition, the Internal
Revenue Code lists other property interests not
qualifying for nonrecognition treatment, including a
security interest in real property (such as the interest
of a mortgagee or beneficiary under a deed of trust);
the interest of a beneficiary under a trust having real
property as its res (or asset); and mere rights, claims
or causes of action involving real property. (See,
generally, 26 United States Code § 1031(a)(2).)
Generally, an exchange involving
relinquished real property located in the United States
and replacement real property located outside the United
States will not qualify for nonrecognition treatment.
(See 26 United States Code § 1031(h).)
"...if such
property is exchanged solely for..."
The key words here are "solely
for." The property relinquished and property acquired
must be of "like kind." In cases where money or other
non like-kind property is received as part of a real
property exchange, the non like-kind consideration is
commonly called "boot." And, the taxpayer's receipt of
boot may be recognized as capital gain, subject to tax,
to the extent of the value of the boot.
As a rule of thumb, when a
taxpayer "trades down" (relinquishes property having
greater value than like-kind replacement property) there
is likely to be recognition of capital gain.

In the example above, the
taxpayer is trading down: exchanging real property
valued at $2,000,000 for replacement property valued at
$1,500,000 plus $500,000 in cash. The taxpayer must
recognize capital gain, and pay tax, to the extent of
the $500,000 in cash received.
On the other hand, as a general
rule no capital gain is recognized where the taxpayer
"trades up."

In this example, the taxpayer is
trading real property valued at $1,500,000, and paying
cash, for replacement property valued at $2,000,000.
There is no capital gain to be recognized since the
value of the relinquished property is less than the
value of the like-kind replacement property. (But note,
if the consideration is paid in some form other than
cash--such as stock--then there may be recognition of
taxable capital gain for the value of the stock.)
Another rule of thumb is that
cash boot received by the taxpayer will not be
considered offset by debt incurred by the taxpayer.

In the example above, the
taxpayer is exchanging property valued at $100,000 for
replacement property also valued at $100,000. However,
the relinquished property is subject to mortgage debt of
$40,000, whereas the replacement property is to be
subject to mortgage debt of $70,000, allowing the
taxpayer to receive $30,000 cash out of the exchange.
The IRS will treat this cash received as capital gain to
be recognized immediately, and will not permit the cash
received to be offset by additional mortgage debt being
assumed by the taxpayer.
In light of these rules, some
taxpayers would attempt to avoid recognition of gain
either by refinancing the relinquished property just
prior to transferring it as part of an exchange, or by
refinancing replacement property shortly after receiving
it. This is another area where taxpayers should proceed
only with the help of a qualified tax advisor. Many tax
advisors will suggest that the taxpayer observe a
"holding period" during which there be no refinancing
prior to or on the heels of a 1031 exchange. The
duration of this period will vary from one tax advisor
to another, depending on individual philosophy
(aggressive vs. conservative) and how strongly the
taxpayer desires to avoid audit by the IRS.
This is not to say that all
replacement property must inevitably be "tied-up," and
rendered unavailable for sale or refinancing, for months
after an exchange. If the taxpayer faces a true
emergency, such as a family member's need for costly
medical care, a post-exchange refinancing should not be
viewed so as to disqualify the exchange for
nonrecognition treatment under § 1031.
Again, this is an area where the
taxpayer should obtain the advice of a qualified tax
advisor.
"…property
of like kind which is to be held either for
productive use in a trade or business or for
investment."
The key words here are "like
kind."
Personal property exchanges are
viewed by the IRS differently than real property
exchanges. While § 1031 permits exchanges of personal as
well as real property, to be considered a "like kind"
exchange the type of personal property acquired must be
very similar to the type of personal property
relinquished. For example, under the Regulations a truck
or fleet of trucks may be exchanged only for a
replacement truck or trucks. A truck or fleet of trucks
exchanged for an aircraft would be considered a non
like-kind exchange.

The Regulations even tell us
that an exchange of livestock of different sexes is non
like-kind. But where real property is concerned the
Regulations are quite liberal. Almost any type of income
or investment real property may be traded for another
type of income or investment real property.

A restaurant can be exchanged
for a motel. An office building can be exchanged for a
lease of real property having a term of 30 years or
more. Improved real property can be exchanged for vacant
land. A single real property can be exchanged for
multiple replacement properties, and vice versa.
One situation requiring extra
care occurs when exchange property, either relinquished
or replacement, has mixed characteristics, being partly
like-kind and partly non like-kind.

The above depicts farm property
valued at $2,000,000. Suppose the property is 200 acres
including a personal residence occupying less than one
acre. If this property is to be exchanged solely for
income or investment real property, then the personal
residence and farm equipment (such as the tractor
pictured and other non-fixture equipment) are non
like-kind property. The like-kind property consists of
the farmland, improvements on the farmland (such as the
barn pictured), and unharvested crops.
In this case the taxpayer must
obtain a qualified appraiser to establish the value of
like-kind property, as a portion of the total sale
price, for 1031 exchange purposes. Without an appraisal
the taxpayer runs considerable risk of his valuations
being questioned or disregarded in the event of an audit
by the IRS.
4.
Three Ways To Exchange:
Historically, exchanging has been done several ways.
Here's a brief review.

The simplest form has been the
simultaneous exchange, illustrated above. Trading
partners meet one day and exchange deeds. This form has
always been recognized as qualifying for nonrecognition
treatment under § 1031, hence the green light depicted.

Another form has been the
delayed exchange. Here the taxpayer relinquishes
property on January 14, and later acquires replacement
property on April 12. Taxpayers historically preferred
the delayed exchange because it allowed their trading
partner to acquire relinquished property without having
to wait for the taxpayer to locate replacement property.
But as originally enacted § 1031
did not expressly approve the delayed exchange form, and
without guidance from Congress the IRS actively opposed
and discouraged delayed exchanges. As will be seen, this
opposition has now changed to acceptance, subject to the
Regulations.

A third form has been the
reverse exchange, above. Here the taxpayer acquires
replacement property on January 17, and later transfers
relinquished property on April 12. This form has also
been discouraged by the IRS in the past but, as will be
seen, is now accepted, subject to the Regulations and
Revenue Procedures published by the IRS.

Remember , it isn't necessary
for a taxpayer to find a trading partner who also
expects nonrecognition treatment under § 1031. Instead,
as shown above, the trading partner may turn around and
sell property acquired from the taxpayer, and pay tax on
the sale.

Or, the taxpayer may transfer
relinquished property to a trading partner who has cash
but no property for trade. Here, the taxpayer locates
and identifies replacement property, which the trading
partner will purchase and cause to be deeded to the
taxpayer.

Exchanges can also involve
additional parties exchanging properties and/or cash in
connected transactions, but having no direct contact
with the taxpayer.
5. The
Starker Case
As mentioned above, for many years taxpayers and their
advisors had no comfort doing anything other than a
simultaneous exchange. In fact, the IRS narrowly
interpreted § 1031 and threatened to audit and penalize
taxpayers whose dealings didn't fit its narrow
interpretation.
What changed all of this,
forever, was the Starker case, a landmark court
decision.
In April 1967, T.J. Starker
entered into a "Land Exchange Agreement" with Crown
Zellerbach Corporation. Under this Agreement, Starker
(and certain of his relatives) agreed to transfer to
Crown Zellerbach 1,843 acres of timberland located in
Columbia County, Oregon.
In consideration for this
transfer, Crown Zellerbach agreed to credit Starker, on
its books, for the amount of $1,502,500. Starker would
then have five years to identify replacement properties
in Washington and Oregon, to be acquired by Crown
Zellerbach using Starker's credits, and then the
properties would be transferred to Starker. Crown
Zellerbach also agreed to add to Starker's credit
account each year a "growth factor," equal to 6% of the
unused balance. This growth factor compensated Starker
for use of his money (akin to interest), as well as for
increased value of the relinquished timberland as a
growing crop.
The deal was sealed in May 1967,
when Starker deeded the timberland to Crown Zellerbach
and Crown Zellerbach booked "exchange value credits" of
$1,502,500 in favor of Starker.
Between September 1967 and May
1969, Starker selected and Crown Zellerbach acquired and
transferred to Starker twelve properties valued at a
total of $1,577,387. This total included the growth
factor. No cash was paid to Starker under the Land
Exchange Agreement.
In April 1968, Starker filed his
tax return treating the Crown Zellerbach transaction as
an exchange qualifying for nonrecognition treatment
under IRS § 1031. The IRS responded by ruling that the
transaction did not qualify, and Starker was assessed a
deficiency of $300,930, plus interest.
Following required procedures,
Starker paid the assessment and filed a claim for
refund. After this claim was denied, Starker sued the
IRS to recover the refund.
In May 1977, a federal trial
court ruled against Starker, and Starker appealed.
In August 1979, the federal
court of appeals ruled in favor of Starker, handing down
a decision which was the first decisive victory for the
delayed exchange concept.
By the time the court ruled in
his favor, Starker was 89 years old. He had spent twelve
of his "golden years" in litigation with the IRS. He
died four years later.
The
Court's Reasoning:
"In this case, the taxpayer claims he intended from
the very outset of the transaction to get nothing but
like-kind property, and no evidence to the contrary
appears on the record. Moreover, the taxpayer never
handled any cash in the course of the transactions. "
It's important to remember this
reasoning; the court ruled as it did because (1) Starker
intended throughout the transaction to acquire like-kind
property only in exchange for his timberland, and (2)
Starker never handled cash during Crown Zellerbach's
performance of its obligations under the Land Exchange
Agreement.
If one
remembers this reasoning, and keeps it clearly in mind,
then the Regulations discussed below are best
understood.
After the Starker
decision, taxpayers and their advisors rejoiced while
the IRS stewed. But even though the Starker court
had opened the door, encouraging delayed exchanges, it
did not address many issues present in the Starker case
but not necessary to the court's decision.
For example, taxpayers and their
advisors wondered:
-
How much time should the taxpayer have to identify
replacement property? Under the Land
Exchange Agreement, Starker had five years, but
ended up taking 20 months. The IRS considered both
periods too long.
-
How much time should the taxpayer have to complete
an exchange? Again, Starker had five
years but completed his exchange in 20 months. The
IRS considered both periods too long.
-
Can a third-party intermediary be used to hold funds
or other property during the exchange?
Remember, Starker had the luxury of dealing with
Crown Zellerbach, a major corporation with a strong
financial statement. Other taxpayers imagined
themselves dealing with trading partners whose
solvency and/or integrity might be unknown, or
questionable. They saw a need for a third-party
intermediary to hold funds and other consideration,
and to facilitate orderly acquisition of replacement
property. Further, they wondered what guarantees
they might get from an intermediary to secure
faithful performance of the intermediary's
functions.
-
Can the taxpayer earn interest without jeopardizing
non-recognition status under § 1031? Even
though it was a factor present in the case, the
Starker court did not indicate approval or
disapproval of the growth factor arrangement.
Taxpayers wondered whether the IRS might challenge
such arrangements.
-
Would there continue to be IRS opposition to the
"reverse" exchange?
6. The
1984 Amendment of §1031
It took five years for Congress to first address these
post-Starker questions, and when it did the guidance
provided was somewhat less than taxpayers had hoped for.
In 1984, Congress amended § 1031
to provide that the taxpayer's time within which to
identify replacement property would expire 45 days after
transfer of relinquished property; and that the
taxpayer's time within which to complete an exchange
would expire 180 days after transfer of the relinquished
property, or upon the due date of the taxpayer's tax
return for the tax year in which the transfer of
relinquished property occurred, whichever date is
earlier.
With § 1031 thus amended,
taxpayers and their advisors continued to cautiously
structure delayed exchanges so as to avoid practices
which might be targeted for enforcement action by the
IRS.
7. The
Regulations of April 1991 - Rules for the Delayed
Exchange
In April 1991, the IRS finally issued Regulations
covering the most common type of delayed exchange (i.e.,
where the taxpayer first relinquishes property, and
later acquires replacement property). Unfortunately, the
1991 Regulations did not address reverse exchanges. In
fact, approved procedures for reverse exchanges were not
published until September 2000 - - and they are
discussed under "Revenue Procedure 2000 - 37, below.
In any case, the 1991
Regulations provided taxpayers and their advisors with
considerable guidance and assurance in doing a delayed
exchange. If the Regulations are observed, that is if
the taxpayer follows the steps and meets the deadlines
set forth in the Regulations, the IRS will deem an
exchange to have been done within the spirit of § 1031,
and it will qualify for nonrecognition treatment. If, on
the other hand, a taxpayer fails to perform a required
step or meet a deadline, the exchange may be deemed
disqualified. It is a "see no evil, hear no evil,
speak no evil" assurance.
In sum and substance, the
Regulations provide as follows:
Identification Period - The 45 Day Rule
- Midnight - 45th day
- Identify replacement
property(ies)
- Written document
- Signed by taxpayer
- Delivered or sent
- To any person involved
other than taxpayer or "disqualified person"
The taxpayer must identify
replacement property or properties on or before midnight
of the 45th day after transfer of relinquished property.
Unlike other legal deadlines with which we may be
familiar, this one is absolutely firm. In the event that
the 45th day falls on a Sunday or legal holiday, there
is no allowance for extension of the deadline to the
next business day. In fact, there is no allowance for
extension of the deadline, at all.
The taxpayer's identification of
replacement property must be evidenced by a written
document, signed by the taxpayer, to be hand delivered,
mailed, telecopied, or otherwise sent to any person
involved in the exchange other than the taxpayer
or a "disqualified person."
The term "disqualified person"
is defined in the Regulations four different ways,
becoming very convoluted and far-reaching. The
definitions of "disqualified person" are as follows:
- Any "agent of the
taxpayer," meaning any employee, attorney,
accountant, investment banker or broker, real estate
agent or broker, who within 2 years of transfer of
relinquished property has had such a relationship
with the taxpayer. This effectively rules out almost
anyone from whom the taxpayer regularly obtains
legal, financial or business advice. Under this
definition, there are two narrow exceptions (those
who may meet the criteria but nevertheless will not
be considered "disqualified"):
- those performing
exchange related services, and
- companies performing
routine financial, title insurance, escrow, or
trust services.
- Any person or business
entity which is a "related taxpayer," as defined by
Internal Revenue Code § 267(b). This definition
includes a family member or blood relation of the
taxpayer, a corporation having the taxpayer as a 10%
or greater minority shareholder, a sister
corporation of the taxpayer, a fiduciary of a trust
having the taxpayer as its grantor, or a grantor or
beneficiary of a trust having the taxpayer as its
fiduciary, among others.
- Any person or business
entity having a partner relationship with the
taxpayer as described by Internal Revenue Code
§707(b). This includes a partnership having the
taxpayer as a 10% or greater interest-owning
partner, any partner having a 10% or greater
interest in the taxpayer partnership, or a
partnership having a common 10% or greater ownership
with the taxpayer partnership, among others.
- Any person or business
entity having a disqualifying "related taxpayer" (#2
above) or partner (#3 above) relationship with a
person who in turn has a disqualifying "agent of the
taxpayer" (#1 above) relationship. This definition
is hard to decipher. Our interpretation can be
explained with the following example: Suppose the
taxpayer proposes to send his identification notice
to his family attorney. The attorney is familiar
with the Regulations and tells the taxpayer that he,
the attorney, is a disqualified person. Suppose
further that the attorney hasn't read the definition
of "disqualified person" fully, or perhaps
misunderstood it, and he (the attorney) suggests
that the taxpayer send his identification notice to
Melvin, the attorney's adult son, who will also act
as an escrow holder in connection with the exchange.
Melvin, of course, has a disqualifying blood
relationship with the attorney, who in turn has a
disqualifying agency relationship with the taxpayer.
It is this sort of "second-tier" disqualifying
relationship we believe the last definition of
"disqualified person" intends to address and
prohibit.
Why is this so complicated? The
IRS's purpose is to encourage involvement of
intermediary, financial, title insurance, escrow and
trust service companies in delayed exchange
transactions. This is with the expectation that such
companies are less likely to have close relationships
with taxpayers, and would therefore be less likely to
cooperate with those taxpayers who might seek to falsify
documentation in their files, such as by changing
contents or falsely dating an identification notice.
By making special exception for
these companies in the definitions of "disqualified
person," the IRS gives the taxpayer a clear and simple
choice in line with its preferences.

The Regulations make clear that
the identification notice must be unambiguous in
describing replacement property, and the taxpayer must
acquire "substantially the same property" as identified.
Although the Regulations indicate that a street address
or name of building may be sufficient, taxpayers are
cautioned that street addresses are assigned mainly to
facilitate delivery of mail, and they may be
misunderstood to include more (or less) property than
the taxpayer intends to acquire. For example, a street
address may, or may not, include adjacent structures,
parking areas or driveways.
The better practice is to
identify replacement property by reference to its
complete legal description, which may be obtained from
the current owner's (or lessor's) vesting deed.
Recognizing that 45 days may not
be sufficient time for the taxpayer to perform due
diligence or satisfy contingency items, the Regulations
permit the taxpayer to identify multiple properties. In
other words, the taxpayer may identify more properties
than he will acquire, allowing additional time (180 days
or due date of tax return, whichever is earlier) in
which to make final decisions. Here are the alternative
and multiple property identification rules:
Identification - Alternative/Multiple Properties
- Up to 3 properties no
matters what value,
- Any number of properties
having aggregate value not more than 200% of
relinquished property value, or
- Any number of properties
provided taxpayer acquires replacement properties
having value equal to at least 95% of aggregate
value of all identified replacement properties.
Because of its relative
simplicity, most taxpayers follow the first rule above,
which the Regulations call the "3-property rule."
As can be seen, the other two
rules (the "200-percent rule" and the "95-percent rule")
rely on property values. Following these rules may
require the additional expense of obtaining appraisals.
Once an identification notice is
sent, what if the taxpayer wants to cancel it and send
another?
Revocation of
Identification
- Written document
- Signed by taxpayer
- Delivered or sent
- Same recipient(s)
- Midnight - 45th day
The Regulations allow revocation
of an identification notice by a written document,
signed by the taxpayer, delivered or sent to the same
recipients as the original identification notice, on or
before midnight of the 45th day after transfer of
relinquished property.
It's important to remember that
a revocation does not extend the 45-day identification
period. The taxpayer who revokes must be careful to send
another identification notice within the original 45-day
identification period.
It's also important to know
that, according to the Regulations, no identification is
required at all if the exchange is completed, by the
taxpayer's acquisition of all replacement property,
within the 45-day identification period.
Exchange
Period - The 180 Day Rule
Taxpayer must acquire
replacement property(ies) on or before midnight of
- 180th day after date of
transfer of relinquished property, or
- due date (including
extension) of taxpayer's tax return, whichever is
earlier.
Following the 1984 amendment of
§ 1031, the Regulations required that the taxpayer
complete the exchange, by acquisition of each and every
replacement property, on or before midnight of the 180th
day after date of transfer of relinquished property or
the due date (including any extension) of the taxpayer's
tax return (for the tax year in which relinquished
property was transferred), whichever is earlier.
Once again, this deadline is
firm, drop-dead, and absolute. And one should never make
the mistake of thinking 180 days means six months.
Exchanges have been blown, disqualified, because the
taxpayer thought he had six months, which turned out to
be 182 days.
Since these dates are so
important, it may be worthwhile to consider the question
of when relinquished property has been "transferred."
Does the transfer occur when escrow closes (or the
settlement date), when the deed is accepted for
recording by the local county recorder, or when the deed
is properly indexed by the recorder so as to be
locatable in the public records?
Since the Regulations provide no
clear answer, it seems best to assume that the transfer
will be deemed to have taken place upon close of escrow,
or the settlement date, for the relinquished property.
Typically, a settlement statement (sometimes called the
"HUD-1" form) will be issued showing the settlement
date. This is the date to keep your eye on; begin
counting the next day. The taxpayer who transfers
relinquished property late in the year, October through
December, needs to be particularly careful about
expiration of the exchange period. For example, if the
transfer takes place in mid-December, the exchange
period may expire in about 4 months, when the taxpayer's
tax return is due on April 15. If the taxpayer files for
an extension, the tax return will be due in August but
the exchange period will then expire in accordance with
the 180 day rule, since 180 days will be earlier than
the taxpayer's extended filing date.
Again, although there is no
regulation on point the IRS seems to accept the view
that replacement property is "acquired" by the taxpayer
on the settlement date.
Replacement
Property to be Constructed
- Identify by legal
description of land and detailed description of
improvements to be made
- Estimated fair market value
- Improvements as-built must
be "substantially the same" as described
- Should be completed before
taxpayer acquires replacement property
Sometimes a taxpayer may want to
acquire replacement property which is unimproved or
needs substantial renovation in order to have value
equal to the relinquished property. For example, suppose
the taxpayer transfers relinquished property valued at
$2,000,000, and proposes to acquire as replacement
property vacant land valued at $200,000. This exchange
would qualify for nonrecognition treatment only to the
extent of $200,000, the value of the replacement
property. If, on the other hand, sufficient improvements
are made to the replacement property before it is
acquired, then the exchange may qualify for
nonrecognition treatment to the full extent of the value
of relinquished property ($2,000,000).
The Regulations give
considerable guidance where replacement property is to
be improved, or constructed, before acquisition by the
taxpayer. As shown above, the identification notice must
include a legal description of the land, a detailed
description of improvements to be made, and the
estimated fair market value of the replacement property
as improved.
When replacement property is
acquired the improvements as-built must be
"substantially the same" as described in the
identification notice. And, all improvements should be
completed before the taxpayer acquires replacement
property.
But exchanges involving
replacement property to be improved present several
practical problems:
First, given the uncertainties
of weather and other working conditions, can all
improvements be completed within the exchange period?
Second, who will hold title to
the replacement property during construction? Remember,
once the taxpayer acquires title to replacement property
the value, for purposes of qualifying the exchange, is
fixed. Therefore, someone else must "hold title" while
improvements are being made.
Third, how will the improvements
be financed? As discussed more fully below, the
Regulations make clear that the taxpayer may not receive
or have use of the proceeds from sale of relinquished
property during the exchange period. Unfortunately, the
1991 Regulations did not address these problems,
although answers for some of them were forthcoming in
"Revenue Procedure 2000-37," issued by the IRS in
September 2000, and discussed in the next section ("8.
Revenue Procedure 2000-37").
Control
of Money or Other Property Within Exchange Period
Remember that the Starker decision was based
largely on the fact that Starker never handled cash.
Mindful of this reasoning, the IRS Regulations are very
strict and detailed concerning control of money or other
property within the exchange period. Any unauthorized
receipt of money or other property before acquisition of
replacement property will disqualify the exchange.
Actual
or Constructive Receipt
The Regulations prohibit actual or constructive receipt
of cash or other property. This means the taxpayer may
not receive cash in hand, nor may he derive economic
benefit from cash or other property in the exchange
escrow account. For example, the taxpayer may not pledge
cash in the escrow account as security for a loan to the
taxpayer during the exchange.
Likewise, the taxpayer may not
cause sale proceeds from relinquished property to be
credited to any account in the taxpayer's name, nor may
he have unrestricted access to any account in which
these proceeds are deposited during the exchange period.
Safe
Harbors
In drafting its Regulations, the IRS was also mindful of
questions left unanswered by the Starker decision. To
answer these and other concerns, the Regulations provide
for "safe harbors." The safe harbors are essentially
protocols, if the taxpayer follows the formalities
dictated by the safe harbor provisions the IRS will deem
the exchange to have been conducted within the spirit of
§ 1031.
There are
four safe harbors:
- Security or guarantee
arrangements
- Qualified escrow accounts
and qualified trusts
- Qualified intermediaries
- Interest and growth factors
Security or Guarantee Arrangements The first
safe harbor provides for security or guarantee
arrangements. Remembering that not all taxpayers will
have the comfort of having a Crown Zellerbach as their
trading partner, the Regulations contemplate that the
taxpayer will use the services of an intermediary, and
during the exchange period the Regulations allow the
taxpayer to receive certain forms of security or
guarantees backing the intermediary's performance.
Specifically, the taxpayer may
receive a mortgage, deed of trust, or other security
interest in property, other than cash, to secure the
intermediary's faithful performance. The Regulations do
not permit receipt of cash as security, since that would
be akin to receipt of sale proceeds from relinquished
property.
Likewise, the Regulations allow
the taxpayer to take a standby letter of credit, or a
third party guarantee, to back the intermediary's
performance.
Qualified Escrow Accounts and Qualified Trusts
The second safe harbor provides for qualified escrow
accounts and qualified trusts. Unwilling to let this
issue go unregulated, the Regulations require that
during the exchange period sale proceeds from
relinquished property must be deposited with an escrow
holder or trustee who is not the taxpayer or a
"disqualified person." The deposit must be pursuant to a
written escrow or trust agreement, which must provide
for the strict control of money or other property during
the exchange period.
Qualified Intermediaries
The third safe harbor provides for qualified
intermediaries. The regulations require that the
intermediary may not be the taxpayer or a "disqualified
person." The contractual relationship between the
taxpayer and intermediary must be formalized by a
written "exchange agreement," which must provide for the
strict control of money or other property during the
exchange.
Also, and very importantly, the
exchange agreement may be entered into after the
taxpayer agrees to transfer relinquished property.
Practically, this is accomplished by the taxpayer giving
the intermediary an assignment of the taxpayer's rights
under the agreement to sell the relinquished property,
and by giving the prospective buyer notice of the
assignment.
This latter provision is of
great benefit to the taxpayer. Frequently a taxpayer
will have found a buyer for his property, and will have
entered into an agreement for sale, before considering
the tax ramifications. Worse yet, the taxpayer or
listing broker may be holding earnest money, paid by the
prospective buyer.
By allowing the taxpayer to
enter into the exchange agreement after the agreement
for sale of the relinquished property, the Regulations
permit the taxpayer to convert his transaction to an
exchange at any time before close of escrow on the
relinquished property. And, intermediary service
providers are typically able to provide the necessary
forms, converting the transaction to an exchange, on
very short notice.
Taxpayers should be cautioned,
however, to be careful about holding earnest money after
entering into an exchange. Once the transaction is
converted to an exchange, all earnest money should be
paid into the exchange escrow account --else the earnest
money may be considered taxable.
Interest and Growth Factors
The fourth safe harbor provides for interest and growth
factors.
The Regulations permit the
taxpayer to be credited for interest or a growth factor
during the exchange period, as provided by a written
agreement (typically a part of the escrow, trust or
exchange agreement), which also provides for strict
control of receipt of money or other property during the
exchange period. In other words, any interest or growth
factor earned by the taxpayer is subject to the same
receipt rules as are sale proceeds from relinquished
property. And, alas, any interest or growth factor
earned and ultimately paid to the taxpayer will be
taxable as ordinary income.
Cash-Out
Rules
- Written agreement
- Strict control of money or
property within 180-day exchange period, except
- If no
identification within identification period,
- After
acquisition of all replacement property, or
- Occurrence
after identification period of contingency that
relates to the exchange, is provided for in
writing, and is beyond control of the taxpayer
and any "disqualified person"
Leaving no stone unturned, the
Regulations spell out when and how the taxpayer (and
others) may receive cash or other property from the
exchange escrow account.
The Regulations require that
provisions for cashing out of an exchange be formalized
by written agreement (typically the exchange, escrow or
trust agreement), which provides for strict control of
money or other property within the 180-day exchange
period, except
- If no identification is
made within the identification period, then the
taxpayer can cash out. This is, of course, logical,
because then the exchange is disqualified anyway.
- After acquisition of all
replacement property, or
- Upon the occurrence after
the identification period of a contingency that
relates to the exchange, is provided for in writing,
and is beyond control of the taxpayer and any
"disqualified person." Such a contingency might be
unforeseen contamination of the property, inability
to obtain needed parking, inability to obtain zoning
changes, and the like. In such a case, the taxpayer
may be legally entitled to cancel his agreement to
purchase replacement property, which then spoils the
exchange since his time for making another
identification has expired.
Permitted
"Receipt" Rules
- Items received incidental
to transfer of relinquished property but not
considered sale proceeds
In addition to the cash-out rules, above, there are
two rules permitting "receipts" during the exchange
period for certain limited purposes.
The first of these rules permits receipt of items
received incidental to transfer of relinquished
property but not considered sale proceeds. For
example, where the relinquished property is an
apartment building, the taxpayer is entitled to
prorated rents. The logic is that rents are taxable
as income and not part of the capital gain
calculation. Likewise, the taxpayer may be entitled
to receive prorated deposits (such as with a local
utility) in connection with sale of relinquished
property.
The Regulations make clear that this rule does not
permit the taxpayer to receive earnest money or
option payments paid in connection with sale of the
relinquished property. As discussed above, once the
transaction is converted to an exchange any earnest
money or option payments should be deposited with
the exchange escrow holder.
- Transactional items paid in
connection with transfer of relinquished property or
acquisition of replacement property
The second permitted receipt rule allows for payment
of transactional items on connection with the
transfer of relinquished property or acquisition of
replacement property. For example, commissions,
prorated taxes and title company fees may be paid.
On the other hand, the Regulations state that debts
unrelated to the exchange may not be paid as
"transactional items." For example, the taxpayer may
not direct that cash in the exchange escrow account
be used to pay off personal credit card or charge
accounts.
The Regulations dictate that cash in the exchange
escrow account may not be used (during the exchange
period) to reimburse the taxpayer for earnest money
paid in connection with purchase of the replacement
property. In practice, the same result can be
accomplished if the taxpayer directs the exchange
escrow holder to pay earnest money directly from the
exchange escrow account to the seller of replacement
property. In this way, the taxpayer doesn't handle
cash and the purity of the exchange is maintained.
Finally, and as discussed above, the Regulations
specify that cash in the exchange escrow account may
not be used for repairs or improvements to
replacement property. Any such work must be paid for
from taxpayer resources outside the exchange
account.
8.
Revenue Procedure 2000-37 - Rules for "Parking" and the
Reverse Exchange
As mentioned above, the 1991 Regulations did not address
reverse exchanges, nor did they offer answers for some
practical problems arising in cases where replacement
property would have to be constructed or renovated
during the exchange period.
These issues were later
addressed, in September 2000, by an IRS policy statement
known as "Revenue Procedure 2000-37."
The purpose of the revenue
procedure was to acknowledge and announce approved
protocols for a practice that had become common among
taxpayers (and their advisors) to facilitate reverse
exchanges and/or improvements to replacement property
during the exchange period - a practice known as
"parking."
Under a "parking" arrangement, a
taxpayer doing a reverse exchange might cause desired
replacement property to be conveyed to a third party
under a holding or trust agreement (i.e., "parked")
while the taxpayer arranges for transfer of relinquished
property to its ultimate transferee, completing the
exchange. Or, a taxpayer may cause a third party to
acquire desired replacement property and immediately
exchange it for relinquished property, thereafter
"parking" the relinquished property with the third party
until the taxpayer arranges for transfer of the
relinquished property to its ultimate transferee.
Likewise, a taxpayer wanting improvements to be made to
replacement property before completing his exchange, may
"park" the replacement property with a third party
during the exchange period.
The revenue procedure provides a
"safe harbor" for certain "parking" arrangements between
a taxpayer and an "exchange accommodation titleholder"
(i.e., third party), if the property is held in a
"qualified exchange accommodation arrangement" (QEAA). A
property will be deemed held in an approved QEAA if all
of the following requirements are met:
- Legal title to the property
(or other "qualified indicia of ownership") is held
by a person (the "exchange accommodation
titleholder") who is not the taxpayer or a
"disqualified person," and the "person" is either
one subject to federal income tax or, if the
"person" is treated as a partnership or S
corporation, more than 90 percent of its interests
or stock are owned by partners or shareholders who
are subject to federal income tax. The term
"qualified indicia of ownership" includes indicia
"treated as beneficial ownership under applicable
principles of commercial law" (such as a contract
for deed), or interests in an entity "that is
disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for
federal income tax purposes (e.g., a single member
limited liability company) and that holds either
legal title to the property or other indicia of
ownership;"
- At the time the property is
transferred to the exchange accommodation
titleholder, it is the taxpayer's "bona fide intent"
that it be held for a qualified 1031 tax-deferred
exchange;
- No later than five business
days after the transfer to the exchange
accommodation titleholder, the taxpayer and the
exchange accommodation titleholder enter into a
written "qualified exchange accommodation
agreement," providing that the exchange
accommodation titleholder is holding the property
for the benefit of the taxpayer in accordance with
section 1031 and this revenue procedure, that the
parties agree to report the holding to the IRS as
provided in this revenue procedure, and that the
exchange accommodation titleholder will be treated
as the beneficial owner of the property for all
federal income tax purposes. It's also required that
both parties report "the federal income tax
attributes of the property on their federal income
tax returns" per their written agreement;
- No later than 45 days after
the transfer of replacement property to the exchange
accommodation titleholder, the taxpayer must
identify the relinquished property "in a manner
consistent" with the rules for identification of
replacement property under the 1991 Regulations,
described in section 7 above.
- No later than 180 days
after the transfer of property to the exchange
accommodation titleholder, either (a) the property
is transferred to the taxpayer as replacement
property, or (b) the property is transferred to an
ultimate transferee as relinquished property; and
- The combined time period
that relinquished and/or replacement property(ies)
are held in the QEAA does not exceed 180 days.
In addition to the "safe harbor"
of the QEAA, the revenue procedure lists "permissible
agreements" which, if they become involved in an
exchange, will not cause property to fail to be treated
as held in an approved QEAA. These are:
- An exchange accommodation
titleholder may also enter into an exchange
agreement to serve as the taxpayer's qualified
intermediary, subject to the rules contained in the
1991 Regulations;
- The taxpayer or a
"disqualified person" (as defined in the 1991
Regulations) may guarantee obligations undertaken by
the exchange accommodation titleholder in connection
with the exchange, or indemnify the titleholder
against costs and expenses;
- The taxpayer or a
disqualified person may loan or advance funds to the
exchange accommodation titleholder, or guarantee a
loan or advance to the titleholder;
- The property may be leased
by the exchange accommodation titleholder to the
taxpayer or a disqualified person;
- The taxpayer or a
disqualified person may manage the property,
supervise improvements, act as a contractor, or
otherwise provide services to the exchange
accommodation titleholder with respect to the
property;
- The taxpayer and the
exchange accommodation titleholder may enter into
agreements relating to purchase or sale of the
property, "including puts and calls at fixed or
formula prices," effective for a period not to
exceed 185 days from the date the property was
transferred to the exchange accommodation
titleholder; and
- The taxpayer and the
exchange accommodation titleholder may enter into
agreements providing that any variation in value of
relinquished property from the estimated value on
the date the property was transferred to the
exchange accommodation titleholder may be taken into
account upon the titleholder's disposition of the
relinquished property.
The revenue procedure states the
IRS recognizes that "parking" transactions can be
accomplished, without adverse tax consequences, "outside
of the safe harbor provided in this revenue procedure."
What this probably means is that any agreement or
arrangement beyond what is contemplated by the revenue
procedure will be considered by the Service in light of
its interpretation of section 1031, the 1991
Regulations, and the court's reasoning in the Starker
decision. In other words, the fundamental rules that the
taxpayer must intend to do a like-kind exchange and may
not enjoy use of proceeds from relinquished property
during the exchange period should be kept in mind when
making "parking" arrangements.
9.
Choosing an Intermediary
One of the most important decisions to be made by a
taxpayer considering an exchange is selection of the
intermediary.
The intermediary should be
knowledgeable and experienced, a "qualified" person
within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code and the
1991 Regulations, and able to provide adequate security
for faithful performance of intermediary functions.

Frequently we see news reports
about escrow and intermediary companies having
mishandled and lost client moneys.
Such was the case with San Diego
Realty Exchange, an intermediary company once operating
in San Diego, California.
The proprietor misappropriated
client trust funds by loaning about $6,000,000 to a
startup business he was backing, which was to offer
electronic tax return filing services.
The startup business failed, the
intermediary went into bankruptcy, and 29 taxpayers saw
their exchanges evaporate.
Then things got worse. A trustee
in bankruptcy was appointed, who filed adversary
proceedings seeking to undo 40 exchange transactions
closed by the intermediary within 90 days of the
commencement of bankruptcy. Calling the intermediary's
operation a "Ponzi scheme," the trustee sought to have
all cash or property "passing" through the hands of the
intermediary during the 90-day period restored to the
bankrupt debtor's estate, for the benefit of unsecured
creditors. These proceedings were based on the "voidable
preference" provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.
When the judge handling the
bankruptcy announced he would rule in favor of the
trustee, and against the taxpayer clients, settlements
were reached involving payments totaling several million
dollars.
Nightmares like this one can
only be avoided by careful selection of the
intermediary, with particular attention to guarantee or
security arrangements the intermediary has to offer.
10. The
Delayed Exchange Transaction
Step-by-step as conducted by First American Exchange
Corporation Here is a step-by-step description of a
typical exchange (without a parking arrangement) as
handled by intermediary First American Exchange
Corporation.
- Taxpayer retains services
of independent tax advisor
- Taxpayer enters into
agreement to sell property, including a recital that
the taxpayer intends to relinquish property as part
of 1031 exchange and provision for the right to
substitute an intermediary as seller.
- Taxpayer enters into
Exchange Agreement with First American Exchange as
intermediary, intermediary becoming a principal in
each transaction (not an agent).
- When all contingencies are
satisfied, taxpayer causes intermediary to be
substituted in as seller in sale transaction for
taxpayer's relinquished property.
- Intermediary is instructed
by taxpayer to execute escrow/closing instructions
and other documents in connection with transfer of
relinquished property. Typically, intermediary will
cause taxpayer to be shown as grantor/transferor on
deed to buyer of relinquished property. This is
called "direct deeding," the intermediary does not
come into title with respect to the relinquished
property.
- The first half of the
exchange closes with transfer of the relinquished
property-time periods begin to run.
- Intermediary deposits net
proceeds from sale of relinquished property into
qualified exchange account to be held solely for the
benefit of the intermediary.
- All interest earned on
funds deposited in the exchange escrow account
accrues to the benefit of the intermediary. Per the
Exchange Agreement, taxpayer may receive credit for
a "growth factor" on funds deposited in exchange
account.
- Taxpayer identifies
replacement property(ies) on or before the 45th day
after transfer of relinquished property.
- Taxpayer enters into
agreement to acquire replacement property, including
recital that taxpayer intends to acquire property as
part of a 1031 exchange and provision for the right
to substitute intermediary as buyer.
- When all contingencies are
satisfied, taxpayer causes intermediary to be
substituted in as buyer of replacement property.
- Intermediary is instructed
by taxpayer to execute escrow/closing instructions
and other documents in connection with acquisition
of replacement property. Typically, intermediary
will cause taxpayer to be shown as
grantee/transferee on deed from seller of
replacement property. Again, the intermediary does
not come into title with respect to replacement
property.
- The final portion of the
exchange closes concurrently with acquisition of
replacement property - or in stages if multiple
properties are involved - all on or before 180th day
after transfer of relinquished property or due date
(including extension) of the taxpayer's tax return,
whichever is earlier.
- Intermediary provides
taxpayer with Settlement Statement showing receipts
and disbursements of all money and other property
involved in the exchange.
- Taxpayer files Form 8824
with the IRS (and, depending on state law,
equivalent documentation with state tax
authorities).
11.
Questions, Answers, and Best Guesses
Q:
We want to do an exchange, but we don't want to use
all of the sale proceeds from our relinquished property.
Can we proceed using only half the proceeds?
A:
Yes. As part of the exchange agreement, you will be
asked to execute an assignment of your rights as to a
50% interest in the sale proceeds from the relinquished
property. The intermediary can take it from there.
Q:
I want to do a 1031 exchange including property which
has been used as my personal residence as recently as 6
months ago. Is there any problem?
A:
Yes, perhaps. Obviously, you know your personal
residence does not qualify for nonrecognition treatment
under § 1031. There is no written regulation on this,
but we know that the IRS is interested whenever a
taxpayer changes the use or financing of real property
shortly before, or after, a 1031 exchange. You need a
tax advisor, and most would probably suggest that the
property be used as income or investment property for a
significant period before becoming part of a 1031
exchange.
Q:
I want to exchange investment property for a personal
residence which I would live in. How can I qualify the
transaction for nonrecognition treatment under § 1031?
A:
This is similar to the problem discussed above. You need
a tax advisor, and most would suggest that your
replacement property be used as income or investment
property for a significant period after completion of
your exchange.
Q:
I am a limited partner in a limited partnership whose
sole asset is an apartment building. I know that my
interest in the partnership will not qualify for
nonrecognition treatment under § 1031. Is there any way
I can structure the transaction to use this asset of
mine as part of a 1031 exchange?
A:
Your tax advisor will recommend that you seek agreement
from the limited partnership for a conversion of your
10% partnership interest into an undivided 10% interest
in the fee title to the apartment building. If this can
be done and you can meet any holding period issues
described above, your 10% undivided interest in the real
property may be used as part of a 1031 exchange.
Q:
I want to do a 1031 exchange with my daughter as my
trading partner. Are there any problems?
A:
It's not necessarily a problem, but you should be aware
of Internal Revenue Code § 1031(f), which provides
special rules for exchanges between related persons. If
either of you should dispose of exchange property within
two years of the exchange period, the exchange may be
disqualified retroactively.
Q:
I entered into an agreement for sale of my investment
property three weeks ago. Yesterday, it occurred to me
that my capital gain on this sale will be substantial.
Is it too late to get into a 1031 exchange?
A:
No, not until you close escrow on sale of the
relinquished property. Remember that under the "safe
harbor" rule for qualified intermediaries, there is
express provision for entering an exchange agreement
after you have agreed to sell relinquished property. You
need to choose an intermediary as soon as possible (but
don't be hasty - - remember how important selection of
the intermediary is), and make sure any earnest money
collected in connection with sale of the relinquished
property is deposited in the exchange escrow account
promptly.
This concludes our "short
course," we hope you will find it useful.
For more
information or if you're ready to more forward with your
investment strategy...click
here!
|