May 2010


From ICSC Website

U.S. lawmakers introduced legislation yesterday that would increase taxes on the percent of the profits investors collect from the deals their firms complete. The proposals to increase taxes on so-called “carried interest” are part a of larger attempt to reform the U.S. financial sector, but could end up hurting the commercial real estate industry just as it is trying to emerge from the worst recession for decades.

Specifically, legislators want to reclassify “carried interest,” which is currently treated as capital gains and taxed at 15 percent. Instead, carried interest would be considered ordinary income, subjecting it to a top tax rate of 35 percent, plus the 2.9 percent Medicare tax. This is likely to rise to 39.6 percent next year. Furthermore, the 3.8 percent Medicare tax included as a last minute addition to the health care will be added on top in 2013. Limited partnerships and liability companies are so common in real estate that the impact would be wide, observers say.

Carried interest — sometimes referred to as “the carry” — refers to the share of profits general partners of such institutions receive as compensation. Typically, general partners also take management, construction or leasing fees, though that is already classified as ordinary income.

Congress initiated the carried tax increase back in 2007 as a way to target perceived excess and abuses within equity and hedge funds. Many in the real estate sector will be unintentionally swept up by the new legislation if it passes, opponents say. If carried interest is taxed as ordinary income, general partners will owe billions more in federal taxes annually. The equity at risk for higher taxation is a traditional part of compensation at real estate development and management companies (which are often partnerships) and also for individuals in private deals, observers say.

Critics point out that most limited partnership managers are not overseers of private equity and hedge funds with billion-dollar returns, but rather more-modest partnerships in which the general partners have a stake in the form of capital investment, sweat equity and reputation.

“Here’s what will happen if this bill becomes law,” said Betsy Laird, senior vice president at ICSC’s Washington office. “Real estate values will be depressed immediately, transaction volume will drop. Risk will get riskier and certain projects our members once may have undertaken will no longer make economic sense.”

Lee H. Wagman, vice chairman of Los Angeles–based CityView, also takes a dim view of the proposal. “The proposal to reclassify “carried interest” as ordinary income instead of capital gains is tantamount to a tax increase on limited partnerships which will be a significant disincentive to take the kind of entrepreneurial risks that have been the hallmark of our industry. By dampening the motivation of real estate developers to undertake new deals, we will put a drag on one of the few robust job-creating sectors in the economy,” he said. “The proposal also makes what I believe is a false comparison between real estate partnerships, where the general partner assumes significant risks in providing things like loan guarantees, upfront risk capital, and carve outs to non-recourse provisions, and the typical private equity structure where the carried interest is much less of a reward for taking on these risks and capital obligations, if at all.”

The House vote on the measure is planned for Tuesday, with the Senate vote due May 28.

The timing could not be worse, says Michael P. Kercheval, president and CEO of ICSC. “Imposing this tax burden would be devastating at a moment when the retail real estate industry, one of the U.S. economy’s biggest drivers, is recovering after the recession,” he said. “ICSC is doing all it can to make legislators aware of the unforeseen consequences of this provision.”

Compiled by the staff of Shopping Centers Today. © May 21, 2010 International Council of Shopping Centers.

Advertisements

Just as commercial real estate is starting to recover… Congress plans to drive a stake through its heart and raise income taxes from 15% capital gains rate to 35% ordinary income rate. Tell your U.S. Senators about the unintended consequences associated with the carried interest proposal.  Please call 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Senators’ offices.  Visit http://lac.icsc.org/icsc/dbq/officials/ to look up your Senators.

Key Points:

  • The tax increase on carried interest proposed in the tax extenders package will have serious unintended consequences to local communities.
  • This proposal would be the largest tax increase on real estate since the 1986 Tax Reform Act.
  • This tax increase is likely to hurt economic redevelopment and job creation in our most economically deprived communities because it captures real estate development.
  • While the original target was private equity and hedge fund managers, this proposal will disproportionately impact the real estate industry because it will increase the tax on the general partner’s share of profits in a real estate partnership.
  • Unlike hedge fund and private equity firms, carried interest in real estate deals is not simply compensation for services.  Rather, it is the return for taking on the tremendous risks and liabilities associated with real estate development projects, such as environmental concerns, lawsuits, operational shortfalls, construction delays and loan guaranties.
  • This potential tax increase does not recognize the entrepreneurial risk and personal guarantees that the managing partner offers on behalf of the real estate partnership.
  • Quite simply, if this legislation is enacted, the managing partner’s incentive to take-on the risk is greatly diminished.  Projects with brownfield, mixed-use, or low income components will be most impacted by the carried interest proposal because they are the most risky.
  • This tax increase will also hit small to medium size developers the hardest.  These developers are already struggling with the current credit crisis, and this proposal will further limit available capital in the real estate market.
  • With the commercial real estate industry under serious strain due to current economic conditions, raising this carried interest tax on real estate will not only threaten economic development projects, but it will also jeopardize the related jobs that those projects create.

With Little Quality Office Product in Play, Investors Vying Sharply for Low Hanging Fruit

By Mark Heschmeyer

Last year, capitalization rates on large office property sales rocketed from the mid-6 range to the mid-8 range. So far this year, cap rates have reversed course, falling back just as rapidly to mid-7 range. Under ‘normal’ conditions, this would imply that property values are increasing. So why isn’t the commercial real estate industry elated?

Cap rates are a benchmark determined by dividing income by property value. Increasing cap rates typically imply that property values are falling. Last year, no one in commercial real estate doubted that the rapid rise in cap rates reflected an equal rapid decline in property values.

[BLOGGER COMMENT: This is a bifurcated market. Class D&F assets are being sold at a dramatic discounts to replacement cost for cash since no financing is available for low quality assets. Class A&AA assets are receiving 20-30 bids when those assets come to market from investors that have raised trillions of equity capital and need to place it before their investors start asking for their money back. The trend toward low cap rates in investment grade assets will continue as the 10 year Treasury stays at such low levels (3.48% as of this writing) and positive leverage can be achieved.  I predict the return of transactions for Class B&C assets will only happen once CMBS 2.0 hits high gear in Q3 or Q4 of 2010.]

READ ARTICLE ON CO-STAR

By Christopher Hosford

Student housing has come a long way from the bleak dorms of bygone days, or the meager off-campus options that were little better. Today, in many cases, student housing rivals market-rate spa communities in their array of amenities and cutting-edge style. Further, they enjoy generally strong overall occupancy and the prospect of growing rental rates, as college enrollment continues to increase.

But student housing does have a dark side…

[BLOGGER COMMENT: At the Apartment Finance Today conference that I attended a couple of weeks ago there was a lot of buzz about student housing. In 2009 we arranged a $15.325 million construction loan for a student housing property in Tampa.  The process of placing this loan taught me that this is an industry niche that is often misunderstood by investors and lenders. It is best to proceed with caution and work with best in breed developers and managers of purpose-built student housing that know the opportunities and pitfalls in this dynamic market.]

Read article in MHNOnline