Category: Tax Policy

Business Coalition Supports Legislation to Make New Pass-Through Deduction Permanent

Posted on by Trey Jackson

The Real Estate Roundtable and a coalition of more than 100 business organizations yesterday sent a letter to Senate and House tax writers supporting legislation that would permanently extend the new 20 percent deduction for qualified pass-through business income. (Coalition letter, April 11)

 

The  Real Estate Roundtable and a coalition of more than 100 business organizations yesterday sent a letter to Senate and House tax writers supporting legislation that would permanently extend the new 20 percent deduction for qualified pass-through business income. 
(Coalition letter, April 11) 

  • Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) introduced the Main Street Tax Certainty Act yesterday (S. 1149) to make the deduction permanent.  The Senate bill mirrors legislation introduced in the House (H.R. 216) by Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) and Jason Smith (R-MO).
  • The 20 percent deduction for pass-through business income  (under Internal Revenue Code section 199A) is one of the most important – and complex – elements of the 2017 tax overhaul law.  The deduction was designed to provide relief to the 30 million businesses in the United States that are not C corporations, and thus don’t benefit from the corporate tax cut.  It is currently scheduled to sunset at the end of 2025.
  • The coalition letter states that the House and Senate bills to make the deduction permanent will help ensure tax relief for the millions of employers organized as partnerships, S corporations, and sole proprietorships. “Repealing this sunset will benefit millions of pass-through businesses, leading to higher economic growth and more employment,” according to the letter.
  • The Treasury Department on Jan. 18 issued final regulations and new guidance on the 20 percent deduction.  Proposed regulations issued alongside the final rules ensure that investors who receive REIT dividends indirectly through an interest in a mutual fund are eligible for the pass-through deduction.  (Roundtable Weekly,  Jan. 25, 2019)
  • Yesterday, the IRS released a fact sheet (FS-2019-8) on the new section 199A deduction.  Among the topics addressed are the qualified business income component, qualified real estate investment trust (REIT) dividends and qualified publicly traded partnership (PTP) income. (IRS news release, April 11) 

The Section 199A deduction was a key topic of Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in the fall of 2017, shortly before lawmakers released the first version of their tax overhaul. The Roundtable was closely involved in the legislative development of the provision.  (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 22, 2017) 

Business Coalition Urges Congress to Correct Cost Recovery Period for Nonresidential Real Estate Improvements

Posted on by Trey Jackson

A coalition of businesses and trade groups, including The Real Estate Roundtable, today urged all members of Congress to cosponsor the Restoring Investment in Improvements Act (H.R. 1869 /  S. 803) – a bill that would correct a drafting error in tax reform.  The legislation would give qualified improvement property (QIP) a 15-year depreciation period and restore its eligibility for accelerated bonus depreciation. (QIP Policy Comment Letter, April 26)

 

A coalition of businesses and trade groups, including The Real Estate Roundtable, urged all members of Congress to cosponsor the Restoring Investment in Improvements Act (H.R. 1869 /  S. 803) – a bill that would correct a drafting error in tax reform.  The legislation would give qualified improvement property (QIP) a 15-year depreciation period and restore its eligibility for accelerated bonus depreciation. (QIP Policy Comment Letter, April 26)

  • House Ways and Means Committee members Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) and Jackie Walorski (R-IN) introduced H.R. 1869 on March 26. The Senate bill (S. 803) was introduced earlier in the month by Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Doug Jones (D-AL).  (Roundtable Weekly, March 15)
  • The legislation would correct a mistake in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 that lengthened the cost recovery period for QIP, which generally applies to improvements to the interior of existing nonresidential buildings.  
  • The error has resulted in a significantly longer 39- or 40-year cost recovery period.  The intent of Congress was to allow the immediate expensing of QIP – or provide a 20-year recovery period in the case of taxpayers electing out of new limitations on the deductibility of business interest.
  • The April 26 coalition letter to leadership in the House and Senate, as well as leaders of tax committees in both chambers, notes that there is no budget impact to restore the QIP depreciation to 15 years.  
  • Specific examples are offered in the letter to show the negative consequences that the current law is having on QIP investments and commercial renovation projects.  The letter states, “Not surprisingly, it is causing numerous negative ripple effects for individuals and businesses, including on job creation, sales of QIP products and building supplies, property values, building occupancy and rental income, cost-saving energy efficiency gains, and even on fire safety.”
  • Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey D. DeBoer said, “The Restoring Investment in Improvements Act would enact an immediate and necessary correction to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  It would reverse an unnecessary drag on building investment, construction activity, and job creation.  Congress should move on this common-sense legislation quickly and reinstate a much shorter cost recovery period for building improvements.” 

In the weeks ahead, the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees may address “technical corrections” to the TCJA, such as the cost recovery period for QIP along with other tax legislative priorities. (Roundtable Weekly, March 29)

Bipartisan FIRPTA Repeal Legislation Introduced

Posted on by Trey Jackson

Bipartisan legislation introduced on April 10 by Reps. John Larson (D-CT) and Kenny Marchant (R-TX) would repeal the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA) – a discriminatory capital gains tax on foreign investors in U.S. real estate.  (Legislative text of the Invest in America Act and one-page summary)

This week, Rep. John Larson (D-CT), above, and Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-TX)  introduced bipartisan legislation, Invest in America Act, that would repeal FIRPTA.

  • FIRPTA’s tax penalty does not apply to any other asset class except U.S. real estate.  The arcane tax, enacted in 1980, discourages capital formation and investment that could create jobs and improve U.S. real estate and infrastructure.  By repealing FIRPTA, the Invest in America Act (H.R. 2210) would unlock foreign capital for productive investment. 
  • Rep. Larson stated, “The American Society of Civil Engineers has given America’s infrastructure a D+ rating. That’s unacceptable. This isn’t a Republican or Democrat issue, this is an American issue. I am proud to introduce the Invest in America Act today with Congressman Marchant to unlock more opportunities to invest in communities in Connecticut and across the nation and to rebuild our infrastructure.”  (Larson-Marchant news release, April 10)
  • Rep. Marchant added, “I am proud to partner with Congressman Larson to introduce the Invest in America Act, which will remove the barriers in our tax code that discourage investments in real estate.  By providing parity to real estate assets under the law, foreign investors will be able to create more opportunities and more prosperity for American families.”
  • The Larson-Marchant bill (H.R. 2210) was introduced with a total of 11 original cosponsors from the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee who represent every major region of the country.  
  • In 2015, Congress passed meaningful reforms to FIRPTA, exempting foreign pension funds and doubling the amount a foreign interest may invest in a publicly traded U.S. REIT.  (Roundtable Weekly, March 18, 2016)

    A  report by the Rosen Consulting Group  (RCG) estimated that FIRPTA repeal would generate an initial increase of between $65 billion and $125 billion in international investment in U.S. commercial real estate.  

     

  • The Real Estate Roundtable and American Institute of Architects released a statement of support for the Invest in America Act yesterday.  RER President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer said, “The FIRPTA regime is an anti-competitive outlier that deflects global capital to other countries.  Our infrastructure challenges demand a holistic approach and innovative solutions. Now is the time to build on the recent success of the 2015 reforms by eliminating FIRPTA outright and unlocking private capital for even more job growth and infrastructure improvements.”
  • The Roundtable and 19 national trade organizations wrote to Ways and Means Committee Members and other key House lawmakers on March 28, urging them to support the Invest in America Act.  (Coalition FIRPTA letter, March 28)

A report by the Rosen Consulting Group (RCG) estimated that FIRPTA repeal would generate an initial increase of between $65 billion and $125 billion in international investment in U.S. commercial real estate. This new level of activity would lead to the creation of 147,000 to 284,000 jobs throughout the economy and increase taxpayers’ income by $8 billion to $16 billion.  (Unlocking Foreign Investment in U.S. Commercial Real Estate, July 2017) 

 

Senators Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Correct Cost Recovery Period for Nonresidential Real Estate Improvements

Posted on by Trey Jackson

This week U.S. Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Doug Jones (D-AL) introduced bipartisan legislation, the Restoring Investment in Improvements Act (S. 803), to correct a mistake in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that lengthened the cost recovery period for qualified improvement property (QIP).  

U.S. Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Doug Jones (D-AL) introduced bipartisan legislation, the Restoring Investment in Improvements Act (  S. 803  ), to correct a mistake in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that lengthened the cost recovery period for qualified improvement property (QIP).  

  • The unintended drafting error has resulted in a significantly longer 39- or 40-year cost recovery period for most improvements to the interior of nonresidential real estate.  The intent of Congress was to allow the immediate expensing of QIP – or provide a 20-year recovery period in the case of taxpayers electing out of new limitations on the deductibility of business interest.
  • Prior to the law’s enactment, commercial building tenants, retail store owners and restaurant owners could write off the costs of their renovations over a span of 15 years.  The legislation drafted by Sens. Toomey and Jones would allow many businesses to immediately deduct the full cost of interior renovations, and would apply retroactively to January 1, 2018. (The Hill, Mar. 14)
  • The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act included a strict new limitation on the deductibility of business interest expense, but also provided an exception for an “electing real property trade or business.”  In general, taxpayers that develop, rent, manage, or operate real estate are not subject to the interest limits, but are subject to longer cost recovery periods for their real estate and real estate improvements.  The Toomey-Jones bill would ensure that the QIP of an electing real property trade or business is depreciated over 20 years, rather than 40 years.   

  • Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey D. DeBoer applauded the Senators bipartisan legislation introduced this week. “The Restoring Investment in Improvements Act ( S. 803 ) introduced by Senators Toomey and Jones is a simple and straightforward technical correction to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” he said.

    “The Restoring Investment in Improvements Act (S. 803) introduced by Senators Toomey and Jones is a simple and straightforward technical correction to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  An acknowledged drafting error significantly lengthened the depreciation period for building improvements.  This has caused a large increase in the after-tax costs of modernizing and altering buildings of all types and uses, from shopping centers to office buildings to industrial properties and restaurants.  The result is an immediate and unnecessary drag on building investment, construction activity, and job creation, said Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey D. DeBoer.  “Congress should act quickly to pass this legislation and reinstate a much shorter cost recovery period for building improvements.”

  • In October 2018, the Roundtable along with 239 businesses and trade groups, wrote to Secretary Mnuchin urging the Treasury Department to provide taxpayers with administrative relief from the drafting error. (Roundtable Weekly, Oct. 12, 2018) 

On Thursday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told reporters that he has discussed fixing technical errors in the 2017 tax law with congressional leaders on both sides. “This is something we’re very interested in doing. There’s a lot of demand,” he said following his testimony before the Senate Finance Committee. (Bloomberg, Mar. 14)

Roundtable Asks Treasury to Clarify Real Estate Exception to New Limit on Business Interest Deductibility

Posted on by Trey Jackson

The Real Estate Roundtable on Tuesday wrote to the Treasury Department and IRS about the new limitation on business interest deductibility enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA).  The provision allows qualifying businesses to continue fully deducting interest related to commercial real estate debt.  (Roundtable comment letter, Feb. 26)

The Roundtable’s Feb. 26 letter on business interest deductibility.

  • Roundtable President & CEO Jeffrey DeBoer sent the  detailed comments as Treasury officials work to finalize proposed regulations implementing TCJA’s new section 163(j), which limits the deductibility of business interest to no more than 30% of modified, adjusted taxable income.  Section 163(j) includes a critical exception for real estate.
  • On December 28, 2018 Treasury published proposed regulations clarifying that partner-level debt may qualify for the real estate exception-if the debt is allocable to a partnership engaged in a real property trade or business (RPTOB). 
  • DeBoer notes in The Roundtable’s Feb. 26 letter, “In light of the clear legislative intent to enact a broad real estate exception and its importance to the health and stability of real estate markets, the final Treasury regulations should build on the proposed rules and not limit unnecessarily the ability of a real property trade or business (RPTOB) to elect out of the provisions of section 163(j).”
  • DeBoer adds, “No issue in tax reform is more important to the health and stability of U.S. commercial real estate than the new rules related to the taxation of business-related borrowing.  U.S. commercial real estate is leveraged conservatively with roughly $14 trillion of total property value and $4 trillion of debt.”

The letter includes detailed comments on several 163(j) implementation issues and makes the following recommendations:

The need to preserve the deduction for income-producing real estate was at the center of Jeffrey DeBoer’s testimony and exchanges with Senate Finance Committee members before final passage of the 2017 tax overhaul law. (Roundtable Statement for the Record, Sept. 19, 2017 and video clips). 

 

  • The real estate exception should extend through all “tiered” investment structures. 
  • The real estate exception should apply fully to non-rental activities. 
  • Treasury regulations should not “whipsaw” corporations/REITs through conflicting definitions of a “trade or business” that can effectively block their ability to use the real estate exception. 
  • Treasury regulations should modify the anti-abuse rule for related-party leases. 
  • The small business exception should not prevent otherwise eligible partners from qualifying for the real estate exception. 
  • Debt allocation rules should not undercount real estate assets for purposes of the real estate exception.
  • Treasury regulations should confirm that senior housing constitutes a real property trade or business.

The economic consequences of changes to the deductibility of business interest expense, and particularly the potential impact on real estate, was a central focus of lawmakers during consideration of the historic tax overhaul in 2017.  The need to preserve the deduction for income-producing real estate was at the center of DeBoer’s testimony and exchanges with Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch – and other members of the committee – during the last congressional hearing on business tax reform prior to votes on the TCJA.  (Roundtable Statement for the Record, Sept. 19, 2017 and video clips).  

Treasury Releases Highly Anticipated Final Regulations on New Pass-Through Deduction

Posted on by Trey Jackson

The Treasury Department on Jan. 18 issued final regulations and new guidance on the 20 percent deduction for qualified pass-through business income (under Internal Revenue Code section 199A).

The Treasury Department on Jan. 18 issued  final regulations  and new guidance on the 20 percent deduction for qualified pass-through business income (under Internal Revenue Code section 199A).

  • The new 20% deduction for pass-through business income is one of the most important – and complex – elements of the 2017 tax overhaul law.  The deduction was designed to provide relief to the 30 million businesses in the United States that are not C corporations, and thus don’t benefit from the corporate tax cut. 
  • The proposal was a key topic of Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee shortly before lawmakers released the first version of their tax overhaul in the fall of 2017, and The Roundtable was closely involved in the legislative development of the provision.  (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 22, 2017) 
  • The final regulations are largely positive, addressing several concerns highlighted in Roundtable comments that could have limited taxpayers’ ability to apply the deduction against real estate rental income. 
    • For example, Treasury agreed with The Roundtable and reversed its prior position on how non-recognition transactions, such as a like-kind exchange or a contribution of property to a partnership, affect the pass-through deduction.  The proposed regulations effectively would have penalized taxpayers for engaging in non-recognition transactions. 
    • Treasury adopted the Roundtable request to allow for aggregation of trades or businesses at the “entity” level, not just the individual level.  Treasury also adopted the Roundtable request to allocate the basis of a property to partners based on “book” depreciation rules, not tax depreciation rules. 
  • In certain areas, the final rules did not adopt specific recommendations offered in Roundtable comments, but nonetheless set forth helpful guidance. 

    The proposal was a key topic of Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee shortly before lawmakers released the first version of their tax overhaul in the fall of 2017.  ( Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 22, 2017) 

    • The Roundtable had asked Treasury to clarify that all real estate rental income would be considered income from a trade or business—a requirement of the statute.  Treasury declined to go this far, but did issue a proposed revenue procedure (IRS Not. 2019-07) that would establish a safe harbor for real estate rental income earned by taxpayers who spend 250 hours, directly or indirectly, on the activity. 
    • The Roundtable had encouraged Treasury to allow taxpayers to aggregate all real estate rental activities, including those conducted in separate entities, at the individual level.  While Treasury did not adopt this simplification, it did offer helpful new examples to clarify when real estate activities are sufficiently similar to permit aggregation by individuals.
  • In addition, proposed regulations issued alongside the final rules ensure that investors who receive REIT dividends indirectly through an interest in a mutual fund are eligible for the pass-through deduction—a priority for The Roundtable, Nareit, and others. 
  • TPAC will discuss issues related to the Section 199A regulations during its next meeting on Jan. 30 in Washington, held in conjunction with The Roundtable’s State of the Industry (SOI) Meeting.  

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal will also participate in the SOI meeting.  Neal – the long-standing co-chair of the House Real Estate Caucus – will discuss prospects for tax policy legislation with Roundtable Board Member John Fish (Chairman and CEO, SUFFOLK) on Jan. 29. 

Tax Technical Corrections Draft Bill Released by Outgoing House Ways and Means Chair; New Chair Plans Hearings on Tax Overhaul’s Impact

Posted on by Trey Jackson

Outgoing House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX) released a draft bill on Jan. 2  that includes tax technical corrections to previously enacted legislation, including the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) overhaul. 

Outgoing House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX) released a  draft bill  on Jan. 2  that includes tax technical corrections to previously enacted legislation, including the  Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)  overhaul. 

  • Rep. Brady stated, “We are releasing this discussion draft of technical corrections with respect to the TCJA and other tax legislation to inform stakeholders and provide the American people an opportunity to submit feedback on the draft provisions.  I look forward to gaining valuable feedback from the public and working with my colleagues in the House and Senate on both sides of the aisle as we continue to provide clarity and certainty for job creators across the country seeking to invest in their workers and our communities.”  
  • The path forward for a technical corrections bill in the 116th Congress will be set by the new Ways and Means Chairman – Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA).
    • Clarification that the recovery period for qualified improvement property is 15 years, or 20 years under the alternative depreciation system (ADS);
    • Clarification that REIT dividends received indirectly by a mutual fund shareholder qualify for the 20% pass-through deduction;
    • Clarification that the Opportunity Zone tax deferral benefit only extends to capital gains – a position that was also incorporated in Treasury’s October proposed regulations.
    • Numerous other clarifications in the Brady draft relate to business interest (§ 163(j)), the pass-through deduction (§ 199A), and the limitation on active losses (§ 461(l).  

The path forward for a technical corrections bill in the 116th Congress will be set by the new Ways and Means Chairman – Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA) . 
  • There is strong bipartisan support for certain technical corrections, such as the 15-year recovery period for qualified improvement property, which could help spur action on a larger tax package.  
  • However, the current draft does not clarify that a business electing out of the new interest limitation is subject to a 30-year ADS recovery period for residential rental property placed in service before 2018.  The issue could be addressed in future versions of the legislation.  
  • Prospects for enactment of technical changes is uncertain, although Ways and Means Chairman Neal stated this week that hearings on tax legislation may be held in early 2019 on the TJCA’s impact and alternative proposals.  Neal also suggested that he will seek agreement with Ranking Member Brady on legislation addressing healthcare, infrastructure and retirement savings. (Wall Street Journal and Tax Notes, Jan. 4)

The Roundtable’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC) will review these proposals, which will be a focus during TPAC’s Jan. 30 meeting, held in conjunction with The Roundtable’s State of the Industry Meeting in Washington, DC.  

 

Treasury Proposes Detailed Rules for New Restrictions on Deducting Business Interest

Posted on by Trey Jackson

On Tuesday, the Treasury Department released proposed regulations governing the new limitation on the deductibility of business interest expense, including the exception for real estate businesses. 

On Tuesday, the Treasury Department released proposed regulations governing the new limitation on the deductibility of business interest expense, including the exception for real estate businesses. 

  • Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), businesses generally can no longer deduct their interest expense to the extent it exceeds 30 percent of their annual earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA).  Business interest deductibility was a key issue in Real Estate Roundtable President & CEO Jeffrey DeBoer’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee shortly before consideration of the tax bill.  (Roundtable Statement for the Record, Sept. 19, 2017)
  • DeBoer testified that the proposal could have severe unintended consequences.  Noting that the cost of debt is a necessary expense that must be accounted for when measuring income, he testified that our capital markets are the envy of the world and that responsible, appropriate leverage helps entrepreneurs and contributes to economic growth and job creation. (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 29 and testimony video clips)
  • The final bill included a critical exception from the interest limit for an electing real property trade or business.  An electing real property trade or business is defined broadly to cover: any real property development, redevelopment, construction, reconstruction, acquisition, conversion, rental, operation, management, leasing, or brokerage trade or business. 
  • In February, the Roundtable submitted comments to Treasury with recommendations for how the real estate exception should work in the case of tiered business structures, and in the case of businesses that involve both real estate and non-real estate activities.  (Roundtable Weekly, Feb. 23, 2018)  

    Business interest deductibility was a key issue in Real Estate Roundtable President & CEO Jeffrey DeBoer’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee shortly before consideration of the tax bill.  (Roundtable Statement for the Record, Sept. 19, 2017 and  video clips ). 
  • The proposed regulations are largely favorable.  Most importantly, the regulations clarify that partner-level borrowing qualifies for the real estate exception. Thus, at the election of the taxpayer, the real estate exception can extend to debt that is incurred by a partner to acquire an interest in a partnership that is engaged in a real property trade or business.  In addition, the regulations confirm the broad definition of a real property trade or business.  The regulations also clarify that capitalized interest, which commonly arises during the development of real estate, is not subject to the interest limit.
  • With respect to taxpayers engaged in both real estate and non-real estate activities, the proposed regulations generally would allocate and apportion debt based on the relative amount of the taxpayer’s adjusted basis in assets used in those activities.  However, taxpayers would directly trace and allocate qualified nonrecourse indebtedness to the asset securing the loan (with no apportionment).  This latter rule should result in the allocation of a larger share of debt to assets qualifying for the real estate exception.
  • Some concerns remain.  Notably, the attribution rule that allows partners to qualify for the real estate exception based on partnership-level activities does not extend broadly to all upper-tier borrowing for investment in lower-tier real estate businesses.  Thus, except in limited circumstances, debt incurred by a taxpayer to invest in a corporation (or REIT) that is engaged in a real property trade or business is not eligible for the real estate exception. 

The Roundtable’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee is continuing to review the 439-page regulatory package to understand its full implications for the financing of U.S. real estate.  Comments on the proposed regulations will be due 60 days after their publication in the Federal Register.

Virginia Plans to Advance Internet Sales Tax Legislation as Opponents Aim to Roll Back Supreme Court’s Wayfair Decision

Posted on by Trey Jackson

The Supreme Court’s recent South Dakota v. Wayfair decision allowing States to collect tax owed on remote internet sales purchases could generate an estimated $250 million in annual revenue for the state of Virginia, which is aiming to start its online sales tax program this summer. 

The Real Estate Roundtable and seven other national trade organizations wrote to congressional leaders on Sept. 17, 2018 opposing any legislation that reverses or limits the Supreme Court’s June 22 decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, which allows States to collect tax owed on remote internet sales purchases.

  • Many states are seeking to expand their tax authority over online sales in the wake of the Supreme Court’s June 21 South Dakota v. Wayfair decision.  The 5-4 Wayfair ruling strongly suggests that South Dakota’s law requiring remote sellers to collect sales tax on more than $100,000 of in-state sales or 200 transactions complies with constitutional law.  
  • Virginia Finance Secretary Aubrey L. Layne Jr. recently told Bloomberg Tax that a state bill in next year’s Virginia legislative session would align with principles supported in the high court’s Wayfair decision.  Layne said details of the bill may be unveiled in December and added, “My guess is it probably won’t be effective until July.”  (BNA, Oct. 30) 
  • Despite the Wayfair ruling, a bipartisan quartet of House members led by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) introduced legislation on Sept. 13 that would  prohibit states from requiring remote sellers with less than $10 million in national annual sales from collecting and remitting sales and use taxes – pending a compact approved by Congress.  In addition to Sensenbrenner’s Online Sales Simplicity and Small Business Relief Act of 2018 (H.R. 6824), other bills in Congress would go even further in reversing the Wayfair decision.   (Tax Notes, Nov. 7)
  • Opponents of the decision are asking Congress to include restrictions on States in an end-of-year bill.  (Bloomberg, Oct. 24).  However, legislation to roll back Wayfair is unlikely.  Any major legislation must be negotiated by leaders of both parties, who have limited time during a Lame Duck session.  Congressional negotiators are expected instead to focus on a handful of “must pass” bills. 
  • The Real Estate Roundtable and seven other national trade organizations wrote to congressional leaders on Sept. 17 opposing legislation that reverses or limits Wayfair.  (Wayfair Comment Letter, Sept. 17) 

The business coalition letter explains that for more than a decade, industry groups “have undertaken significant efforts to establish economic parity between online and brick-and-mortar sellers that would better reflect the changing dynamics of today’s omnichannel marketplace. For Congress to insert themselves post-ruling only creates additional uncertainty and further complicates the implementation process, while undermining the level playing field created by the Wayfair decision.”  (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 21) 

The eight organizations conclude the letter by offering to work with Congress on any problems that may arise from state implementation of remote internet sales tax collection allowed by Wayfair.  (Roundtable Weekly, June 22)

 

Guidance on Business Interest Deduction Limit May Address Real Estate Investment Issues

Posted on by Trey Jackson

The Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service are close to issuing draft regulations on the new business interest expense limitation, enacted in last year’s tax overhaul.  Regulations related to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act can be designated for an expedited, 10-day review by the White House Office of Management and Budget before publication and public release, though the timetable can be extended if needed.

A Feb. 21, 2018 Roundtable letterurged Treasury to clarify that interest (other than investment interest) on debt that is allocable to an owner of an entity engaged in a real property trade or business is exempt from the new business interest limitation rule – if that trade or business has elected out of the rule.

  • The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act capped the amount of interest that a business with revenue over $25 million can deduct annually – to no more than 30 percent of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.  The provision also includes an important exception for an “electing real property trade or business.” 
  • This exception reflects policymakers’ understanding that limits on the deduction for interest expense could have enormous negative consequences for property values, real estate markets, and economic growth.  (Reference: Real Estate Forum, Jan/Feb 2018,  Decoding The New Tax Bill) 
  • The Real Estate Roundtable on Feb. 21, 2018 wrote to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and offered a number of recommendations to resolve ambiguities in how the new limitation will apply.  The Roundtable requested clarifications to ensure the exception operates as intended for common real estate ownership arrangements – focusing on the scope and application of the exception for an electing real property trade or business. 
  • The letter urged Treasury to clarify that interest (other than investment interest) on debt that is allocable to an owner of an entity engaged in a real property trade or business is indeed exempt from the new business interest limitation rule – if that trade or business has elected out of the rule.  As relevant examples, the letter describes four common scenarios where the financing of a real property trade or business occurs through a tiered structure. Clarifying the rules for real estate in the context of tiered arrangements will help avoid potential disruptions.  (Roundtable comment letter, Feb. 21, 2018)
  • In April, Treasury and the IRS released Notice 2018-28 to provide interim guidance on the new limit until the proposed regulations are issued. For real estate investors, however, the Notice leaves unanswered some of the key issues related to the financing of real estate.  (IRS, April 2 and Roundtable Weekly, April 6)   
  • On Oct. 25, OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) acknowledged receipt of the proposed section 163(j) rules from Treasury.  After OIRA completes its review, the proposed guidance will be issued.  A second set of regulations, focused specifically on pass-through entities, is expected in December.

The Roundtable’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee will continue to seek appropriate clarifications as Treasury moves forward with regulatory projects related to implementation of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.