Tag: Business Interest Deduction

Bipartisan Tax Bill Stalls in Senate

Posted on by Abigail Grenadier

Yesterday, the Senate failed to pass a bipartisan $79 billion tax package, the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 (H.R. 7024). The House-passed legislation seeks to extend various expiring tax provisions from the 2017 and pandemic-related tax bills. (WSJ, Aug. 1 | The Hill, Aug. 1)

Key Points

  • Bipartisan Effort: Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-OR) and House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-MO) crafted the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 (H.R. 7024). The bill passed the House on Jan. 31 by an overwhelming 357-70 vote.
  • Senate Opposition: Despite bipartisan support, the bill faced significant opposition in the Senate, where critics argued it failed to adequately address long-term fiscal concerns and prioritized short-term fixes.
  • Roundtable Support: The bill included Roundtable-supported measures on business interest deductibility, bonus depreciation, and the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC).
  • Other provisions in the agreement: Reforms to the child tax credit, the expensing of R&D costs, disaster tax relief, a double-taxation tax agreement with Taiwan, and a large pay-for that creates significant new penalties for abuse of the employee retention tax credit (ERTC) rules and accelerates the expiration of the ERTC. (RW, Jan. 19)

Roundtable Advocacy

  • In February, The Roundtable and a large coalition of housing and other real estate groups sent letters to Congress in support of the tax bill. (RW, Feb. 16)
  • The Roundtable and the Housing Affordability Coalition’s letter emphasized the importance of advancing provisions in the bill that strengthen the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC)—along with various real estate investment measures that would benefit families, workers, and the national economy.
  • The coalition noted how the bill would increase the housing supply as a positive response to the nation’s housing affordability crisis. It would also suspend certain tax increases on business investment that took effect in 2022 and 2023. 

Congress will return to Washington on September 9, with several critical legislative priorities on the agenda, including decisions on key housing policies and potential new regulations impacting the commercial real estate industry.

Roundtable and Housing Affordability Coalition Urge Senate to Pass Tax Package

Posted on by Abigail Grenadier
Housing Affordability Coalition logos

This week, The Real Estate Roundtable and 21 other industry organizations urged the Senate to pass a tax package that was approved by the House in an overwhelming bipartisan vote (357-70) on Jan. 31. (Coalition letter, Feb. 15)

Tax Provisions in the Senate

  • The Housing Affordability Coalition’s letter to all Senators emphasized the importance of advancing provisions in The Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 (H.R. 7024) that strengthen the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC)—along with various real estate investment measures that would benefit families, workers, and the national economy.
  • The coalition noted how the bill would increase the supply of housing as a positive response to the nation’s housing affordability crisis. It would also suspend certain tax increases on business investment that took effect in 2022 and 2023. 
  • The Feb. 15 letter focused on details of the bill’s provisions that positively impact the LIHTC, deductibility of business interest, bonus depreciation, and small business expensing.
  • The Roundtable also joined the National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC) and a large coalition of housing and other real estate groups in a Jan. 26 letter to Congress in support of the tax package. That letter also focused on the bill’s important improvements to the LIHTC, which will significantly increase the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing over the next three years.

Congressional Timing

U.S. Capitol building
  • Senate Republicans considering the House tax package have called for an amendment process that would be time consuming. (The Hill, Feb. 2)
  • With Congress in recess until the last week of February, there will be limited legislative vehicles available the bill could ride on, just days before a set of government funding deadlines hit on March 1 and 8. The best chances the package could have for inclusion in other legislation include a potential funding bill to prevent an early March government shutdown or a bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration on March 8.
  • If the tax package is pushed beyond March, it may not be considered until a lame duck session after what is expected to be a contentious election season.

SALT Reform Pinched

  • On Feb. 14, a procedural rule to advance the SALT Marriage Penalty Elimination Act (H.R. 7160) to a floor vote in the House fell short of a majority vote needed to pass.
  • The effort by House lawmakers to double the $10,000 cap on state-and-local tax deductions (SALT) for married couples earning up to $500,000 failed by a vote of 195-225. (RollCall and CQ, Feb. 14)

The tax package (H.R. 7024) passed by the House last month did not address the SALT cap, which led to this week’s consideration of a separate reform measure. The current SALT cap is scheduled to expire at the end of 2025, along with many other measures passed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017.

#  #  #

Bipartisan Tax Package with LIHTC and Business Provisions Passes House; Senate Challenges Ahead

Posted on by Abigail Grenadier

A bipartisan $79 billion tax package overwhelmingly approved this week by the House still faces potential hurdles in the Senate. The bill contains Roundtable-supported measures on business interest deductibility, bonus depreciation, and the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC).  (Associated Press, and Wall Street Journal, Jan. 31 | The Hill, Feb. 2)

Industry Support for House Bill

  • On Wednesday, the House voted 357-70 to pass the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 (H.R. 7024). House GOP leaders gained additional support for the bill by allowing a floor vote next week on the SALT Marriage Penalty Elimination Act (H.R. 7160), which would increase the cap on state and local tax deductions to $20,000 from $10,000 for married couples. (PoliticoPro and TaxNotes, Feb. 2)
  • House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) negotiated the larger tax package. Sen. Wyden and senior congressional staff discussed the legislation last week with Roundtable members during The Roundtable’s all-member 2024 State of the Industry Meeting in Washington. (Roundtable Weekly, Jan. 26)
  • Last Friday, The Roundtable joined the National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC) and a large coalition of housing and other real estate groups in a letter to Congress in support of the tax bill.  The letter focused on the bill’s important improvements to the low-income housing tax credit, which will significantly increase the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing over the next 3 years. (Coalition letter, Jan. 26)

Tax Measures Face Senate Scrutiny

  • In the Senate, the House-passed tax bill faces an uncertain path forward. Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) and other Republican Senators have raised concerns regarding the lack of a work requirement for the child credit, the cost, the proposed pay-for, and other aspects of the bill. Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD) added the bill would not be able to clear a possible Senate filibuster without amendment votes. (The Hill, Feb. 2)
  • Provisions in the House tax bill affecting real estate include:

    • Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
      A Roundtable-supported three-year extension (2023–2025) of the 12.5 percent increase in LIHTC allocations to states. The bill also reforms LIHTC’s tax-exempt bond financing requirement, which will allow more affordable housing projects to receive LIHTC allocations outside of the state cap.

    • Business Interest Deductibility
      A retroactive, four-year extension (2022–2025) of the taxpayer-favorable EBITDA standard for measuring the amount of business interest deductible under section 163(j). The changes do not alter the exception to the interest limitation that applies to interest attributable to a real estate business.

    • Bonus Depreciation 
      Extension of 100 percent bonus depreciation through the end of 2025. As under current law, leasehold and other qualifying interior improvements are eligible for bonus depreciation. In 2026, bonus depreciation would fall to 20 percent and expire altogether after 2026.  

Other provisions in the agreement include reforms to the child tax credit, the expensing of R&D costs, disaster tax relief, a double-taxation tax agreement with Taiwan, and a large pay-for that creates significant new penalties for abuse of the employee retention tax credit (ERTC) rules and accelerates the expiration of the ERTC.

#  #  #

Final Treasury Rules on Deducting Business Interest Preserve and Strengthen the Real Estate Exception

Posted on by Trey Jackson
U.S. Treasury Department
US Treasury Department in Washington

Final Treasury regulations released on July 28 create a detailed legal framework to implement the new limitation on the deductibility of business interest enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.  The underlying provision—section 163(j) —caps the deduction for business interest expense at no more than 30 percent of modified gross income but allows real estate businesses to elect out of the regime altogether. 

  • The deductibility of business interest expense was front and center in the 2017 tax reform debate.  Elimination of the deduction was viewed by some as a necessary “pay-for” to help offset the cost of immediately expensing capital investment and reducing the corporate rate from 35 to 21 percent.  The Roundtable worked to preserve the full deduction, noting that it was necessary to accurately measure income and critical to the normal financing of real estate investment and activities.  (Roundtable President & CEO Jeffrey DeBoer Statement for the Record before Senate Finance Committee, video clips and full hearing on September 19, 2017)
  • During the rulemaking process, The Roundtable focused on ensuring that the regulations would not restrict unnecessarily the ability of a real property trade or business (RPTOB) to elect out of the provisions of the new limit (section 163(j)).  Previously proposed regulations clarified, as requested, that interest on debt incurred by a partner to fund an investment in a partnership engaged in a real estate business would be allocable to that business and therefore qualify for the RPTOB election.  The proposed regulations also clarified that an RPTOB election by a partnership did not bind a partner with respect to any activity conducted by the partner outside the partnership.
  • The 575 pages of final rules unveiled last week favorably address and resolve several outstanding issues raised in Roundtable comment letters submitted at various times during the two and a half year regulatory process.  (The Roundtable’s Interest Deductibility webpage)
  • For example, the regulations clarify that a business entity can be in a real property trade or business even if it is not in a trade or business under the general tax rules of section 162 (the provision that authorizes taxpayers to deduct ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred in carrying on a trade or business).  Unlike the proposed rules, the final regulations provide that a small business that is exempt from the business interest limit can still make a RPTOB election.
  • This clarification is important because individual partners in a small business may not qualify for the exemption once their interests in multiple properties are aggregated.  The final regulations favorably revise troubling language in the proposed rules that suggested the RPTOB exception was only available for trades or businesses involved in rental real estate activities.
  • Consistent with Roundtable recommendations, the Treasury guidance also includes a notice (IRS Notice 2020-59) with a proposed revenue procedure that creates a safe harbor for assisted living facilities so they can qualify for the RPTOB exception – notwithstanding their provision of other services, such as nursing and routine medical services.  Other elements of the Treasury guidance include new proposed regulations on specific issues, such as application of the rules to foreign taxpayers.

Collectively, the final regulations should provide greater certainty to real estate owners and investors that debt used to acquire, improve, and operate commercial real estate remains fully deductible for federal income tax purposes, provided the taxpayer complies with specific tax and filing requirements. 

#  #  # 

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 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.

Treasury Releases Guidance on New Business Interest Deduction Limit, but Questions for Real Estate Investment Remain

Posted on by Trey Jackson

On Monday, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released Notice 2018-28, which provides guidance on the new limitation on the deductibility of business interest, (Section 163(j)), enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

In the Feb. 21 letter the Roundtable asked Treasury to clarify     that interest on debt incurred by an owner to fund an investment in a partnership or other entity engaged in a real property trade or business, constitutes interest on debt properly allocable to that real estate business  . 

The Notice focuses on interest expense carryforwards from prior years, corporate interest deductions, and consolidated corporate groups, while leaving unresolved certain key questions for real estate investors.  Taxpayers can rely on the guidance at least until proposed regulations are issued.

In general, for taxpayers with revenue over $25 million, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act capped the amount of business interest that a business can deduct annually to no more than 30 percent of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.  The provision includes several exceptions, including an exception critical to real estate for an “electing real property trade or business.”  

Notice 2018-28 addresses a concern that partners in partnerships could effectively double-count certain interest income when calculating the limitation on partner-level borrowing.  Other highlights of the Notice include:

  • Carryforward of interest expense.  The Notice states that forthcoming regulations will allow taxpayers with disqualified interest under the old law to carry forward such interest as business interest under the new law.  Such interest could be disallowed under the new limitation in the same manner as any other business interest. 

  • Corporate business interest.  The Notice clarifies that interest paid by a C corporation is business interest for purposes of the interest limit.  Forthcoming regulations will address whether and when interest paid by a partnership, including a partnership with a corporate partner, should be treated as business interest for the corporate partner. 

  • Consolidated groups.  The Notice confirms that the business interest limit properly applies at the level of a consolidated group.  Forthcoming regulations will address how the interest limit applies to a consolidated group when one of the members is an electing real property trade or business, and to a consolidated group in which a member holds an interest in a partnership that is engaged in a real property trade or business.

  • Earnings and profits.  The Notice clarifies that a disallowed business interest deduction will not affect whether or when the interest expense reduces a C corporation’s earnings and profits.

For real estate investors, however, the Notice leaves unanswered some of the key issues related to the financing of real estate.  For example, The Real Estate Roundtable has asked Treasury to clarify that interest on debt incurred by an owner to fund an investment in a partnership or other entity engaged in a real property trade or business, constitutes interest on debt properly allocable to that real estate business (Comment Letter, Feb 23; Roundtable Weekly, Feb. 23).

The Treasury Department and the IRS are expected to issue additional guidance and regulations in the future, and request comments on the rules described in the notice and what additional guidance should be issued to assist in computing the business interest expense limitation under Section 163(j). (IRS, April 2)

Depending on the outcome of the rule-making process, the new limitation on business interest expense (Section 163(j)) could have significant implications for real estate markets and the financing of real estate transactions.  Clarifying the rules for real estate in the context of tiered arrangements will help avoid potential disruptions.

The Roundtable and TPAC will continue to play an active role in seeking appropriate clarifications affecting the most significant changes to the tax code.

Roundtable Proposes Framework for Implementing the Real Estate Exception to the New Business Interest Deduction Limit

Posted on by Trey Jackson

The Real Estate Roundtable on Wednesday wrote to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin regarding the new limitation on business interest deductibility created in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, including rules that allow taxpayers to continue fully deducting interest related to commercial real estate debt. (Roundtable letter, Feb. 21)

The Feb. 21 Roundtable letter urges that Treasury 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 exception for interest allocable to a real property trade or business 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 Feb. 21 comment letter requests clarification to ensure the real estate 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 urges that Treasury 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.  

As relevant examples, the letter describes four common scenarios where the financing of a real property trade or business occurs through a tiered structure.  The letter demonstrates why treating the interest expense of an upper-tier entity as properly allocable to the real property trade or business of a lower-tier entity is consistent with the legislative intent and conforms with existing tax rules and principles.  

The letter also addresses the allocation of indebtedness within entities, requesting that Treasury guidance apply the tracing rules found in existing authorities, which are already used for purposes of the passive loss rules.  

During a Feb. 20 tax conference, both Treasury’s Deputy Tax Legislative Counsel Krishna Vallabhaneni and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Dana Trier said a notice on language limiting interest expenses under the new tax law will be issued soon. (Bloomberg Law, Feb. 20).  

This week’s letter is a follow-up to a Jan. 18 Roundtable letter, which identified several areas where Treasury rulemaking would reduce uncertainty and facilitate continued investment. [Roundtable Weekly, Jan. 19]   

As Treasury and Congress continue to focus on implementation and technical corrections to the new tax law, The Roundtable and TPAC will play an active role in seeking appropriate clarifications affecting the most significant changes to the tax code in more than three decades.

Real Estate Roundtable Testifies Before Senate on Business Tax Reform

Posted on by Trey Jackson

Rational Taxation of Real Estate Urged to Spur Job Creation, Encourage Business Expansion and Contribute to GDP Growth

WASHINGTON, DC — Real Estate Roundtable President and Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey DeBoer today testified before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, encouraging modest changes to the current taxation of commercial real estate that would continue to encourage economic growth while cautioning policymakers on specific business tax reform concepts that could cause severe market dislocation.

During today’s Senate hearing on Business Tax Reform, DeBoer testified, “Importantly, commercial real estate markets are largely in balance with supply, only modestly exceeding demand.  Despite our industry’s relative positive health, we know the underlying economy can and should grow more rapidly.”  DeBoer added that The Roundtable is concerned that some concepts under discussion in tax reform are risky, untested and have the potential to cause severe dislocation – not only in real estate markets but in the nations’ capital markets as well.

In his written testimony and his oral statement, The Real Estate Roundtable’s President and CEO addressed specific elements of potential tax reform.  (See Senate Finance Committee webcast and documents at https://www.finance.senate.gov/hearings/business-tax-reform.) Below is a summary of policy issues covered in his testimony:

  • Business interest deduction.  DeBoer noted that interest, the cost of borrowing, is an ordinary and necessary business expense that has always been deductible.  Today, U.S. capital markets are the deepest in the world, but restrictions would deter business formation and expansion.  The impact would fall disproportionately on entrepreneurs and other developers likely to serve small and medium-sized markets.  As interest rates rise, the harm to the economy will grow.
  • Cost recovery / expensing.  Current cost recovery rules need reform, but 100 percent expensing of real estate is a risky and untested proposal.  Accelerated depreciation of real estate in the early 1980s led to tax-driven, uneconomic investment.  Tax rules should reflect the economic life of structures.  Leading research by MIT suggests existing depreciation schedules for real estate are too long.  Shortening depreciation to 20 years would spur sustainable and economically sound investment.   

     

  • Pass-through reform.  U.S. pass-through tax rules create a dynamic, flexible business environment that supports entrepreneurship and productive investment.  Tax reform should provide equitable relief for pass-throughs.  A new, reduced tax rate for pass-through business income should avoid “cliffs”, phase-outs, and carve-outs that discriminate against certain taxpayers and create new economic distortions.    

     

  • Capital gains.  The tax code should encourage entrepreneurial activity and risk-taking through low capital gains rates and continue to recognize that risk can involve more than the contribution of capital.  Reform should also preserve like-kind exchanges, which get properties into the hands of new owners with the time and resources to invest in job-creating property improvements.

     

  • State and local tax deduction.  Tax reform should retain the deductibility of state and local taxes.  Eliminating the state and local tax deduction would undercut the principal source of financing for schools, roads, law enforcement, and other needed infrastructure and public services.

     

  • FIRPTA.  Tax reform should boost job growth and domestic investment by repealing outdated tax barriers to foreign investment in U.S. real estate and infrastructure.

     

  • Infrastructure.  An infrastructure initiative in tax reform is needed to create jobs, reflect the changing transportation needs of Americans and increase productivity, all to benefit the GDP.  

In his testimony, DeBoer said that although tax reform should unleash entrepreneurship, capital formation, and job creation – Congress should also undertake reform with caution, given the potential for economic dislocation and unintended consequences. 

As an example of over-reactive government policies, DeBoer noted past tax reform efforts in 1981 and 1986, which combined, created severe dislocation in real estate markets nationwide; led to job losses and bankruptcies; and contributed to the demise of the savings and loan industry.

The Roundtable’s President and CEO also addressed the federal deduction for state and local property and income taxes. “Ending the federal deduction for state and local property and income taxes could potentially cause significant issues in our nation’s cities, as some businesses relocate for no reason other than taxes. We urge that this idea be rejected,” DeBoer said.

He also testified about the crucial need to preserve interest deductibility.  “Eliminating or limiting the deduction for interest on business debt would cause great dislocation in capital markets, slow economic activity and lessen the unique importance of America’s capital markets,” DeBoer said.

After noting that commercial real estate markets today are estimated to account for nearly 20 percent of America’s GDP and employ millions of Americans, he added that real estate provides local governments with its largest revenue source and plays a key role in the retirement savings and wealth creation of Americans.  “Properly designed tax reform can spur job creation, encourage more robust business expansion and result in a sustainable increase in GDP,” DeBoer testified.  

#  #  #