Tag: Cost Recovery Period

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)

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)

Senate Democrats and House Republicans Urge Tax Policy Correction for Real Estate Improvements’ Cost Recovery Period

Posted on by Trey Jackson

Two recent letters – one from 16 Democratic Senators to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and the other from 58 House Republicans to GOP leadership – urge policymakers to fix an unintentional drafting mistake in last year’s tax overhaul that mistakenly increased the cost recovery period for qualified improvement property (QIP).  (House Letter, Oct 2 and Senate Letter, Sept 24) 

The tax policy drafting error currently affects leasehold improvements, expenditures made to improve common spaces in shopping centers and office buildings, and other interior improvements to nonresidential structures.

  • The drafting error in the tax law has resulted in a significantly longer 39-year cost recovery period for new, qualified nonresidential interior improvements.  The original 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 mistake currently affects leasehold improvements, expenditures made to improve common spaces in shopping centers and office buildings, and other interior improvements to nonresidential structures.  The current, longer cost recovery period effectively increases the after-tax cost of upgrading and improving commercial real estate.  (“Correcting the Drafting Error Involving the Expensing of Qualified Improvement Property” – The Tax Foundation , May 30)     
  • In Monday’s joint letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX), 58 House Republican members state, “While they wait for Congress to act to correct this error, these businesses are forgoing renovations, halting plans to revitalize declining malls, and placing safety improvements on hold.  Not only does this hurt restaurants and retailers, but also the businesses involved in the planning and renovations, and ultimately our communities.  
  • This week’s House letter urges GOP leadership to address the QIP investment drafting error via legislation, while also recommending that Treasury should issue interim guidance while refraining from enforcing the drafting error.  

    Congress could address the issue during the lame duck congressional session between the mid-term election and January.

  • In the Sept. 24 joint letter to Secretary Mnuchin, 16 Senate Democrats address the need for a QIP correction, stating: “Improper implementation of this portion of the 2017 law would cause disruption to a wide range of industries, including the nation’s retail, restaurant and commercial property industries. Given this, and the potential for considerable harm to local economies, we believe it would be prudent for Treasury to address this issue and its interpretation through guidance.” 
  • The Real Estate Roundtable and a broad-based business coalition urged Secretary Mnuchin in August to issue guidance clarifying certain provisions included in tax overhaul legislation enacted last year – including the cost recovery period for qualified improvement property. (Coalition letter, Aug. 22) 
  • Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer stated, “In 2015, Congress voted overwhelmingly to permanently extend the 15-year recovery period for certain property improvements.  By passing tax reform, Congress intended to consolidate those changes.  Treasury should now use its authority to provide taxpayers with relief until a technical corrections bill is enacted.  Treasury guidance will remove taxpayer uncertainty, unlock investment, and spur job-creating property upgrades and renovations.”  (Roundtable Weekly, Aug. 24)

Congress could address the issue during the lame duck congressional session between the mid-term election and January. A number of tax issues are outstanding, including tax reform technical corrections and expired tax provisions.

 

Business Coalition Urges Treasury Secretary Mnuchin to Issue Guidance on Cost Recovery Period for Real Estate Improvements

Posted on by Trey Jackson

A broad-based business coalition that includes The Real Estate Roundtable urged Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Wednesday to issue guidance clarifying certain provisions included in tax overhaul legislation enacted last year — including the cost recovery period for qualified improvement property (QIP).  ( Coalition letter , Aug. 22)

A broad-based business coalition that includes The Real Estate Roundtable urged Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Wednesday to issue guidance clarifying certain provisions included in tax overhaul legislation enacted last year — including the cost recovery period for qualified improvement property (QIP).  (Coalition letter , Aug. 22) 

  • An unintentional drafting mistake in the tax law has resulted in a significantly longer 39-year cost recovery period for new, qualified nonresidential interior improvements.  Congress intended to allow the immediate expensing of qualified improvements, or provide a 20-year recovery period in the case of taxpayers electing out of new limitations on the deductibility of business interest.  
  • The drafting error affects leasehold improvements, expenditures made to improve common spaces in shopping centers and office buildings, and other interior improvements to nonresidential structures.  The longer cost recovery period effectively increases the after-tax cost of upgrading and improving commercial real estate.   (“Correcting the Drafting Error Involving the Expensing of Qualified Improvement Property ” –  The Tax Foundation , May 30)     
  • The August 22 letter includes 283 signatories, who state the delay in correcting the  QIP provision is delaying some store and restaurant remodeling projects, and causing some retailers to decline opportunities to purchase or lease new store locations that would require substantial improvements.  
  • The coalition letter further explains, “These decisions not only deny communities the jobs associated with substantial construction projects, but also deny our communities the opportunity to bring new, permanent jobs to an otherwise abandoned store or to revitalize a declining mall. The delayed investment in remodeling projects is also causing a decline in sales by manufacturers that supply products used in remodels, like energy-efficient lighting and plumbing supplies.”  
  • The coalition urges Secretary Mnuchin “to issue guidance that will facilitate the intent of the law and eliminate the imposition of large additional tax compliance and accounting burdens on taxpayers, as well as associated tax enforcement burdens on the Internal Revenue Service.”  
  • Last week, all Republican members of the Finance Committee and Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) wrote to Treasury and the IRS, requesting “guidance that is consistent with the congressional intent” of the new tax law regarding QIP expensing and two other tax policy areas.  (Roundtable Weekly, Aug. 17)    

Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer stated, “In 2015, Congress voted overwhelmingly to permanently extend the 15-year recovery period for certain property improvements.  By passing tax reform, Congress intended to consolidate those changes.  Treasury should now use its authority to provide taxpayers with relief until a technical corrections bill is enacted.  Treasury guidance will remove taxpayer uncertainty, unlock investment, and spur job-creating property upgrades and renovations.” 

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.  

#  #  #