| Related-Party
Like-Kind Property Exchanges: Recent IRS Guidance
By Nancy B. Nichols, Jill Mayclim, and M. Cathy Sullivan
In 2002,
the IRS issued new guidance for related-party like-kind exchanges
using a qualified intermediary. Revenue Ruling 2002-83 (2002-49
IRS 927, 11/25/2002) eliminated the opportunity for related
parties to exchange property using a qualified intermediary
(QI) when, as part of that transaction, one of the related
parties receives cash or other non–like-kind property
in the exchange. This ruling becomes yet another obstacle
for like-kind exchange transactions between related parties
that are already subject to other restrictions.
Like-Kind
Exchanges
Generally
no gain or loss is recognized on the exchange of like-kind
property. Like-kind property is defined as property held
for productive use in a trade or business or for investment
that is exchanged solely for similar property. The basis
of the property acquired is the same as the basis of the
property exchanged, decreased by any boot (property other
than like-kind) received and increased (or decreased) by
the gain (or loss) recognized by the taxpayer. (See “Like-Kind
Real Estate Exchanges Under IRC Section 1031,” The
CPA Journal, November 2001.)
Related-party
restrictions. As part of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1989, Congress enacted additional
requirements for like-kind exchanges between related parties
[IRC section 1031(f)]. The additional rules are intended
to eliminate the benefits that related parties were receiving
by exchanging low-basis property for high-basis property
in anticipation of the profitable sale of the low-basis
property.
To
avoid this “shifting of basis,” IRC section
1031(f) requires a two-year holding period after an exchange
between related parties. If either the taxpayer or the related
party disposes of the exchanged property within two years,
then the taxpayer’s exchange with the related party
becomes taxable.
Related
party defined. For purposes of the like-kind
exchange rules, the definition of related parties is a combination
of related parties as defined under IRC section 267(b) and
section 707(b). Combining these two sections, related parties
include the following:
-
Family members (siblings, spouses, ancestors, and lineal
descendants);
-
An individual and an entity (corporation or partnership)
where the individual owns either directly or indirectly
more than 50% in value of the entity;
-
Two entities in which the same individual owns directly
or indirectly more than 50% of each;
-
An estate in which the taxpayer is either the executor
or beneficiary of the estate; and
-
A trust in which the taxpayer is the fiduciary and the
related party is a beneficiary either of that same trust
or a related trust or a fiduciary of a related trust.
Two-year
holding period. IRC section 1031(f) created
a two-year holding period for property given up or received
in a like-kind exchange between related parties. The nonrecognition
treatment under section 1031 is lost if either property
in the exchange is disposed of within two years. Thus, if
either the taxpayer or the related party disposes of the
property received in the exchange within two years, the
gain or loss is triggered for both parties. Section 1031(f)
does not bar related-party exchanges, it merely requires
a longer holding period to deter taxpayers from shifting
low-basis property with high-basis property in anticipation
of selling the low-basis property, thus substantially reducing
the amount of gain recognized on the transaction.
Related
parties often overlook the “suspension” provisions
in IRC section 1031(g) that can extend the two-year holding
period. The two-year holding period is suspended if either
the taxpayer’s or the related party’s risk of
loss is substantially decreased (due to an option, put,
or other transaction). Once the risk of loss ceases, the
two-year period continues from the point where it stopped.
For
example, Taxpayer exchanges property with Related Party.
Twelve months later, Third Party acquires an option to acquire
the property from Related Party. The option expires 12 months
later and Related Party waits seven months and sells the
property. Even though the sale is 31 months after the original
exchange, Taxpayer’s gain from the original exchange
is triggered, because the two-year holding period was suspended
during the time the option was outstanding, so the sale
is deemed to occur only 19 months after the exchange.
Additional
exceptions exist to the two-year holding period. Under IRC
section 1031(f)(2), if the taxpayer or related party dies
and the property is disposed of within the two-year holding
period, gain will not be triggered to the second party.
In addition, the two-year limitation will not apply if the
property is disposed of due to an involuntary conversion
and the original exchange occurred before the threat or
imminence of such conversion. The third exception provides
that if the taxpayer can establish that neither the original
exchange nor the subsequent disposition within the two-year
period was undertaken for the purpose of avoiding tax, then
the original exchange will not fail.
The
IRS has provided guidance regarding the third exception
in two letter rulings. In PLR 9116009, the IRS held that
a taxpayer’s transfer of property acquired in a like-kind
exchange with a related party to a grantor trust within
two years of the exchange is not a disposition under section
1031(f). The second letter ruling, PLR 199926045, involves
the cutting of timber on the replacement property received
in a like-kind exchange from a related party. Here, the
IRS ruled that the taxpayer’s original exchange remained
intact and that the subsequent cutting of timber by a related
party within the two-year period did not trigger a gain
to the taxpayer.
Anti-abuse
Provision
IRC
section 1031(f)(4) provides that deferred treatment is denied
in any exchange that “is part of a transaction (or
series of transactions) structured to avoid” the purpose
of the related-party rules. This catchall provision causes
many exchanges to fail and is often misunderstood or overlooked.
Recent
IRS guidance. Application of the anti-abuse
provision with the use of a qualified intermediary in a
related-party like-kind exchange has resulted in a number
of IRS rulings, most recently Revenue Ruling 2002-83 (2002-49
IRS 927, 11/25/2002). This ruling prevents related parties
from deferring recognition of gain by using a qualified
intermediary when the related party receives cash or non–like-kind
property.
For
example, Bob owns Property 1 worth $100 with a basis of
$10, and his brother Jim owns Property 2 worth $100 with
a basis of $100. Jane, an unrelated party, wants to acquire
Property 1 for $100. To complete the transfer, Bob enters
into an agreement to exchange Property 1 and 2 with Jim,
Jane, and a qualified intermediary (QI) unrelated and independent
of Bob and Jim. Bob transfers his low-basis Property 1 to
QI; QI then exchanges Property 1 with Jane for cash; QI
attains high-basis Property 2 from Jim for cash, and transfers
Property 2 to Bob. Bob has engaged in a like-kind exchange
with QI (an unrelated third party) instead of with Jim.
Essentially, the result of the transaction, if one removes
the QI, is as follows: Bob and Jim have exchanged properties,
and Jim sold the property received in the exchange to Jane
for cash. According to the ruling, a related party is not
entitled to nonrecognition treatment under section 1031
if the related party receives cash or other non–like-kind
property for the property received in a transaction that
uses a QI to exchange the property. In this example, Jim
has received non–like-kind property (cash); thus,
the provisions of 1031 will not apply, and Bob must recognize
his gain of $90.
In
making the ruling, the IRS relied on the anti-abuse provision
of IRC section 1031(f)(4), holding that the QI was used
to circumvent the purpose of the related-party rules and,
therefore, the nonrecognition provisions of section 1031
do not apply. In Technical Advice Memorandum (TAM) 9748006
(11/28/1997), the IRS used the same approach for analyzing
a like-kind exchange involving related parties, a QI, and
an unrelated third party. In general, the IRS looks to the
final outcome to determine whether a related party “cashed
out.” If a related party has cashed out, then the
transaction will not qualify for nonrecognition treatment
under section 1031.
TAM
2001-26007 involves a complicated set of transactions between
two corporations meeting the related-party definition due
to common stock ownership by members of two families. The
transactions involved a QI and two unrelated parties. Ultimately,
the transactions shifted the taxpayer’s low basis
in its property to the replacement property previously owned
by the related party. The related party eventually received
cash that it used to reduce bank debt. In the end, the related
party “cashed out” of its investments, denying
the taxpayer nonrecongition treatment on the transactions.
Field
Service Advice (FSA) Memorandum 2001-37003 provides that
if related parties exchange properties, nonrecognition treatment
of the gain is permitted as long as the subsequent disposition
of the replacement property occurs after two years of the
initial exchange. The IRS concluded “the two-year
rule in section 1031(f)(1)(C) is a safe harbor that precludes
application of section 1031(f)(1) to any transaction falling
outside that period.” Therefore, related parties can
avoid the anti-abuse rules just by waiting two years. The
FSA states that the purpose of the anti-abuse provisions
is to “stop taxpayers from violating the two-year
rule, and not to preclude taxpayers from planning to dispose
of property after the two-year period.” Taxpayers
can enter into a related-party exchange with the intent
of selling the property after two years without triggering
recognition of the original gain as long as the transaction
was not a sham.
Planning
Considerations
The
restrictions and potential pitfalls of related-party like-kind
exchanges would seem to limit the tax benefits of these
transactions. The opportunity for tax deferral, available
for all like-kind exchanges, still applies to related-party
transactions. In many situations, tax deferral coupled with
estate planning objectives make related-party like-kind
exchanges very attractive.
From
an estate planning perspective, like-kind exchanges may
result in taxes never being paid on the investment. If a
taxpayer who has participated in a section 1031 exchange
dies, the property is left to heirs without being subject
to capital gains tax. Properties are revalued when the taxpayer
dies, and the accumulated capital gains that were never
recognized are wiped clean.
Other
estate planning objectives can also be accomplished through
like-kind exchanges. For example, retiring parents with
a family farm may exchange the farm for smaller real estate
parcels that are investments owned by their children. These
smaller parcels can then be gifted back to the children
over time. Or the parents may retain ownership of the properties
and sell them over a period of years, after the two-year
holding period has been met. This plan would give the retired
couple additional funds in retirement by allowing them to
control when and how much gain they realize.
If
the children do not have investment properties that meet
the parents’ needs, a multiparty exchange may be the
answer. As long as the parents and children do not cash
out for two years, the nonrecognition provisions under section
1031 will still apply.
The
shifting of basis still works for related parties, but requires
a little more work. For example, a taxpayer who owns a property
with low basis that has appreciated significantly can still
consider exchanging the property with a related party that
owns investment property with a higher basis. As made clear
in FSA 2001-37003, the related parties can avoid the anti-abuse
provision by waiting two years to sell the property. This
technique works especially well in the following situation:
A parent owns investment land that is appreciating significantly.
The area where the land is located is beginning to develop
and the parent knows that the property will eventually be
sold. A child has rental property that generates income
but is not appreciating as rapidly. The child does not need
the rental income and the parent could use the income to
supplement his retirement. A like-kind exchange is ideal.
Not only will the tax on the ultimate sale be lower because
of the child’s higher basis, but also the additional
appreciation during the two-year holding period will have
been transferred to the child.
Reporting
requirements. IRS Form 8824, Like-Kind Exchanges,
must be filed when an exchange involving like-kind property
occurs. When related parties exchange property, additional
information is required, including the name, address, identifying
number, and relationship of the related party. In addition,
Form 8824 must be filed for the year of exchange and also
for the two years following the exchange to provide the
IRS with the information necessary to monitor the two-year
holding requirement.
Nancy
B. Nichols, PhD, CPA, is an assistant professor at
the College of Business at James Madison University, Harrisburg,
Va. Jill Mayclim, is senior associate with
KPMG.
M. Cathy Claiborne, PhD, CMA, CGFM, CPA,
is an associate professor, at California State University
Channel Islands. |