Peter M Fass

February 06, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In his Real Estate Securities column, Peter M. Fass, a partner at Proskauer Rose, writes that the admission of new partners is normally only a temporary measure to prevent the immediate loss of the property and should be attempted only when a turnaround is likely or when temporary financial stability is needed.

By Peter M. Fass

8 minute read

June 06, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his Real Estate Securities column, Peter M. Fass, a partner at Proskauer Rose, writes that any restructuring or workout1 of a troubled loan must be tested under the code partnership tax provisions to determine whether there are any adverse tax consequences

By Peter M. Fass

11 minute read

April 04, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his Real Estate Securities column, Proskauer Rose partner Peter M. Fass writes that, to avoid the tax consequences of being considered a 'related party,' partners desirous of acquiring a troubled loan encumbering the partnership property at a reduced price typically attempt to find a sufficient number of third-party investors to join with them. If they cannot, regulations issued by the IRS may offer some limited relief.

By Peter M. Fass

15 minute read

February 01, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his Real Estate Securities column, Peter M. Fass of Proskauer Rose furthers the discussion of a modification of a defaulted or "troubled" loan secured by real property, and reviews the specific tests contained to determine whether a modification is "significant," thereby resulting in a taxable exchange.

By Peter M. Fass

9 minute read

October 03, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his Real Estate Securities column, Peter M. Fass, a partner at Proskauer Rose, continues a discussion of the tax consequences of restructuring a troubled loan secured by real estate, where the owner is a partnership, with a review of a recent IRS revenue ruling which addresses guidance on cancellation of indebtedness income in the partnership context.

By Peter M. Fass

11 minute read

February 01, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Peter M. Fass, a partner at Proskauer Rose, writes that like-kind exchanges and their tax-deferral benefits are a driving force behind the rapid growth of tenant-in-common investments in real property. Because of the difficulty of finding an equal and offsetting property for the exchange, an owner can instead pool her interest with other similarly situated property owners to acquire property or properties with a large enough value to provide tax deferral for all.

By Peter M. Fass

9 minute read

February 02, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In the first of three installments of his Real Estate Securities column, Proskauer Rose partner Peter M. Fass focuses on key issues that an owner of a troubled property faces when engaged in restructuring a troubled loan while unable to pay outstanding tax obligations.

By Peter M. Fass

11 minute read

August 02, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Peter M. Fass, a partner at Proskauer Rose, continues his discussion of deferred like-kind exchanges of real estate, where the exchange of property is not simultaneous but occurs within the statutory requirements of identification of the replacement property (within 45 days after the transfer of the relinquished property) and the acquisition of the replacement property (within 180 days after the transfer of the relinquished property).

By Peter M. Fass

9 minute read

August 05, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Peter M. Fass, a partner at Proskauer Rose, discusses Regulation D's prohibition on the use of general solicitation and general advertising; the well-known principle that a general solicitation is not present when there is a pre-existing, substantive relationship between an issuer, or its broker-dealer, and the offerees; and the SEC's guidance on websites that invite prospective investors to qualify as accredited or sophisticated as a prelude to participation in limited or private offerings transmitted on those web sites.

By Peter M. Fass

7 minute read

June 22, 2007 | New Jersey Law Journal

Certain states may exempt particular types of tenancy-in-common transactions from the definition of "security" under state law. A determination that a particular transaction does not involve a security for purposes of state law, however, is not determinative for purposes of federal securities law.

By Peter M. Fass

7 minute read