New Opportunity Zone Regulation Provides Further Planning Opportunities
A discussion of the Treasury Department's 2021 regulations regarding qualified opportunity funds which "provide a significant benefit to taxpayers who purchased property in qualified opportunity zones prior to 2018." The authors warn, however, that there are "several pitfalls that must be avoided."
April 26, 2022 at 10:13 AM
5 minute read
Taxpayers who invest eligible capital gains into qualified opportunity funds can potentially take advantage of significant federal income tax benefits. Among these benefits are the potential deferral of such capital gains until Dec. 31, 2026 and the potential to avoid income tax completely on any gains accrued on the investment in the qualified opportunity fund if the investment is held for at least 10 years. However, in order to qualify as a qualified opportunity fund, an entity's assets must generally have been acquired by purchase after 2017. Thus, without further structuring, a taxpayer who owns property in a qualified opportunity zone that it purchased before 2018 would be unable to benefit from these rules.
However, in 2019, the Treasury Department finalized regulations that allow qualified opportunity funds to acquire leasehold interests in properties that were purchased prior to 2018 if the lease is on market terms, even if the fee interest in the property is owned by a related party. This is generally the case regardless of the extent to which the lessee improves the leased property. (However, if a taxpayer leases property to a qualified opportunity fund and then the fund makes only limited improvements to the property, the transaction may fall under an anti-abuse rule, which allows the IRS to recharacterize transactions that do not fall within the purposes of the qualified opportunity fund rules, which is to encourage the making of new investments in qualified opportunity zones.)
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCourt of Appeals Provides Comfort to Land Use Litigants Through the Relation Back Doctrine
8 minute readBinding a Successor Town Board; Default on Stipulation of Settlement: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'Landmark' New York Commission Set to Study Overburdened, Under-Resourced Family Courts
- 2Wave of Commercial Real Estate Refinance Could Drown Property Owners
- 3Redeveloping Real Estate After Natural Disasters: Challenges, Strategies and Opportunities
- 4Calif. Fires Should Serve as a Reminder to Fla.’s Commercial Landlords and Tenants Not to Be Complacent
- 5The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Commercial Real Estate Transactions
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250