§ 1.168(j)-1T — Questions and answers concerning tax-exempt entity leasing rules (temporary).

§ 1.168(j)-1T Questions and answers concerning tax-exempt entity leasing rules (temporary).

The following questions and answers concern tax-exempt entity leasing under section 168(j) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as enacted by section 31 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (“TRA”) (Pub. L. 98-369):

Consequences of Tax-Exempt Use Status

Q-1. If recovery property is subject to the tax-exempt entity leasing provisions of section 168(j), how must the taxpayer compute the property's recovery deductions?

A-1. The taxpayer must compute the property's recovery deductions in accordance with section 168(j) (1) and (2); that is, the taxpayer must use the straight line method and the specified recovery period. For property other than 18-year real property, the applicable recovery percentages for the specified recovery period are to be determined with reference to the tables contained in Prop. Treas. Reg. § 1.168-2(g)(3)(iv)(A). For 18-year real property for which a 40-year recovery period is required, the applicable recovery percentages are to be determined under the following table:

40-Year Straight Line Method (Assuming Mid-Month Convention)

If the recovery year is—	And the month in the first recovery year the property is placed in service is—
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
The applicable recovery percentage is—
1	2.4	2.2	2.0	1.8	1.6	1.4	1.1	0.9	0.7	0.5	0.3	0.1
2	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
3	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
4	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
6	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
7	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
8	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
9	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
10	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
11	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
12	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
13	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
14	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
15	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
16	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
17	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
18	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
19	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
20	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
21	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
22	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
23	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
24	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
25	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
26	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
27	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
28	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
29	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
30	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
31	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
32	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
33	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
34	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
35	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
36	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
37	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
38	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
39	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
40	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
41	0.1	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.9	1.1	1.4	1.6	1.8	2.0	2.2	2.4

Q-2. If recovery property that was placed in service after December 31, 1980 by a taxable entity subsequently becomes tax-exempt use property, how are such property's cost recovery deductions under section 168 affected?

A-2. A change to tax-exempt use property, as defined in section 168(j)(3), will cause the cost recovery deductions under the accelerated cost recovery system (ACRS) to be recomputed. The allowable recovery deduction for the taxable year in which the change occurs (and for subsequent taxable years) must be determined as if the property had originally been tax-exempt use property. Proper adjustment must be made under the principles of Prop. Treas. Reg. § 1.168-2(j)(3)(i)(B) to account for the difference between the deductions allowable with respect to the property prior to the year of change and those which would have been allowable had the taxpayer used the recovery period and method for tax-exempt use property under section 168(j) (1) and (2). However, no adjustment is made pursuant to the provisions of this A-2 if section 168(j)(2)(C) applies, that is, if the taxpayer had selected a longer recovery period in the year the property was placed in service than the recovery period prescribed for such property under section 168(j)(1).

Example 1.On July 1, 1983, X, a calendar year taxpayer, places in service 5-year recovery property with an unadjusted basis of $100. For 1983, X's allowable deduction is $15 (i.e., .15 × $100). In 1984, the property becomes tax-exempt use property. Under section 168(j), assume the prescribed recovery period is 12 years. For 1984 (and subsequent taxable years), X's allowable deduction is determined as if the property had been tax-exempt use property since 1983, that is, the year it was placed in service. Thus, taxable year 1984 is the property's second recovery year of its 12-year recovery period. Additionally, X must account for the excess allowable recovery deduction of $11 (i.e., the difference between the recovery allowance for 1983 ($15) and the allowance for that year had the property been tax-exempt use property ($4)) in accordance with the principles of Prop. Treas. Reg. § 1.168-2(j)(3)(i)(B). Thus, the recovery allowances in 1984 and 1985 are $7.97, determined as follows:

Unadjusted basis multiplied by the applicable recovery percentage for second recovery year ($100 × .09	$9.00
Excess allowable recovery deduction multiplied by the applicable recovery percentage for second recovery year divided by the sum of the remaining unused applicable percentages for tax-exempt use property existing as of the taxable year of change (1984) (($11 × .09)/.96)	−1.03
Difference—allowable deduction for 1984	$7.97
Unadjusted basis multiplied by the applicable recovery percentage for third recovery year ($100 × .09)	$9.00
Excess allowable recovery deduction multiplied by the applicable recovery percentage for third recovery year divided by the sum of the remaining unused applicable percentages for tax-exempt use property existing as of the taxable year of change (1984) (($11 × .09)/.96)	−1.03
Difference—allowable deduction for 1985	$7.97

Additionally, X must make a similar adjustment for the taxable years 1986 through 1995, that is, his fourth through thirteenth recovery years.

Example 2.Assume the same facts as in Example (1) except that in 1983, X elected under section 168 (b) (3) with respect to the 5-year property to use the optional recovery percentages over a 25-year recovery period. Based on these facts, the provisions of this A-2 do not apply.

Definition of Tax-Exempt Use Property Mixed Leases of Real and Personal Property

Q-3. How is a mixed lease of real property and personal property (e.g., a building with furniture) to be treated for purposes of applying the rules of section 168(j)(3) defining which property constitutes tax-exempt use property?

A-3. The general rule is that 18-year real property and property other than 18-year real property are tested separately to determine whether each constitutes tax-exempt use property. However, if a lease of section 1245 class property is incidental to a lease of 18-year real property, and the 18-year real property is not tax-exempt use property, then the section 1245 class property also does not constitute tax-exempt use property. A lease of section 1245 class property will be considered incidental if the adjusted basis of all section 1245 class property leased in the same transaction is 1 percent or less of the adjusted basis of all 18-year real property leased in such transaction.

Buildings Which Are Partially Tax-Exempt Use Property

Q-4. If part of a building is leased to a tax-exempt entity in a disqualified lease and part of the building is leased other than to a tax-exempt entity in a disqualified lease, to what extent do the tax-exempt entity leasing rules apply to such building?

A-4. The taxpaper must determine the amount of the building's unadjusted basis that is properly allocable to the portion of the building that is tax-exempt use property; the section 168(j) rules apply to the allocated amount. Solely for purposes of determining what percentage of the building's basis is subject to the tax-exempt entity leasing rules, no part of the basis is allocated to common areas.

Example.A constructs a 3-story building in 1984 at a cost of $900,000. Each floor consists of 30,000 square feet. The only common area (10,000 square feet) in the building is on the first floor. A leases the first floor (other than the common areas) to a firm that is not a tax-exempt entity. A leases the top two floors to a tax-exempt entity in a 25-year lease. The top two floors constitute tax-exempt use property. Assume that square footage is the appropriate method for allocating basis in this case. Thus, A must allocate $675,000 of the $900,000 basis to the tax-exempt use portion, determined as follows: $$

A must compute his recovery deductions on this portion of the basis ($675,000) in accordance with the rules of section 168(j) (1) and (2).

Requirement of a Lease

Q-5. Can the use of property by a party other than a tax-exempt entity result in the property being treated as tax-exempt use property within the meaning of section 168(j)(3)?

A-5. Yes, if based on all the facts and circumstances it is more appropriate to characterize the transaction as a lease to a tax-exempt entity. A transaction can be characterized as a lease to a tax-exempt entity under section 168(j)(6)(A), which provides that “the term ‘lease’ includes any grant of a right to use property”; or under the service contract rules of section 7701(e). See Q&A #18 for rules regarding service contracts.

Example.A trust is executed on January 1, 1984, to create a pooled income fund (P) that meets the requirements of section 642(c)(5). A university (U) that is tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) is the remainderman of the pooled income fund. P's purpose is to construct and operate an athletic center on land adjacent to U's campus. Construction of the athletic center, which has a 50-year useful life, was completed and the center was placed in service on February 1, 1985. The athletic center is managed for a fee by M, an unrelated taxable organization which operates athletic facilities open to the public. Office space at the facility is occupied rent-free by both the U athletic department and M. Scheduling of activities at the center is handled jointly by members of U's athletic department and M. General operating expenses of the athletic center are paid by P. Although the athletic center is open to the public for a membership fee, the majority of members are U's students who pay membership fees as part of their tuition. These fees are remitted by U to P. This arrangement is in substance a grant to U of a right to use the facility, and therefore a lease to U under section 168(j)(6)(A). U, as remainderman, will have obtained title to the entire building when the last pooled income fund donor dies. This arrangement is a disqualified lease because either (1) U has the equivalent of a fixed price purchase option under section 168(j)(3)(B)(ii)(II) (if U receives title as remainderman before the end of the useful life of the building), or (2) the lease has a term in excess of 20 years under section 168(j)(3)(B)(ii)(III) (if U does not receive title as remainderman until 20 years have elapsed), or both. Therefore, the allowable recovery deductions (without regard to salvage value) must be computed in accordance with section 168(j) (1) and (2). In addition, because this arrangement is treated as a lease under section 168(j), the facility is used by U for purposes of section 48(a)(4), and thus no investment tax credit is permitted with respect to any portion of the facility. This arrangement also may be treated as a lease to U for all purposes of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code under section 7701 (e).

“More Than 35 Percent of the Property” Test

Q-6. How is the percentage of 18-year real property leased to a tax-exempt entity in a disqualified lease to be determined for purposes of the “more than 35 percent of the property” test of section 168(j)(3)(B)(iii)?

A-6. The phrase “more than 35 percent of the property” means more than 35 percent of the net rentable floor space of the property. The net rentable floor space in a building does not include the common areas of the building, regardless of the terms of the lease. For purposes of the “more than 35 percent of the property” rule, two or more buildings will be treated as separate properties unless they are part of the same project, in which case they will be treated as one property. Two or more buildings will be treated as part of the same project if the buildings are constructed, under a common plan, within a reasonable time of each other on the same site and will be used in an integrated manner.

Q-7. Are disqualified leases to different tax-exempt entities (regardless of whether they are related) aggregated in determining whether 18-year real property is tax-exempt use property?

A-7. Yes.

Example.A tax-exempt entity participates in industrial development bond financing for the acquisition of a new building by a taxable entity. The tax-exempt entity leases 60 percent of the net rentable floor space in the building for 5 years. Sixty percent of the building is tax-exempt use property. If the same tax-exempt entity leased only 19 percent of the net rentable floor space in the building for 5 years, no portion of the building would be tax-exempt use property because not more than 35 percent of the property is leased to a tax-exempt entity pursuant to a disqualified lease. If such tax-exempt entity leased only 19 percent of the net rentable floor space in the building for 5 years and another tax-exempt entity leased 20 percent of the net rentable floor space in the building for a term in excess of 20 years (or a related entity leased 20 percent of the building for 5 years), 39 percent of the building would be tax-exempt use property. See A-4 regarding the determination of the amount of the building's unadjusted basis that is properly allocable to the portion of the building that is tax-exempt use property.

“Predominantly Used” Test

Q-8. What does the term “predominantly used” mean for purposes of the section 168(j)(3)(D) exception to the tax-exempt use property rules?

A-8. “Predominantly used” means that for more than 50 percent of the time used, as determined for each taxable year, the real or personal property is used in an unrelated trade or business the income of which is subject to tax under section 511 (determined without regard to the debt-financed income rules of section 514). If only a portion of property is predominantly used in an unrelated trade or business, the remainder may nevertheless be tax-exempt use property.

Q-9. How is the “predominantly used” test of section 168(j)(3)(D) to be applied to a building?

A-9. The “predominantly used” test is to be applied to a building in the following manner:

(i) Identify the discrete portions (excluding common areas) of the building which are leased to a tax-exempt entity in a disqualified lease under section 168(j)(3)(B)(ii). A discrete portion of a building is an area physically separated from other areas. An area is physically separated from other areas if separated by permanent walls or by partitions serving as room dividers if such partitions remain in place throughout the taxable year. A discrete portion can be the entire building, floors, wings, offices, rooms, or a combination thereof. For example, a building whose entire internal space consists of a single large room used as a gymnasium has only one discrete portion. On the other hand, if the building has 3 stories with 10 offices on each floor, each of the 30 offices is a discrete portion.

(ii) Determine whether each discrete portion is predominantly used in an unrelated trade or business subject to tax under section 511. See A-8 for the rules regarding how to make this determination.

(iii) Once the discrete portions of the building that constitute tax-exempt use property have been identified, an appropriate allocation of basis must be made to such discrete portions. See A-4 for rules regarding how to make such allocation.

(iv) The application of these rules is illustrated by the following example:

Example.A building, constructed in 1985, is leased in its entirety to a tax-exempt entity (E) pursuant to a 25-year lease. The building has 25,000 square feet of net rentable floor space and consists of an auditorium (15,000 square feet), a retail shop (10,000 square feet), plus common area of 5,000 square feet. E uses the auditorium 80 percent of the time in its exempt activity and 20 percent of the time in an unrelated trade or business subject to tax under section 511. The retail shop is used 90 percent of the time in an unrelated trade or business subject to tax under section 511 and 10 percent of the time in an exempt activity. Thus, the auditorium is tax-exempt use property; the retail shop is not. An appropriate allocation of basis to the auditorium must be made. See A-4.

Definition of Tax-Exempt Entity

Q-10. What elections must be made in order to avoid the “5-year lookback” rule of section 168(j)(4)(E)(i)?

A-10. Only organizations which were exempt from tax under section 501(a) as organizations described in section 501(c)(12) (and which are no longer tax-exempt) may avoid the 5-year lookback rule of section 168(j)(4)(E)(i). In order to avoid the 5-year lookback rule with respect to any property, two elections are required. First, the organization must elect not to be exempt from tax under section 501(a) during the tax-exempt use period (as defined in section 168(j)(4)(E)(ii)(II)) with respect to the property. Second, the organization must elect to be taxed on the exempt arbitrage profits as provided in section 31(g)(16) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984. See Temp. Treas. Reg. § 301.9100-6T(a) for the time and manner of making these elections. These elections, once made, are irrevocable.

Q-11. Does the term “tax-exempt entity” include tax-exempt plans of deferred compensation and similar arrangements?

A-11. Yes. For purposes of section 168 (j), the term “tax-exempt entity” includes trusts or other entities that are tax-qualified under section 401 (a), individual retirement accounts, simplified employee pensions, and other tax-exempt arrangements described in subchapter D of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Special Rules for High Technology Equipment

Q-12. What effect do the tax-exempt entity leasing provisions have on “qualified technological equipment”?

A-12. “Qualified technological equipment” which is leased to a tax-exempt entity for a term of 5 years or less shall not constitute tax-exempt use property. If “qualified technological equipment” which is leased to a tax-exempt entity for a term of more than 5 years constitutes tax-exempt use property (as defined in section 168(j)(3)) and is not used predominantly outside the United States, the rules of section 168(j) (1) and (2) apply except that the recovery period to be used for such equipment shall be 5 years regardless of the length of the lease term. For purposes of section 168(j)(5), “qualified technological equipment” means (1) any computer or peripheral equipment, (2) any high technology telephone station equipment installed on the customer's premises, and (3) any high technology medical equipment. For definitions of these terms, see A-13 through A-16.

Q-13. What is a “computer” as that term is used in section 168(j)(5)(C)(i)(I)?

A-13. Computers are electronically activated devices that are programmable by the user and that are capable of accepting information, applying prescribed processes to it, and supplying the results of those processes with or without human intervention. Computers consist of a central processing unit containing extensive storage, logic, arithmetic, and control capabilities. A computer does not include any equipment which is an integral part of property that is not a user-programmable device, any video games or other devices used by the user primarily for amusement or entertainment purposes, or any typewriters, calculators, adding or accounting machines, copiers, duplicating equipment, or similar equipment. A computer does not include any equipment that is not tangible personal property.

Q-14. What is “peripheral equipment” as that term is used in section 168(j)(5)(C)(i)(I)?

A-14. Peripheral equipment means tangible personal property such as auxiliary machines, whether on-line or off-line, that are designed to be placed under the control of the central processing unit of the computer. Some examples of peripheral equipment are: card readers, card punches, magnetic tape feeds, high speed printers, optical character readers, tape cassettes, mass storage units, paper tape equipment, keypunches, data entry devices, teleprinters, terminals, tape drives, disc drives, disc files, disc packs, visual image projector tubes, card sorters, plotters, and collators. Peripheral equipment does not include equipment not included in Asset Depreciation Range (ADR) 00.12 listed in section 3 of Rev. Proc. 83-35, 1983-1 C.B. 745, 746. Peripheral equipment also does not include any equipment that is an integral part of property that is not a user-programmable device, any video games or other devices used by the user primarily for amusement or entertainment purposes, or any typewriters, calculators, adding or accounting machines, copiers, duplicating equipment, or similar equipment.

Q-15. What does “high technology telephone station equipment” mean as that term is used in section 168(j)(5)(C)(i)(II)?

A-15. High technology telephone station equipment includes only tangible personal property described in asset depreciation range (ADR) class 48.13 listed in section 3 of Rev. Proc. 83-35, 1983-1 C.B. 745, 758 that has a high technology content and which, because of such high technology content, can reasonably be expected to become obsolete before the expiration of its physical useful life. For example, telephone booths and telephones which include only a standard dialing feature are not high technology equipment. However, telephones with features such as an abbreviated dialing short program, an automatic callback, or conference call feature may qualify as high technology equipment. High technology telephone station equipment may include terminal equipment including such extra features but not terminal equipment used in conjunction with features offered through central office capacity. There are no current plans to utilize the regulatory authority provided in section 168(j)(5)(C)(iv).

Q-16. What is “high technology medical equipment” as that term is used in section 168 (j)(5)(C)(i)(III)?

A-16. High technology medical equipment is any electronic, electromechanical, or computer-based high technology equipment which is tangible personal property used in the screening, monitoring, observation, diagnosis, or treatment of human patients in a laboratory, medical, or hospital environment. High technology medical equipment includes only equipment that has a high technology content and which, because of such high technology content, can reasonably be expected to become obsolete before the expiration of its physical useful life. High technology medical equipment may include computer axial tomography (C.A.T.) scanners, nuclear magnetic resonance equipment, clinical chemistry analyzers, drug monitors, diagnostic ultrasound scanners, nuclear cameras, radiographic and fluoroscopic systems, Holter monitors, and bedside monitors. Incidental use of any such equipment for othe purposes, such as research, will not prevent it from qualifying as high technology medical equipment. There are no current plans to utilize the regulatory authority provided in section 168(j)(5)(C)(iv).

Lease Term

Q-17. What is included in determining the length of a lease term?

A-17. (i) The lease term starts when the property is first made available to the lessee under the lease. The lease term includes not only the stated duration, but also any additional period of time which is within the “realistic contemplation of the parties at the time the property is first put into service. Hokanson v. Commissioner, 730 F.2d 1245, 1248 (9th Cir. 1984). A subsequent period of time is included in the term of the original lease if the circumstances indicate that the parties, upon entering into the original lease, had informally agreed that there would be an extension of the original lease.

(ii) With respect to personal property, the lease term includes all periods for which the tax-exempt lessee or a related party (as defined under section 168(j)(7)) has a legally enforceable option to renew the lease, or the lessor has a legally enforceable option to compel its renewal by the tax-exempt entity or a related party. This is true regardless of the renewal terms of the lease agreement or whether the lease is in fact renewed.

(iii) With respect to real property, the lease term includes all periods for which the tax-exempt lessee or a related party (as defined under section 168(j)(7)) has a legally enforceable option to renew the lease, or the lessor has a legally enforceable option to compel its renewal by the tax-exempt entity or a related party, unless the option to renew is at fair market value, determined at the time of renewal. The Hokanson facts and circumstances test (see (i) above) may cause the term of a fair market value renewal option to be treated as part of the original lease term.

(iv) Successive leases that are part of the same transaction or a series of related transactions concerning the same or substantially similar property shall be treated as one lease. This rule applies if at substantially the same time or as part of one arrangement the parties enter into multiple leases covering the same or substantially similar property, each having a different term. If so, then the original lease term will be treated as running through the term of the lease that has the last expiration date of the multiple leases. The multiple lease rule will not apply merely because the parties enter into a new lease at fair market rental value at the end of the original lease term.

(v) The application of the above rules is illustrated by the following examples:

Example 1.On December 30, 1984, X, a taxable corporation, and Y, a tax-exempt entity, enter into a requirements contract for a period of 3 years. The requirements contract sets the terms and conditions under which X and Y will do business on those occasions when X actually leases items of personal property to Y. The requirements contract imposes no obligation on either party to actually enter into a lease agreement. Pursuant to this requirements contract, on January 1, 1985, X and Y enter into three separate leases. Under the leases, Y obtained the use of three identical items of personal property, each for a term of six months beginning on January 1, 1985. On March 1, 1985, Y entered into a fourth lease for the use of a fourth item of personal property substantially similar to the other three items for a term of 20 months beginning on that date. The mere fact that all 4 leases were entered into pursuant to the same requirements contract and involved the same or substantially similar property does not require aggregation of the terms of such leases under section 168(j)(6)(B). Example 2.Assume the same facts as in example (1) except that, instead of the 4 leases entered into in example (1), on January 1, 1985, pursuant to the requirements contract, X and Y enter into a lease for an item of personal property for one year. On January 10, 1986, after the end of the one-year lease term, X and Y enter into a second lease with respect to the same or substantially similar equipment. Assuming that the requirements contract itself is not a lease and assuming that the parties did not have any informal or implicit understanding (other than the general expectation of doing some business in the future) to enter into the second lease when the first lease was entered into, these two leases are not aggregated. The mere fact that the parties entered into two leases under the requirements contract does not result in the application of the section 168(j)(6)(B) rules for successive leases. Example 3.The facts are the same as in example (2) except that the parties did have an understanding, informal or otherwise, at the time of the first lease that they would enter into a second lease of the same personal property. The terms of the leases are aggregated. Example 4.The facts are the same as in example (2) except that, instead of the leases entered into in example (2), on January 1, 1985, X and Y enter into two separate leases, each for a term of one year. One lease is for the period beginning on January 1, 1985 and ending on December 31, 1985. The other lease is for the period beginning on January 1, 1986 and ending on December 31, 1986. Both leases involve the same or substantially similar personal property. Under the successive lease rule, the terms of both leases are aggregated for purposes of determining the term of either lease under section 168(j)(6)(B). This result occurs because the two leases were entered into as part of the same transaction, and they relate to the same or substantially similar personal property.

Service Contract Issues

Q-18. How is the treatment of service contracts affected by the service contract rules set forth in section 7701(e)?

A-18. If a contract which purports to be a service contract is treated as a lease under section 7701(e), such contract is to be treated as a lease for all purposes of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code (including, for example, section 168(j) and section 48(a) (4) and (5)).

Q-19. Does a contract to provide heating, maintenance, etc. services in low-income housing come within the low-income housing exception in section 7701(e)(5) to the service contract rules set forth in section 7701(e)?

A-19. No. Although certain low-income housing operated by or for an organization described in paragraphs (3) or (4) of section 501(c) is not subject to the service contract rules in section 7701(e), a contract, for instance, to provide heating services to low-income housing units, such as by installing and operating a furnace, does not constitute “low-income housing” within the meaning of section 7701(e)(5). Thus, the rules of section 7701(e) apply to such contracts in determining whether they are properly treated as leases.

Partnership Issues

Q-20. Do the provisions applicable to property leased to partnerships, set forth in section 168(j)(8), and the provisions applicable to property owned by partnerships, set forth in section 168(j)(9), apply to pass-through entities other than partnerships?

A-20. Yes. Rules similar to those provided in paragraphs (8), (9)(A), (9)(B), and (9)(C) of section 168(j) and those provided in Q & A's 21-26 apply to pass-through entities other than partnerships.

Q-21. What rules apply to property owned by a partnership in which one or more partners is a tax-exempt entity?

A-21. If property is owned by a partnership having both taxable and tax-exempt entities as partners, and any allocation to a tax-exempt entity partner is not a “qualified allocation” under section 168(j)(9)(B), then such entity's proportionate share of the property is to be treated as tax-exempt use property for all purposes. However, the property will not be tax-exempt use property if it is predominantly used by the partnership in an activity which, with respect to the tax-exempt entity, is an unrelated trade or business. An activity is an unrelated trade or business with respect to a tax-exempt entity if such entity's distributive share of the partnership's gross income from the activity is includible in computing its unrelated business taxable income under section 512(c) (determined without regard to the debt-financed income rules of section 514). A tax-exempt entity partner's proportionate share of property of a partnership equals such partner's share of that item of the partnership's income or gain (excluding income or gain allocated under section 704(c)) in which the tax-exempt entity has the highest share. If the tax-exempt entity partner's share of any item of income or gain (excluding income or gain allocated under section 704(c)) may vary during the period it is a partner, the previous sentence shall be applied with reference to the highest share of any such item that it may receive at any time during such period. The application of these rules is illustrated by the following example:

Example.A partnership (P) operates a factory, which consists of a building and various items of machinery. P has one tax-exempt entity (E) as a partner, and E's proportionate share is 10 percent (i.e., 10 percent is the largest share of any item of income or gain that E may receive during the time E is a partner). Unless P's allocations to E are qualified under section 168(j)(9)(B), 10 percent of each item of partnership property (including the building) is tax-exempt use property, notwithstanding the 35 percent threshold test of section 168(j)(3)(B)(iii) that is otherwise applicable to 18-year real property. However, the property will not be tax-exempt use property if it is predominantly used by the partnership in an activity which, with respect to E, is an unrelated trade or business (determined without regard to the debt-financed income rules of section 514).

Q-22. What consititutes a “qualified allocation” under section 168(j)(9)(B)?

A-22. (i) A “qualified allocation” means any allocation to a tax-exempt entity which is consistent with such entity's being allocated the same share (i.e., the identical percentage) of each and every item of partnership income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, and basis during the entire period such entity is a partner. Except as provided in A-23, an allocation is not qualified if it does not have substantial economic effect under section 704(b). However, for purposes of the two preceding sentences, items allocated under section 704(c) (relating to contributed property) are not taken into account. An allocation is not a “qualified allocation” under section 168(j)(9)(B) if the partnership agreement provides for, or the partners have otherwise formally or informally agreed to, any change (regardless of whether such change is contingent upon the happening of one or more events) in the tax-exempt entity's distributive share of income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, or basis at any time during the entire period the tax-exempt entity is a partner.

(ii) A change in a tax-exempt entity's distributive share of income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, or basis which occurs as a result of a sale or redemption of a partnership interest (or portion thereof) or a contribution of cash or property to the partnership shall be disregarded in determining whether the partnership allocations are qualified, provided that such transaction is based on fair market value at the time of the transaction and that the allocations are qualified after the change. For this purpose, the consideration determined by the parties dealing at arm's length and with adverse interests normally will be deemed to satisfy the fair market value requirement. In addition, a change in a tax-exempt entity's distributive share which occurs as a result of a partner's default (other than a prearranged default) under the terms of the partnership agreement will be disregarded, provided that the allocations are qualified after the change, and that the change does not have the effect of avoiding the restrictions of section 168(j)(9). Any of the above-described transactions between existing partners (and parties related to them) will be closely scrutinized.

Example 1.A, a taxable entity, and B, a tax-exempt entity, form a partnership in 1985. A contributes $800,000 to the partnership; B contributes $200,000. The partnership agreement allocates 95 percent of each item of income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, and basis to A; B's share of each of these items is 5 percent. Liquidation proceeds are, throughout the term of the partnership, to be distributed in accordance with the partner's capital account balances, and any partner with a deficit in his capital account following the distribution of liquidation proceeds is required to restore the amount of such deficit to the partnership. Assuming that these allocations have substantial economic effect within the meaning of section 704(b)(2), they are qualified because B's distributive share of each item of income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, and basis will remain the same during the entire period that B is a partner. The fact that the liquidation proceeds may be distributed in a ratio other than 95 percent/5 percent does not cause the allocations not to be qualified. Example 2.A, B, and E are members of a partnership formed on July 1, 1984. On that date the partnership places in service a building and section 1245 class property. A and B are taxable entities; E is a tax-exempt entity. The partnership agreement provides that during the first 5 years of the partnership, A and B are each allocated 40 percent of each item of income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, and basis; E is allocated 20 percent. Thereafter, A, B, and E are each allocated 33 1/3 percent of each item of income, gain, loss, deduction, credit, and basis. Assume that these allocations meet the substantial economic effect test of section 704(b)(2) and E's distributive share of the partnership's income is not unrelated trade or business income subject to tax under section 511. The allocations to E are not qualified allocations under section 168(j)(9)(B) because E's distributive share of partnership items does not remain the same during the entire period that E is a partner in the partnership. Thus, 33 1/3 percent of the building and 33 1/3 percent of the section 1245 class property are tax-exempt use property from the time each is placed in service by the partnership and are thus subject to the cost recovery rules of section 168(j) (1) and (2). In addition, no investment tax credit is allowed for 33 1/3 percent of the section 1245 class property because of section 48(a)(4).

Q-23. In determining whether allocations constitute qualified allocations, what rules are applied to test allocations that are not governed by the substantial economic effect rules?

A-23. A-22 provides the general rules to be used in determining whether an allocation is a qualified allocation, including the rule that the allocation must have substantial economic effect. However, certain allocations are not governed by the substantial economic effect rules (e.g., an allocation of basis of an oil and gas property is generally governed by section 613A(c)(7)(D), rather than section 704(b)), and other allocations cannot satisfy the substantial economic effect rules (e.g., allocations of credits, allocations of deduction and loss attributable to nonrecourse debt, and allocations of percentage depletion in excess of basis). Since allocations in either of these categories cannot be tested under the substantial economic effect test, these allocations, in order to be qualified, must comply with the relevant Code or regulation section that governs the particular allocation (e.g., in the case of an allocation of basis of an oil and gas property, section 613A(c)(7)(D)).

Q-24. Will the Internal Revenue Service issue letter rulings on the issue of whether an allocation is a “qualified allocation” for purposes of section 168(j)(9)?

A-24. The Internal Revenue Service will accept requests for rulings on the question of whether an allocation is a “qualified allocation” for purposes of section 168(j)(9). Such requests should be submitted in accordance with the appropriate revenue procedure. One requirement of a qualified allocation is that such allocation must have substantial economic effect under section 704(b)(2). Currently, the Service will not rule on the question of whether an allocation has substantial economic effect under section 704(b)(2). Therefore, unless and until this policy is changed, a ruling request regarding a qualified allocation must contain a representation that the subject allocation has substantial economic effect (or complies with A-23, if applicable).

Q-25. Do priority cash distributions which constitute guaranteed payments under section 707(c) disqualify an otherwise qualified allocation?

A-25. Priority cash distributions to partners which constitute guaranteed payments will not disqualify an otherwise qualified allocation if the priority cash distributions are reasonable in amount (e.g., equal to the Federal short-term rate described in section 1274(d)) and are made in equal priorities to all partners in proportion to their capital in the partnership. Other guaranteed payments will be closely scrutinized and, in appropriate cases, will disqualify an otherwise qualified allocation.

Example.A and B form Partnership AB to operate a manufacturing business. A is a tax-exempt entity; B is a taxable person. A contributes $500,000 to the partnership; B contributes $100,000. The partnership agreement provides that A and B are each entitled to cash distributions each year, in equal priority, in an amount equal to 8 percent of their capital contribution. Assume that these payments are reasonable in amount and constitute guaranteed payments under section 707(c). Without taking into consideration the guaranteed payments, all allocations constitute qualified allocations under section 168(j)(9)(B) and A-22. These guaranteed payments will not disqualify such allocations.

Q-26. Can property be treated as tax-exempt use property under both the general rule of section 168(j)(3) and the partnership provisions of section 168(j)(9)?

A-26. Yes. For example, a tax-exempt entity may be a partner in a partnership that owns a building 60 percent of which is tax-exempt use property because it is leased to an unrelated tax-exempt entity under a 25-year lease. The status of the remaining 40 percent depends on whether or not allocations under the partnership agreement are qualified under section 168(j)(9). If the allocations are not qualified under section 168(j)(9), the tax-exempt entity's proportionate share (as determined under section 168(j)(9)(C)) of the remaining 40 percent will be tax-exempt use property. For example, if the tax-exempt entity's proportionate share is 30 percent, then 12 percent of the remaining 40 percent (i.e., .30 times .40) is tax-exempt use property and a total of 72 percent of the property (60 percent + 12 percent) is tax-exempt use property.

Effective Date Questions

Q-27. Does an amendment to a lease (or sublease) to a tax-exempt entity of property which, pursuant to the effective date provisions of section 31(g) of TRA, is not subject to section 168(j) cause such property to be subject to the provisions of section 168(j)?

A-27. An amendment to such a lease (or sublease) does not cause such property to be subject to the provisions of section 168(j) unless the amendment increases the term of the lease (or sublease). However, if the amendment increases the amount of property subject to the lease, the additional property must be tested independently under the effective date provisions of section 31(g) of TRA. See A-31 for special rules regarding improvements to property.

Example.On May 1, 1983, X, a taxable entity, and E, a tax-exempt entity, enter into a lease whereby X will lease to E the top 4 floors of a ten-story building for a lease term of 25 years. In 1985, the lease is amended to provide that E will lease an additional floor for the balance of the lease term. At that time the annual rent due under the lease is increased. Pursuant to the provisions of section 31(g)(2)(A) of TRA, section 168(j) does not apply to the lease to E of the top 4 floors of the building. Assuming that no other provision of section 31(g) of TRA provides otherwise, the floor added to the lease in 1985 is subject to the provisions of section 168(j).

Q-28. If property which is not subject to section 168(j) by virtue of the effective date provisions of section 31(g) of TRA is sold, subject to the lease to the tax-exempt entity, what are the consequences?

A-28. Property to which section 168(j) does not apply by virtue of the effective date provisions set forth in section 31(g) (2), (3), and (4) of TRA will not become subject to section 168(j) merely by reason of a transfer of the property subject to the lease by the lessor (or a transfer of the contract to acquire, construct, reconstruct, or rehabilitate the property), so long as the lessee (or party obligated to lease) does not change. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term “transfer” includes the sale-leaseback by a taxable lessor of its interest in the property, subject to the underlying lease to the tax-exempt entity. However, if property is transferred to a partnership or other pass-through entity after the effective date of section 168(j)(9) (see section 31(g) of TRA), such property is subject to the provisions of section 168(j)(9).

Q-29. Can property which was leased to a tax-exempt entity after May 23, 1983 and acquired by a partnership before October 22, 1983 be tax-exempt use property?

A-29. Yes. Because the property was leased to a tax-exempt entity after May 23, 1983, it may be tax-exempt use property under section 168(j)(3) and section 31(g)(1) of TRA. However, if the partnership included a tax-exempt entity as a partner, section 168(j)(9) would be inapplicable under section 31(g)(3)(B) of TRA because the partnership acquired the property before October 22, 1983.

Q-30. What is a binding contract for purposes of the transitional rules in section 31(g) of TRA?

A-30. (i) A contract is binding only if it is enforceable under State law against the taxpayer or a predecessor and does not limit damages to a specified amount, as for example, by a liquidated damages provision. A contract that limits damages to an amount equal to at least 5 percent of the total contract price will not be treated as limiting damages for this purpose. In determining whether a contract limits damages, the fact that there may be little or no damages because the contract price does not significantly differ from fair market value will not be taken into account. For example, if a taxpayer entered into an irrevocable contract to purchase an asset for $100 and the contract contained no provision for liquidated damages, the contract is considered binding notwithstanding the fact that the property had a fair market value of $99 and under local law the seller would only recover the difference in the event the purchaser failed to perform. If the contract provided for a refund of the purchase price in lieu of any damages allowable by law in the event of breach or cancellation, the contract is not considered binding.

(ii) A contract is binding even if subject to a condition, so long as the condition is not within the control of either party or a predecessor in interest. A contract will not be treated as ceasing to be binding merely because the parties make insubstantial changes in its terms or because any term is to be determined by a standard beyond the control of either party. A contract which imposes significant obligations on the taxpayer (or a predecessor) will be treated as binding notwithstanding the fact that insubstantial terms remain to be negotiated by the parties to the contract.

(iii) A binding contract to acquire a component part of a larger piece of property will not be treated as a binding contract to acquire the larger piece of property. For example, if a tax-exempt entity entered into a binding contract on May 1, 1983 to acquire a new aircraft engine, there would be a binding contract to acquire only the engine, not the entire aircraft.

Q-31. If an improvement is made to a property that is “grandfathered” (i.e., property that is not subject to section 168(j) because of the effective date provisions of section 31(g) of TRA), to what extent will such improvement be grandfathered?

A-31. Section 31(g)(20)(B) provides that a “substantial improvement” to property is treated as a separate property for purposes of the effective date provisions of section 31(g) of TRA. As a result, a “substantial improvement” will not be grandfathered unless such “substantial improvement” is grandfathered under a provision other than section 31(g)(20)(B). A property that is grandfathered will not become subject to section 168(j) merely because an improvement is made to such property, regardless of whether the improvement is a “substantial improvement”. If an improvement other than a “substantial improvement” is made to property (other than land) that is grandfathered, that improvement also will be grandfathered. The determination of whether new construction constitutes an improvement to property or the creation of a new separate property will be based on all facts and circumstances. Furthermore, any improvement to land will be treated as a separate property.

Example.On January 3, 1983, T, a taxable entity, entered into a lease of a parking lot to E, a tax-exempt entity. On January 1, 1985, T begins construction of a building for use by E on the site of the parking lot. The building is completed and placed in service in November 1985. The building is treated as a separate property, and is thus subject to the provisions of section 168(j), unless the building is grandfathered under a provision other than section 31(g)(20)(B) of TRA.

Q-32. What is “significant official governmental action” for purposes of the section 31(g)(4) transitional rule of TRA?

A-32. (i) “Significant official governmental action” involves three separate requirements. First, the action must be an official action. Second, the action must be specific action with respect to a particular project. Third, the action must be taken by a governmental entity having authority to commit the tax-exempt entity to the project, to provide funds for it, or to approve the project under State or local law.

(ii) The first requirement of official action means that the governing body must adopt a resolution or ordinance, or take similar official action, on or before November 1, 1983. The action qualifies only if it conforms with Federal, State, and local law (as applicable) and is a proper exercise of the powers of the governing body. Moreover, the action must not have been withdrawn. There must be satisfactory written evidence of the action that was in existence on or before November 1, 1983. Satisfactory written evidence includes a formal resolution or ordinance, minutes of meetings, and binding contracts with third parties pursuant to which third parties are to render services in furtherance of the project.

(iii) The second requirement of specific action is directed at the substance of the action taken. The action must be a specific action with respect to a particular project in which the governing body indicates an intent to have the project (or the design work for it) proceed. This requires that a specific project have been formulated and that the significant official action be a step toward consummation of the project. If the action does not relate to a specific project or merely directs that a proposal or recommendation be formulated, it will not qualify. The following set of actions with respect to a particular project constitute specific action: the hiring of bond counsel or bond underwriters necessary to assist in the issuance and sale of bonds to finance a particular project or the adoption of an inducement resolution relating to bonds to be issued for such a project; applying for an Urban Development Action Grant on behalf of the project described in the application, receiving such a grant concerning the project, or the recommendation of a city planning authority to proceed with a project; the enactment of a State law authorizing the sale, lease, or construction of the property; the appropriation of funds for the property or authorization of a feasibility study or a development services contract with respect to it; the approval of financing arrangements by a regulatory agency; the enactment of a State law designed to provide funding for a project; the certification of a building as a historic structure by a State agency and the Department of the Interior; or the endorsement of the application for a certification of need with respect to a medical facility by a regulatory agency other than the agency empowered to issue such a certificate.

(iv) The third requirement for significant official governmental action is that the action must be taken by a Federal, State, or local governing body having authority to commit the tax-exempt entity to the project, to provide funds for it, or to approve the project under applicable law.

If the chief executive or another representative of a governing body has such authority, action by such representative would satisfy the requirement of this (iv). A governing body may have the authority to commit the tax-exempt entity to a project notwithstanding the fact that the project cannot be consummated without other governmental action being taken. For example, a city council will be treated as having authority to commit a city to do a sale-leaseback of its city hall notwithstanding the fact that State law needs to be amended to permit such a transaction. Similarly, if a local project cannot be completed without Federal approval, either legislative or administrative, the obtaining of such approval satisfies the requirements of this (iv).

(v) Routine governmental action at a local level will not qualify as significant official governmental action. Routine governmental action includes the granting of building permits or zoning changes and the issuance of environmental impact statements.

(vi) In order to qualify under the transitional rule of TRA section 31(g)(4), a sale and leaseback pursuant to a binding contract entered into before January 1, 1985 must be part of the project as to which there was significant official governmental action. Except as provided in the following sentence, where there has been significant official governmental action on or before November 1, 1983 with respect to the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of a property, the sale and leaseback of such property pursuant to a binding contract entered into before January 1, 1985 will be treated as part of the project which was the subject of the significant official governmental action. However, if the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation was substantially completed prior to January 1, 1983, the sale and leaseback of such property will be treated as a separate project, unless the sale and leaseback was contemplated at the time of the significant official governmental action. Nevertheless, where the sale and leaseback is treated as a separate project, section 31(g)(4) may apply if there was significant official governmental action on or before November 1, 1983, with respect to such sale and leaseback. The application of this provision is illustrated by the following example:

Example.In the summer of 1927, the Board of Aldermen of City C passed a resolution authorizing the design and contruction of a new city hall and appropriated the funds necessary for such project. Construction was completed in 1928. At the time of the significant official governmental action, City C had no plan to enter into a sale-leaseback arrangement with respect to the facility. On December 15, 1984, City C entered into a binding sale-leaseback arrangement concerning the city hall. This transaction will not qualify for exclusion from section 168(j) under the section 31(g)(4) of TRA since construction of the facility in question was substantially completed before January 1, 1983. If, however, there had been significant official governmental action on or before November 1, 1983 with respect to the sale-leaseback project, then the transitional rule of section 31(g)(4) of TRA would apply. [T.D. 8033, 50 FR 27224, July 2, 1985, as amended by T.D. 8435, 57 FR 43896, Sept. 23, 1992]