by Mat Sorensen | Jan 12, 2016 | Real Estate & Alternative Asset Investing , Tax Planning, Uncategorized
The most common asset class for self-directed IRA accounts is real estate. Real estate investments for self-directed IRAs come in various forms from simple single-family rentals owned 100% by the IRA to LLC or LP investment partnerships with multiple investors in larger commercial or multi-family properties.
Given the changes in federal securities laws that now allow investment sponsors and real estate syndicators to raise capital more easily, many self directed IRA investors have considered investing their IRAs into these offerings. Crowdfunding sites such as Realcrowd are already offering Crowdfunding type investment opportunities for investors under SEC Rule 506(c). This rule and those investments are currently only available to accredited investors and have no restriction on the investment amount that may come from the accredited investor. These offerings have traditionally been known as private placements or “PPMs” but can now be marketed and there is no requirement that they be “private” so long as the offering company only accepts accredited investors.
For those who are not accredited investors, “true” Crowdfunding under Title III of the JOBS Act goes into effect in May of 2016. Under these Crowdfunding offerings everyone will be able to invest into Crowdfunding opportunities and the investment amount will be based on the investor’s income and assets. These new Crowdfunding rules were enacted in Title III of the JOBS Act and were put into final regulations by the SEC in late 2015.
Before investing your self-directed IRA into a real estate Crowdfunding offering, you must first learn and understand one very important tax called UBIT tax that may apply to your self-directed IRA’s income.
Will My IRA Be Subject to UBIT Tax?
Unrelated Business Income Tax (“UBIT”) applies to an IRA that receives non-passive income. UBIT is a hefty tax and has a maximum rate of 39.6%. IRC § 511. The tax table is copied below.
2016 UBIT Tax Rates
| If taxable income is: |
The tax is: |
| Not over $2550 |
15% of the taxable income |
| Over $2550 but not over $5950 |
$375 plus 25% of the excess over $2550 |
| Over $5950 but not over $9050 |
$1225 plus 28% of the excess over $5950 |
| Over $9050 but not over $12300 |
$2107 plus 33% of the excess over $9050 |
| Over $12400 |
$3179 plus 39.6% of the excess over $12400 |
Although not shown on the table, the first $1,000 in UBIT gross income is exempt and you receive an automatic $1,000 deduction.
UBIT will apply to your self-directed IRAs real estate investment in two scenarios. First, it will apply if the income to the IRA is ordinary. And second, it will apply if the offering company uses debt to acquire its properties.
Step One: Is the income passive?
First, UBIT will apply if the investment is an ordinary income producing business. An ordinary income business in real estate investing would include investing into an LLC or LP that conducts new construction, real estate developments held for sale, or other activities that are deemed business activities. Passive income investments, on the other hand, are specifically exempt from UBIT and include real estate rental income, capital gain income, interest income, and dividend income from a c-corp. IRC § 512(b). The vast majority of real estate Crowdfunding offerings are structured to obtain passive income such as rental income while the property is held and capital gain income when the property is sold. Typical real estate offerings where UBIT can be due include offerings to fix and flip properties or offerings for new construction or real estate development where the investment strategy is to buy properties to then immediately sale.
If you have an investment offering that is ordinary income (e.g. a fix and flip fund), then the income to the IRA from the fund will be subject to UBIT tax and the IRA will be required to file and pay the tax each year by using IRS Form 990-T. This responsibility to file the return each year is on the IRA account owner and not the investment sponsor or the IRA custodian so IRA owners need to know for themselves whether the IRA is subject to UBIT or not. So for example, let’s say that a self-directed IRA invested into a Crowdfunding offering that was a real estate development with properties held immediately for sale and that the income was ordinary income. Let’s further assume that the self-directed IRA received a K-1 for profits to the IRA for the year of $10,000. Based on the UBIT tax table, the IRA would owe UBIT tax in the amount of $2,420. This amount is due from the IRA to the IRS and is reported and payable using form 990-T.
If you’ve determined that the Crowdfunding offering income is passive (e.g. rental, capital gain), then you may still be subject to UBIT if the LLC or LP offering company is using debt to leverage and acquire its properties.
Step Two: Will the investment be leveraged with debt?
Second, UBIT will apply to profits returned to your IRA from a Crowdfunding real estate offering (and really any real estate owned by your IRA) if the offering company uses debt to leverage its acquisition of properties. For example, let’s say the offering company raises $1M in cash to buy a $4M multi-family property. There will be $1M of cash invested into the property and $3M of debt. The property will therefore be leveraged 75% with debt.
Whenever an IRA’s investment is leveraged with debt, the tax code requires the IRA owner to determine what profits are attributable to the IRAs cash and what profits are attributable to the debt. The profits attributable to the cash invested is still treated as tax deferred (traditional IRA) or tax free (roth IRA) and is not subject to UBIT. The profits and income attributable to the debt, however, is called unrelated debt financed income (“UDFI”) and is subject to UBIT. IRC § 514. So, in the multi-family property example above where the property is leveraged 75% with debt, the self-directed IRA will be subject to UBIT tax on 75% of the income.
In order to calculate UBIT tax based on debt, you must first determine the leverage ratio. Once we know the leverage ratio, we can then begin to calculate how UBIT will apply. The good news is that the IRA is also allowed to take expenses against the property using the same leverage ratio and is able to take depreciation expenses which help to offset UBIT. In many situations, even where a property is cash-flowing the IRA will not be subject to UBIT because the property expenses and depreciation will offset UBIT income.
Let’s continue through this example to illustrate how this works.
Example
Property Purchase Price = $4M
Debt/Leverage = $3M
Leverage Ration = 75%
Income = $1.3M
Income at Leverage Ratio (75%) = $975,000
Operating Expenses= $1,000,000
Operating Expenses at Leverage Ratio (75%) = $750,000
Net Leveraged Income = $225,000
Depreciation Expense ($4M / 27.5) = $145,500
Depreciation Expense at Leverage Ratio = $109,125
Net UDFI/UBIT Income = $115,875
SDIRA Investor Invested $20K and received 1.5% of Company Profit/Loss
SDIRA Investor 1.5% of Net UDFI/UBIT = $1,738.
Automatic IRS $1,000 deduction = $738 subject to UBIT/UDFI
UBIT Table Rate of 15% of $738 = $110 in UBIT is Due
As the example demonstrates, given the low-level of investment from the IRA it isn’t subject to much UBIT as the net UBIT income (after expenses and depreciation) keeps the tax rate on the low end of the tax table. That being said, 990-T tax returns must be filed by the IRA investor for the IRA and the IRA will be responsible for the tax due. Factors that will cause more UBIT are higher returns and income, larger investment amounts and ownership, and more leverage.
While self-directed IRA’s are subject to UDFI and UBIT on leveraged real estate investments, it is worth noting that self-directed 401(k) and other employer based plans are exempt from UDFI on leveraged real estate investments. IRC § 514(9). Unfortunately, self-directed IRAs do not receive this exemption.
So, in short, the quick list to determine whether UBIT will be due a self-directed IRA Crowdfunding real estate investment requires analysis of two issues. First, is the offering company’s income passive or is it ordinary. If it is ordinary then it is subject to UBIT. If it is passive, then it is only subject to UBIT if the company uses debt to leverage its investments. Once you can answer these questions you know whether UBIT will apply to your investment and whether your IRA will need to report and pay tax on its income.
by Mat Sorensen | Jun 29, 2015 | Real Estate & Alternative Asset Investing , Uncategorized
A recent Bankruptcy Court decision dealt with prohibited transaction claims against a self directed IRA owner who was using their IRA to flip real estate for profit. The claims were brought by a bankruptcy trustee who argued that the protected IRA was no longer an IRA because it engaged in a number of prohibited transactions. If the trustee is successful in disqualifying the retirement account because of a prohibited transaction, then the funds and assets held in such retirement account are no longer protected from creditors and may be used to pay debtors involved in the bankruptcy. While most prohibited transaction cases arise in Tax Court, I’m seeing more cases on prohibited transactions in Bankruptcy Court as trustees are becoming more aggressive and as self directed IRAs are becoming more popular.
The case in question is known as In re Cherwenka, Case 13-57592-MGD (Bankr. N. D. GA 2014). The case included two important prohibited transaction analysis that are helpful to IRA owners.
Court Rules No Prohibited Transaction When Managing IRA Investment Properties Without Compensation
The first significant ruling from the Court was that there was no prohibited transaction when the IRA owner completed the following tasks related to the IRA owned property.
- Research and identified properties to buy
- Appointed and approved work on the properties
- Oversaw payments on the property for work from the self-directed IRA.
The Court reasoned that these actions do no constitute a “transaction” as defined in IRC § 4975 and as a result they cannot constitute a prohibited transaction. The Court further stated that, “…self-directed IRAs as qualified IRAs, necessarily implies that a disqualified person (the owner as fiduciary) will make investment decisions regarding the plan. The Court distinguished this case from In re Williams, 2011 WL 10653865 (Bankr E.D. Cal 2011) a similar case in which the self-directed IRA owner was managing properties owned by the IRA because in Williams the IRA was paying the self-directed IRA owner for the services. The court stated that it was the payment from the IRA to the IRA owner in Williams that caused the prohibited transaction and not the mere provision of managing the IRAs investment owned by the IRA.
Court Ruled That No Prohibited Transaction Occurred When IRA and Owner Invested Into Property Together
The second significant ruling from the Court was that there was no prohibited transaction when the IRA owner and the IRA co-invested into a property together. The property in question was owned 45% by the IRA and 55% by the IRA owner. The Court rejected the bankruptcy Trustee’s argument that such co-investment purchase resulted in a prohibited transaction and stated that the interests appeared to have been treated distinctly and that the HUD documents from the sale of the property show that the IRA and the IRA owner’s proceeds from the sale were treated separately and that they were apportioned properly. As a result, the Court concluded that no prohibited transaction occurred since there was no evidence of un-fair benefit between the IRA owner and his IRA. In its reasoning, the Court referenced DOL Opinion 2000-10A which addressed an IRA and the IRA owner co-investing into a partnership. In the Opinion the DOL states that, “a violation of section 4975 (c)(1)(D) or (E) will not occur merely because the fiduciary [IRA owner] drives some incidental benefit from the transaction involving IRA assets.” The Court referenced this opinion and stated that unless there is evidence of some un-fair benefit that no prohibited transaction occurred merely because of co-investment into the same property.
There are two key take-away’s for self-directed IRA investors from this case.
First, never take compensation or payment from the IRA for services rendered. It is clear that the Courts will find a prohibited transaction if you do and that you will no longer have an IRA.
Second, if you are buying property or others assets (e.g. LLC interests) between your IRA and yourself personally (or another disqualified person) those interests must be carefully calculated and treated such that there is no benefit going unfairly between the IRA and the disqualified person (e.g. IRA owner). In sum, get advice and plan carefully as there are many land-mines you could encounter when investing IRA funds with your own personal funds. Bottom line, it can be done but it can easily be done incorrectly.
by Mat Sorensen | Feb 13, 2015 | Real Estate & Alternative Asset Investing , Uncategorized
Comprehensive Webinar: Buying Real Estate with Your IRA and a Non-Recourse Loan Mat Sorensen from Mathew Sorensen on Vimeo.
Your IRA can buy real estate using its cash and a loan/mortgage to acquire the property. Whenever you leverage your IRA with debt, however, you must be aware of two things. First, the loan your IRA obtains must be a non-recourse loan. Additionally, your IRA may be subject to a tax known as unrelated business taxable income (UBTI). This comprehensive webinar explains the requirements for non-recourse loans, as well as the various non-recourse loan options. It provides detailed information on how UDFI tax may be applied and how it is calculated. Below are the slides from the presentation as well as the recorded video presentation of the webinar. Please note that page 27 in the PDF slides below has been updated from the webinar, as I made a calculation error regarding the debt owed. The final tax numbers were still correct, though. Thanks to Roger St.Pierre, Sr. VP at First Western Federal Savings Bank, for co-presenting the topic with me.
The so-called “DOL Fiduciary Rule” went into effect in June and has caused negative repercussions on self-directed retirement account investors who self-directed their IRA, 401(k), or pension into alternative investments. Many self-directed investors have been shut out from investing into private offerings – real estate funds, private placements, start-ups, private REITs, etc. – as investment sponsors or private companies raising funds fear that, by accepting the self-directed retirement account’s investment, they will be labeled a “fiduciary” and will need to adhere to fiduciary rules really meant for investment advisers.