nach oben

The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics

Erschienen in:

11.07.2016

Depreciation-Related Capital Gains, Differential Tax Rates, and the Market Value of Real Estate Investment Trusts

verfasst von: Dan W. French, S. McKay Price

Erschienen in: The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics | Ausgabe 1/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

We develop a model for valuing U.S. real estate investment trusts (REITs) that considers the tax liability impounded in REITs’ property portfolios. This liability is a function of the portfolio’s accumulated depreciation and is driven by different tax rates applied to individual components of the total gain from property sales. These two components are the capital gain resulting from the sale of property at a price higher than its cost and the gain due to the recapture of depreciation taken during the use of the property. Our measure of value is the REIT’s net asset liquidation value (NALV). The metric of REIT value currently used by analysts is a REIT’s net asset value (NAV), but a REIT’s NAV will always be greater than the NALV and therefore overestimate market value, all else equal. Finally, using observed market prices for REITs, we provide evidence that NALVs give superior estimates of REIT market prices than do NAVs.

Vorheriger Artikel Fundamental Drivers of Dependence in REIT Returns

Nächster Artikel Good Growth, Bad Growth: How Effective are REITs’ Corporate Watchdogs?

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Of course, the firm’s profits resulting from those activities should overcome that “decline” so that the overall the firm value would rise.

A building will not last forever, so real estate (improvement to land) does get “used up” over time. However, a properly maintained property should have a useful life that well exceeds and might even be several multiples of the depreciation life allowed by current tax and financial accounting standards. Therefore, the actual rate of economic depreciation of real property should be a fraction of standard depreciation allowances and can even approach zero.

See Section V labeled “Evidence from Net Asset Values and Observed Market Prices” below.

In our model, “net after-tax liquidation value” does not imply the forced, or distressed, sale (liquidation) of underlying assets as in Shleifer and Vishny (1992). Rather, we are simply referring to the idea of selling underlying assets at fair market value less any tax liabilities.

Define a conduit firm as one that passes the taxability of its earnings through to its shareholders when paying dividends, without paying taxes itself on those earnings.

In a closed-end funds setting, Malkiel (1977) derives a formula for the discount from NAV that arises solely because of the timing of the cash flows. The present value of the tax payable on the dividend stream is less than the present value of the future tax credit from the sale of shares resulting in a discount. However, even in the Malkiel framework, the discount is zero using the arbitrage argument of an immediate sale of the assets and disbursement of cash.

The price paid includes the original price of the property plus any subsequent capital improvements on the property.

See Internal Revenue Code §857(b)(3).

http://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1099div/ar02.html#d0e410.

See Internal Revenue Code §1(h)(1)(C) and §1(h)(1)(D). Additionally, Public Law 105–34, known as the “Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997”, introduced the concept of depreciation recapture and set the rate at 25 %. This law also reduced the marginal capital gains tax rate from 28 % to 20 %. The rate was further reduced to 15 % by Public Law 108–27, known as the “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003”.

This remains the case even when considering that REITs can utilize tax deferred like-kind exchanges (the “1031 exchange” codified in Internal Revenue Code §1031.) Exchanges do not eliminate the associated tax liabilities; rather, they merely delay the realization of them while depreciation continues to accumulate. In practice there is much cross-sectional variation within the REIT industry in the extent to which firms utilize like-kind exchanges and/or pay section 1250 gains in any given year. We have confirmed this in conversations with REIT executives in addition to observing that, on average, the ratio of reported section 1250 gains to total capital gains is 0.41; indicating that some, but certainly not all, REIT property sales make use of tax-deferred exchanges.

This explains how REITs, on average, pay out as dividends more than their taxable income. They are utilizing the cash flow generated by depreciation. Of course, most REITs do not pay out their entire cash flow generated by depreciation; a typical REIT pays a generous cash dividend that is somewhat more than its net income and then retains the remainder of its cash flow for additional investment.

This component and the cash distribution it represents will never be negative.

The distribution from this component cannot (by definition of a distribution) be negative. However, when this component is negative (i.e. there is a capital loss), the REIT can use it to reduce the gain in component 2 before making the actual distribution. The resulting net effect is equivalent to allowing component 3 to be negative. Therefore, we allow this component to be negative when necessary.

Only a handful of REITs fall into the M – D – L < 0 category at any point in time. During our sample period, the number ranged from zero to eight in any 1 year with most occurring, as expected, during the 2008–2009 financial crisis years.

We utilize the NALV Premium [Eq. (9)] in this specification, rather than simply using NALV [Eq. (11)], in order to avoid potential collinearity issues that could arise if we were to include NALV and NAV as independent variables in the same regression.

We do not include debt (L) and preferred equity (BVPE) in the regressions in Table 5 because they are incorporated into the calculation of NALV Premium. Nonetheless, in unreported results we obtain the same signs, similar coefficient magnitudes, and strong significance for our variable of interest across all models when L and BVPE are included.

Not taxing corporations, while it would achieve the same result, would likely be politically not feasible.

Auerbach, A. (1979). Share valuation and corporate equity policy. Journal of Public Economics, 11(3), 291–305.CrossRef

Auerbach, A. J., & Hassett, K. A. (2002). On the marginal source of investment funds. Journal of Public Economics, 87(1), 205–232.CrossRef

Barkham, R., & Geltner, D. (1995). Price discovery in American and British property markets. Real Estate Economics, 23(1), 21–44.CrossRef

Benveniste, L., Capozza, D. R., & Seguin, P. J. (2001). The value of liquidity. Real Estate Economics, 29(4), 633–660.CrossRef

Berk, J. B., & Stanton, R. (2007). Managerial ability, compensation, and the closed-end fund discount. Journal of Finance, 62(2), 529–556.CrossRef

Bradford, D. (1981). The incidence and allocation effects of a tax on corporate distributions. Journal of Public Economics, 15(1), 1–22.CrossRef

Brennan, M. J. (1970). Taxes, market valuation and corporate financial policy. National Tax Journal, 23, 417–427.

Brennan, M. J., & Thakor, A. J. (1990). Shareholder preferences and dividend policy. Journal of Finance, 45(4), 993–1018.CrossRef

Brounen, D., Ling, D. C., & Prado, M. P. (2013). Short sales and fundamental value: explaining the REIT premium to NAV. Real Estate Economics, 41(3), 481–516.CrossRef

Capozza, D. R., & Lee, S. (1995). Property type, size and REIT value. Journal of Real Estate Research, 10(4), 363–379.

Capozza, D. R., & Seguin, P. J. (2003). Inside ownership, risk sharing and Tobin’s q-ratios: evidence from REITs. Real Estate Economics, 31(3), 367–404.CrossRef

Cherkes, M., Sagi, J., & Stanton, R. (2009). A liquidity-based theory of closed-end funds. Review of Financial Studies, 22(1), 257–297.CrossRef

Chiang, K. C. H. (2009). Discovering REIT price discovery: a new data setting. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 39(1), 74–91.CrossRef

Clayton, J., & MacKinnon, G. (2001). Explaining the discount to NAV in REIT pricing: noise or information? Real Estate Research Institute Working Paper.

Clayton, J., & MacKinnon, G. (2002). Departures from NAV in REIT pricing: the private real estate cycle, the value of liquidity and investor sentiment. Real Estate Research Institute Working Paper.

Cutler, D. M. (1988). Tax reform and the stock market: an asset price approach. American Economic Review, 78(5), 1107–1117.

Damodaran, A., & Liu, C. H. (1993). Insider trading as a signal of private information. Review of Financial Studies, 6(1), 79–119.CrossRef

Desai, M. A., & Goolsbee, A. D. (2004). Investment, overhang, and tax policy. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 35(2), 285–338.CrossRef

Gentry, W. M., Kemsley, D., & Mayer, C. J. (2003). Dividend taxes and share prices: evidence from real estate investment trusts. Journal of Finance, 58(1), 261–282.CrossRef

Gentry, W. M., Jones, C. M., & Mayer, C. J. (2004). Do stock prices really reflect fundamental values? The case of REITs. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper.

Givoly, D., & Hayn, C. (1991). The aggregate and distributional effects of the tax reform act of 1986 on firm valuation. Journal of Business, 64(3), 363–392.CrossRef

Harris, T. S., & Kemsley, D. (1999). Dividend taxation in firm value: new evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 37(2), 275–291.CrossRef

Kallberg, J. G., Liu, C. L., & Trzcinka, C. (2000). The value added from investment managers: an examination of funds of REITs. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 35(3), 387–408.CrossRef

Kang, S. H., & Zhao, Y. (2010). Information content and value relevance of depreciation: a cross-industry analysis. Accounting Review, 85(1), 227–260.CrossRef

King, M. (1977). Public policy and the corporation. London: Chapman and Hall.

Lee, C. M. C., Shleifer, A., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Investor sentiment and the closed-end fund puzzle. Journal of Finance, 46(1), 75–109.CrossRef

Malkiel, B. G. (1977). The valuation of closed-end investment-company shares. Journal of Finance, 32(3), 847–859.CrossRef

McLure, C. E. (1977). The new view of the property tax: a caveat. National Tax Journal, 30(1), 69–76.

Patel, K., Pereira, R. A. M. G., & Zavodov, K. V. (2009). Mean-reversion in REITs discount to NAV and risk premium. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 39(3), 229–247.CrossRef

Pontiff, J. (1995). Closed-end fund premia and returns: implications for financial market equilibrium. Journal of Financial Economics, 37(3), 341–370.CrossRef

Pontiff, J. (1996). Costly arbitrage: evidence from closed-end funds. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111(4), 1135–1151.CrossRef

Poterba, J. M., & Summers, L. H. (1984a). The economic effects of dividend taxation. In E. Altman & M. Subramanyam (Eds.), Recent advances in corporate finance (pp. 227–284). Homewood: Richard D. Irwin.

Poterba, J. M., & Summers, L. H. (1984b). New evidence that taxes affect the valuation of dividends. Journal of Finance, 39(5), 1397–1415.CrossRef

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1992). Liquidation values and debt capacity: a market equilibrium approach. Journal of Finance, 47(4), 1343–1366.CrossRef

White, H. (1980). A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test of Heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817–838.

Yavas, A., & Yildirim, Y. (2011). Price discovery in real estate markets: a dynamic analysis. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 42(1), 1–29.CrossRef

Titel: Depreciation-Related Capital Gains, Differential Tax Rates, and the Market Value of Real Estate Investment Trusts
verfasst von: Dan W. French
S. McKay Price
Publikationsdatum: 11.07.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0895-5638
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-045X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11146-016-9568-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

Search Costs, Behavioral Biases, and Information Intermediary Effects

Fundamental Drivers of Dependence in REIT Returns

Real Estate Risk, Corporate Investment and Financing Choice

Monocentric Cyberspace: The Primary Market for Internet Domain Names

Good Growth, Bad Growth: How Effective are REITs’ Corporate Watchdogs?

The 2015 Maastricht-NUS-MIT International Real Estate Finance & Economics Symposium: Editors’ Introduction to the Special Issue