Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Inside the New Tax Act's Changes to Carried Interest
To the surprise of many, the new tax policy included changes to the carried interest provision. Under the new policy, carried interest now has a three-year holding period. The policy has significant implications for commercial real estate investors, who will need to make immediate adjustments to comply with the new provision. Reporters from this newsletter's ALM sibling Globest.com sat down with Phil Jelsma, a partner and chair of the tax practice team at San Diego-based commercial real estate law firm Crosbie Gliner Schiffman Southard & Swanson LLP, to talk about the changes to carried interest, how this will impact commercial real estate investment and what investors should do now to comply.
Question: How has carried interest changed in the new tax policy?
A. Jelsma: Often referred to as profits interest or promote, carried interest is what is received for contributing services to a partnership, LLC fund or project. In real estate, it is often the interest received for taking the entrepreneurial risk of an enterprise. One of the most difficult — and unexpected — provisions of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act is the three-year holding period on “carried interests,” which has especially significant implications for those in the real estate industry. Capital gains allocable to a carried interest or profits interest in a partnership or LLC, which would otherwise be entitled to capital gains rights, will only be available if the partnership or LLC interest is held for more than three years. If held for less than three years, the capital gain will be subject to tax as short-term capital gain rather than long-term capital gain.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?