§ 1.48-12. Qualified rehabilitated building; expenditures incurred after December 31, 1981.

Furthermore, for returns filed after August 27, 1985, if the adjusted basis of the building for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test is determined in whole or in part by reference to the adjusted basis of a person, or persons, other than the taxpayer (e.g., a rehabilitation by a lessee), the taxpayer must attach to the Form 3468 filed with the tax return on which the credit is claimed a statement addressed to the District Director, signed by such third party, that states the first day of the third party's holding period and the amount of the adjusted basis of such third party in the building at the beginning of the measuring period or the first day of the holding period, whichever is later. If the taxpayer is unable to obtain the required information, that fact should be indicated and the taxpayer should state the manner in which the adjusted basis was determined and, if different, the fair market value of the building on the relevant date.

Assume that A, a calendar year taxpayer, purchases a building for $140,000 on January 1, 1982, incurs qualified rehabilitation expenditures in the amount of $48,000 (at the rate of $4,000 per month) in 1982, $100,000 in 1983, and $20,000 (at the rate of $2,000 per month) in the first ten months of 1984, and places the rehabilitated building in service on October 31, 1984. Assume that A did not have written architectural plans and specifications describing a phased rehabilitation within the meaning of paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section in existence prior to the beginning of physical work on the rehabilitation. For purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, A may select any 24-consecutive-month measuring period that ends in 1984, the taxable year in which the rehabilitated building was placed in service. Assume that on A's 1984 return, A selects a measuring period beginning on February 1, 1982, and ending on January 31, 1984, and specifies that A's basis in the building (within the meaning of section 1011(a)) was $144,000 on February 1, 1982 ($140,000 + $4,000). (The $4,000 of rehabilitation expenditures incurred during January 1982 are included in A's basis under section 1011 even though such property has not been placed in service.) The amount of qualified rehabilitation expenditures incurred during the measuring period was $146,000 ($44,000 from February 1 to December 31, 1982, plus $100,000 in 1983, plus $2,000 in January 1984). The building shall be treated as “substantially rehabilitated” within the meaning of this paragraph (b)(2) for A's 1984 taxable year because the $146,000 of expenditures incurred by A during the measuring period exceeded A's adjusted basis of $144,000 at the beginning of the period. If the other requirements of section 48(g)(1) and this paragraph are met, the building is treated as a qualified rehabilitated building, and A can treat as qualified rehabilitation expenditures the amount of $168,000 (i.e., $146,000 of expenditures incurred during the measuring period, $4,000 of expenditures incurred prior to the beginning of the measuring period as part of the rehabilitation process, and $18,000 of expenditures incurred after the measuring period during the taxable year within which the measuring period ends (See paragraph (c)(6) of this section.)). The result would generally be the same if the property attributable to the rehabilitation expenditures was placed in service as the expenditures were incurred, but A would have $148,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures for 1983 and $20,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures for 1984. (See paragraph (f)(2) of this section).

Assume the same facts as in example 1, except that additional rehabilitation expenditures are incurred after the portion of the basis of the building attributable to qualified rehabilitation expenditures was placed in service on October 31, 1984. Such expenditures are incurred through the end of 1984 and in 1985 when the portion of the basis attributable to the additional expenditures is placed in service. The fact that the building qualified as a substantially rehabilitated building for A's 1984 taxable year has no effect on whether the building is a qualified rehabilitated building for property placed in service in A's 1985 taxable year. In order to determine whether the building is a qualified rehabilitated building for A's 1985 taxable year, A must select a measuring period that ends in 1985 and compare the expenditures incurred within that period with the adjusted basis as of the beginning of the period. Solely for the purpose of determining whether the building was substantially rehabilitated for A's 1985 taxable year, expenditures incurred during 1983 and 1984, even though considered in determining whether the building was substantially rehabilitated in 1984, may also be used to determine whether the building was substantially rehabilitated for A's 1985 taxable year, provided the expenditures were incurred during any 24-month measuring period selected by A that ends in 1985.

(i) Assume the B purchases a building for $100,000 on January 1, 1982, and leases the building to C who rehabilitates the building. Assume that C, a calendar year taxpayer, places the property with respect to which rehabilitation expenditures were made in service in 1982 and selects December 31, 1982, as the end of the measuring period for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test. The beginning of the measuring period is January 2, 1982, the beginning of B's holding period under section 1250(e), and the adjusted basis of the building is $100,000. Accordingly, if C incurred more than $100,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures during 1982, the building would be substantially rehabilitated within the meaning of paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section.

(ii) Assume the facts of example 3(i), except that after C begins physical work on the rehabilitation, but before C incurs $100,000 of expenditures, D acquires the building, subject to C's lease, from B for $200,000. D's holding period under section 1250(e) begins on the day after D acquired the building, and C's adjusted basis for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test is $200,000, less the amount of expenditures incurred by C before the transfer. (See paragraphs (b)(2) (ii) and (vii) of this section.) Accordingly, if C incurred more than $200,000 (less the amount of expenditures incurred prior to the transfer) of qualified rehabilitation expenditures during 1982, the building would be substantially rehabilitated within the meaning of paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Under paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B) of this section, however, C's adjusted basis for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test would be $100,000 if C had substantially rehabilitated the building (i.e., incurred more than $100,000 in rehabilitation expenditures) prior to B's sale to D.

E owns a building with a basis of $10,000 and E incurs $5,000 of rehabilitation expenditures. Before completing the rehabilitation project, E sells the building to F for $30,000. Assume that F is treated under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section as having incurred the $5,000 of rehabilitation expenditures actually incurred by E. Because F's basis in the building is determined under section 1011 with reference to F's $30,000 cost of the building (which includes the property attributable to E's rehabilitation expenditures), F's basis for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test is $25,000 ($30,000 cost basis less $5,000 rehabilitation expenditures treated as if incurred by F). (See paragraph (b)(2)(vii) of this section.) F would thus be required to incur more than $20,000 of rehabilitation expenditures (in addition to the $5,000 incurred by E and treated as having been incurred by F) during a measuring period selected by F to satisfy the substantial rehabilitation test.

G owns Building I with a basis of $10,000 and a fair market value of $20,000. H owns Building II with a basis of $5,000 and a fair market value of $20,000, with respect to which H has incurred $1,000 of rehabilitation expenditures. G and H exchange their buildings in a transaction that qualifies for nonrecognition treatment under section 1031. Assume that G is treated under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section as having incurred $1,000 of rehabilitation expenditures. G's basis in Building II, computed under section 1031(d), is $10,000. G's basis in Building II is not determined with reference to (A) the cost of Building II, (B) H's basis in Building II (including the cost of the rehabilitation expenditures) or (C) any other amount that includes the cost of expenditures, but is instead determined with reference to G's basis in other property (Building I). Therefore, G's basis in Building II for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test is not reduced by the $1,000 of rehabilitation expenditures treated as if incurred by G. (See paragraph (b)(2)(vii) of this section.) Accordingly, G's basis in Building II for purposes of the substantial rehabilitation test is $10,000, and G must incur additional rehabilitation expenditures in excess of $9,000 within a measuring period selected by G to satisfy the test.

Taxpayer A rehabilitated a building all of the walls of which consisted of wood siding attached to gypsum board sheets (which covered the supporting elements of the wall, i.e., studs). A covered the existing wood siding with aluminum siding as part of a rehabilitation that otherwise qualified under this subparagraph. The addition of the aluminum siding does not affect the status of the existing external walls as external walls and they would be considered to have been retained in place.

Taxpayer B rehabilitated a building, the external walls of which had a masonry curtain. The masonry on the wall face was replaced with a glass curtain. The steel beam and girders supporting the existing masonry curtain were retained in place. The walls of the building are considered to be retained in place as external walls, notwithstanding the replacement of the curtain.

Taxpayer C rehabilitated a building that has two external walls measuring 75′ × 20′ and two other external walls measuring 100′ × 20′. C demolished one of the larger walls, including its supporting elements and constructed a new wall. Because one of the larger walls represents more than 25 percent of the area of the building's external walls, C has not satisfied the requirements that 75 percent of the existing external walls must be retained in place as either internal or external walls. If however, C had not demolished the wall, but had converted it into an internal wall (e.g., by building a new external wall), the building would satisfy the external wall requirements.

The facts are the same as in example 3, except that C does not tear down any walls, but builds an addition that results in one of the smaller walls becoming an internal wall. In addition, C enlarged 8 of the existing windows on one of the larger walls, increasing them from a size of 3′ × 4′ to 6′ × 8′. Since the smaller wall accounts for less than 25 percent of the total wall area, C has satisfied the requirement that 75 percent of the existing external walls must be retained in place as external walls in the rehabilitation process. The enlargement of the existing windows on the larger wall does not affect its status as an external wall.

Taxpayer D rehabilitated a building that was in the center of a row of three buildings. The building being rehabilitated by D shares its side walls with the buildings on either side. The shared walls measure 100′ × 20′ and the rear and front walls measure 75′ × 20′. As part of a rehabilitation, D tears down and replaces the front wall. Because the shared walls as well as the front and back walls are considered external walls and the front wall accounts for less than 25 percent of the total external wall area (including the shared walls), D has satisfied the requirement that 75 percent of the existing external walls must be retained in place as external walls in the rehabilitation process.

In 1981, A, a taxpayer using the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting, commenced the rehabilitation of a 30-year old building. In June 1981, A signed a contract with a plumbing contractor for replacement of the plumbing in the building. A agreed to pay the contractor as soon as the work was completed. The work was completed in December 1981, but A did not pay the amount due until January 15, 1982. The expenditures for the plumbing are not qualified rehabilitation expenditures (within the meaning of this paragraph (c)) because they were not incurred under an accrual method of accounting after December 31, 1981.

B incurred qualified rehabilitation expenditures of $300,000 with respect to an existing building between January 1, 1982, and May 15, 1982, and then sold the building to C on June 1, 1982. The portion of the building to which the expenditures were allocable was not used by B or any other person during the period from January 1, 1982, to June 1, 1982, and neither B nor any other person claimed the credit. Consequently, C will be treated as having incurred the expenditures on the dates that B incurred the expenditures.

D, a taxpayer using the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting, begins the rehabilitation of a building on January 11, 1982. Prior to May 1, 1982, D makes rehabilitation expenditures of $16,000. On May 3, 1982, D sells the building, the land, and the property attributable to the rehabilitation expenditures to E for $35,000. The purchase price is properly allocable as follows:

The property attributable to the rehabilitation expenditures is placed in service by E on September 5, 1982. E may treat a portion of the $35,000 purchase price as rehabilitation expenditures paid or incurred by him. Since the rehabilitation expenditures paid by D ($16,000) are less than the portion of the purchase price properly allocable to property attributable to these expenditures ($19,000), E may treat only $16,000 as rehabilitation expenditures paid or incurred by him. The excess of the purchase price allocable to rehabilitation expenditures ($19,000) over the rehabilitation expenditures paid by D ($16,000), or $3,000, is treated as the cost of acquiring an interest in the building and is not a qualified rehabilitation expenditure treated as incurred by E.

The facts are the same as in example 3, except that the purchase price properly allocable to the property attributable to rehabilitation expenditures is $15,000. Under these circumstances, E may treat only $15,000 of D's $16,000 expenditures as rehabilitation expenditures paid by D. The excess of the rehabilitation expenditures paid by D ($16,000) over the purchase price allocable to rehabilitation expenditures ($15,000), or $1,000, is treated as the cost of acquiring an interest in the building and is not a qualified rehabilitation expenditure treated as incurred by E.

For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(i), the terms “nonresidential real property”, “residential rental property”, and “class life” have the respective meanings given to such terms by section 168 and the regulations thereunder.

Assume that A, a calendar year taxpayer, purchases a four-story building on January 1, 1983, for $100,000, and incurs $10,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures in 1983 to rehabilitate floor one, $50,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures in 1984 to rehabilitate floor two, $70,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures in 1985 to rehabilitate floor three, and $60,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures in 1986 to rehabilitate floor four. Assume further that A places the property attributable to these expenditures in service on the last day of the year in which the respective expenditures were incurred and that the building is never taken out of service since as each floor is rehabilitated, the other three floors are occupied by tenants. Under the rule in this paragraph (f)(2), the portion of the basis of the building that is attributable to qualified rehabilitation expenditures incurred with respect to floor one and two are deemed to be placed in service in 1985, because that is the first year that the substantial rehabilitation test described in paragraph (b) of this section is met ($120,000 of expenditures incurred by A during a measuring period ending on December 31, 1985 is greater than the $110,000 basis at the beginning of the period). Assume that as of December 31, 1985, at least 75 percent of the external walls of the building have been retained during the rehabilitation process and that A has a reasonable expectation that no work during the remainder of the rehabilitation process will result in less than 75 percent of the external walls being retained. A may claim a credit for A's 1985 taxable year on $130,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures ($10,000 in 1983, $50,000 in 1984, and $70,000 in 1985). (See paragraph (c)(6) of this section for rules applicable to when qualified expenditures may be incurred. In addition, see section 46 (d) and § 1.46-5 for rules relating to qualified progress expenditures.) The fact that the building was a qualified rehabilitated building for A's 1985 taxable year, however, has no effect on whether the building is a qualified rehabilitated building for A's 1986 taxable year. In order to determine whether A is entitled to claim a credit on A's 1986 return for the $60,000 of qualified rehabilitation expenditures incurred in 1986, A must select a measuring period ending in 1986 and must determine whether the building is a qualified rehabilitated building for that year. Solely for purposes of determining whether the building was substantially rehabilitated, expenditures incurred in 1984 and 1985, even though considered in determining whether the building was substantially rehabilitated for A's 1985 taxable year, may be used in addition to the expenditures incurred in 1986 to determine whether the building was substantially rehabilitated for A's 1986 taxable year, provided the expenditures were incurred during any measuring period selected by A that ends in 1986.