Category: Tax Policy

Treasury Considering Extension of Bonus Depreciation to Certain Existing Real Estate Investments

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The U.S. Treasury Department is reviewing real estate industry concerns that many firms may be locked out of the One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3) Act’s restored 100 percent bonus depreciation because of prior elections made to opt out of the Section 163(j) business interest limitation. (Bloomberg, Feb. 3)

State of Play

  • The restoration of 100 percent expensing for capital expenditures, including tenant and nonresidential property improvements, is among the most significant provisions in the OB3 Act.
  • Treasury tax policy advisor Dan Penrith acknowledged the concern at the American Bar Association Tax Section’s midyear meeting in San Diego. Penrith stated that the issue is “on our radar, it’s something that we’re thinking about,” signaling potential openness to targeted administrative relief. (Bloomberg, Feb. 3)
  • The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) has urged Treasury guidance to allow “real property trades or businesses (RPTOBs)” that previously elected out of Section 163(j) to withdraw or amend that election—so they can fully benefit from the OB3 Act’s restored bonus depreciation for eligible property improvements. (Roundtable Weekly, Oct. 17)

Why It Matters

  • The RPTOB election historically enabled full interest deductibility, but required the alternative depreciation system, making taxpayers ineligible for bonus depreciation.
  • Without additional guidance, many taxpayers may not qualify for bonus depreciation on property improvements, despite Congress’s intent to spur investment through 100 percent expensing.
  • There is precedent for allowing flexibility. During the pandemic, IRS Revenue Procedure 2020-22 provided an opportunity for certain taxpayers to withdraw a prior Section 163(j)(7)(B) election in response to CARES Act changes. (Revenue Procedure 2020-22)
  • As RER’s SVP & Counsel Ryan McCormick told Bloomberg Tax: “We’re seeking similar flexibility,” adding that it’s “really important for the future.” (Bloomberg, Feb. 3)

Roundtable Advocacy

  • In an Oct. 17, 2025, letter, RER wrote to Treasury urging guidance to ensure the OB3 Act’s restored 100 percent bonus depreciation provision supports real estate investment, job creation, and economic growth.
  • The letter emphasized that clear implementing rules will help bonus depreciation “facilitate the modernization and repurposing of real estate assets,” including underutilized offices, shopping centers, hotels, and mixed-use properties. (Roundtable Weekly, Oct. 17)

RER will continue engaging Treasury as it considers next steps to ensure the OB3 Act’s bonus depreciation provisions deliver on their intended investment and growth impact.

Fifth Circuit Reverses Tax Court, Sides with Taxpayer and Roundtable in Limited Partnership Tax Dispute

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in Sirius Solutions, L.L.L.P. v. Commissioner (No. 24-60240) on Jan. 16, restricting the federal government’s effort to extend self-employment taxes to a broad range of limited partners in limited partnerships. The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) submitted an amicus brief in the case, and the Court’s ruling closely aligns with the RER’s position.

Court Ruling

  • Since 1977, the tax code has exempted limited partners from self-employment taxes. In recent years, the IRS has asserted a new and more restrictive test to determine whether a limited partner qualifies for the exclusion.
  • The Fifth Circuit held that the Section 1402(a)(13) “limited partner” exception from self-employment (SECA) tax applies to a partner in a state-law limited partnership who has limited liability. (TaxNotes, Jan. 27)
  • The ruling vacates and remands the Tax Court decision that followed Soroban Capital Partners LP v. Commissioner (No. 25-2079), and applied a “functional analysis” of partner roles and activities to determine whether the SECA exclusion applies. (Sullivan Cromwell, Jan. 27)
  • The Fifth Circuit rejected that approach and held that “limited partner” in Section 1402(a)(13) is a status-based, state-law concept tied to limited liability, not an activity test.
  • The decision is the first appellate ruling to reach the issue and reverse the Tax Court’s restrictive interpretation. (Reuters, Jan. 21)
  • This ruling has set a precedent for future SECA tax cases, with significant consequences for real estate and other industries that use limited partnerships for business purposes.

Roundtable Advocacy

  • In August 2024, RER submitted an amicus brief to the Fifth Circuit. The brief argued that the IRS’s interpretation was flawed and inconsistent with decades of state law recognizing that limited partners can provide services while retaining limited partner status. (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 6, 2024)
  • The brief emphasized that pre-1977 state court decisions and the IRS’s own 1994 proposed regulations contradict the government’s position that limited partners must be passive to avoid SECA taxes.
  • RER argued the Tax Court’s “passive investor” test is found nowhere in the statute and reflects a misunderstanding of partnership law that real estate and other businesses have relied on for decades.
  • RER has continued this advocacy across the circuits. In Dec. 2025, RER filed an amicus brief with the Second Circuit in Soroban, challenging the IRS’s restrictive interpretation of the “limited partner exception” under Section 1402(a)(13). (Roundtable Weekly, Dec. 19, 2025)
  • This successful outcome in the Sirius case supports RER’s position and could reduce momentum for formal tax guidance that would broaden the reach of SECA taxes.

What’s Next

  • Related appeals are pending in the First Circuit (Denham) and Second Circuit (Soroban). (TaxNotes, Jan. 27)
  • Divergent outcomes could create a circuit split and increase the odds of Supreme Court review. (Skadden Arps, Jan. 27)
  • The First Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Denham on Feb. 5. (TaxNotes, Jan. 27)

RER remains committed to protecting entrepreneurs’ ability to flexibly organize in partnerships and other pass-through entities that promote capital formation, risk-taking, and economic growth, and it will remain engaged as the SECA dispute moves forward.

OECD Carves Out U.S. Companies from Global Minimum Tax, Reducing Risk of Retaliatory Taxes on Foreign Real Estate Investors

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

After months of negotiations, global tax talks produced an agreement at the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that exempts U.S.-headquartered companies from Pillar Two’s global minimum tax and reduces the risk of retaliatory taxes that could have affected foreign investment in commercial real estate. (ABCNews, Jan. 6)

State of Play

  • Nearly 150 jurisdictions agreed to new Pillar Two guidance, including a long-sought “side-by-side” safe harbor that shields U.S. multinationals from key global minimum tax rules. U.S. companies will remain subject only to existing U.S. global minimum taxes. (Reuters, Jan. 6)
  • The Trump administration renegotiated the framework in June after congressional Republicans removed a proposed retaliatory tax—Section 899—from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OB3 Act).
  • The agreement formally recognizes U.S. tax sovereignty over the worldwide operations of American companies, while preserving other countries’ authority to tax business activity within their borders. (OECD Press Release, Jan. 5)
  • Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo and House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith praised the outcome but warned that Congress remains prepared to revive retaliatory tax measures if countries delay or fail to implement the agreement. (Sen. Crapo and Rep. Smith Press Release, Jan. 5)
  • They emphasized that Republicans rolled back those measures earlier this year only after the G7 publicly committed to respecting U.S. tax sovereignty—and said that warning “remains today” as implementation begins.
  • Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent called the agreement “a historic victory” that protects American workers and businesses from extraterritorial taxation. (Press Release, Jan. 5)

Why It Matters

  • During negotiations for the OB3 Act, RER and other industry groups warned that Section 899 would deter foreign investment, weaken capital formation, increase borrowing costs, and dampen property values. (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 12)
  • Section 899 would have generated significant uncertainty for foreign real estate investors, with applicable tax rates potentially shifting year to year or across administrations.
  • The provision would have extended to a wide range of passive investors—including sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, high-net-worth individuals, and insurance companies—with the economic burden often falling on U.S. borrowers under typical loan covenants that shift tax-law risk to domestic parties.

RER’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC) will review implications for U.S. real estate investment and global capital flows at the State of the Industry Meeting on Jan. 22, 2026, in Washington, D.C.

Roundtable Urges Second Circuit Court of Appeals to Preserve Employment Tax Exemption for Limited Partners

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) filed an amicus brief this week with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Soroban Capital Partners LP v. Commissioner, a case that challenges the IRS’s restrictive interpretation of the “limited partner exception” from self-employment (SECA) taxes under section 1402(a)(13) of the tax code. (Amicus Brief, Dec. 15)

Why It Matters

  • Income-producing real estate—rental housing, neighborhood shopping centers, office buildings, etc.—is predominantly owned and operated in partnership form. In 2022, there were over 2.2 million real estate partnerships in the United States, with nearly 9.6 million partners.
  • The Self-Employment Contributions Act (SECA) imposes Social Security and Medicare taxes on net earnings from self-employment. The SECA tax rate on earnings above $250,000 is 3.8%. While the tax applies to a broad range of trade or business income, Congress expressly exempted limited partners from SECA in the Social Security Amendments of 1977.
  • Legislative proposals and proposed regulations have unsuccessfully attempted to extend the 3.8% SECA tax or the 3.8% net investment income tax to limited partners.
  • The IRS has undertaken an aggressive effort to redefine what it means to be a limited partner by challenging taxpayers and litigating the issue in several cases before the Tax Court.

Roundtable View

  • Real estate partnerships have relied for decades on longstanding tax law as it relates to limited partners and the SECA exception.
  • In Soroban and related cases, the Tax Court has imposed a judge-made test and concluded contrary to decades of established state law that a limited partner must be a ‘passive investor,’ notes the RER amicus brief.
  • The Tax Court’s 2023 Soroban ruling wrongly introduced a federal “passivity” requirement that is unmoored from statute, legislative history, and Treasury’s own prior interpretations. However, limited partners have routinely provided business services to their partnerships without losing their limited liability status. (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 12)
  • “A shift in the federal tax definition of a limited partner could alter underlying partnership economics, increase tax burdens, and create significant uncertainty for real estate and other pass-through businesses,” said RER President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer. “Such changes need to go through Congress and withstand legislative scrutiny.”

Background

  • RER’s amicus brief was drafted by litigation counsel at Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, in consultation with RER’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC). RER also filed an amicus brief in August
    with the First Circuit Court of Appeals in a related case, Denham Capital Management LP v. Commissioner. (Roundtable Weekly, Sept. 12)

Next Steps

The decision in any of the pending cases could have nationwide implications for how partnerships are treated under SECA. A ruling against the Tax Court’s passive investor test would reinforce state law’s central role in defining “limited partner” status.

Roundtable Urges IRS to Issue Transition Guidance for Opportunity Zones

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) submitted a comment letter this week, urging the Treasury Department and IRS to issue expedited guidance to ensure Opportunity Zone (OZ) investment continues uninterrupted in 2026 as the program transitions from Opportunity Zones 1.0 to the permanent Opportunity Zones 2.0 framework enacted in the One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3) Act. (Letter, Dec. 19)

Roundtable Advocacy

  • In a letter to IRS Chief Counsel (Acting) Kenneth Kies, RER called on the agency to issue a Revenue Procedure confirming that investments in existing Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) qualified opportunity funds (“QOFs”) and qualified opportunity zone businesses (“QOZBs”) will continue to qualify for OZ benefits after zone designations lapse, provided the investments are consistent with the QOZB’s working capital plan.
  • RER warned that, absent clear transition rules, investors in 2026 will face uncertainty over whether to proceed with TCJA OZ projects or wait for new zone designations expected to take effect in 2027—risking a slowdown in capital deployment to distressed communities.
  • The OB3 Act made OZs permanent and expanded key incentives, but also raised questions about compliance testing, QOF asset requirements, and treatment of projects that span the transition period between expiring and newly designated zones.

Why It Matters

IRS building in Washington, DC
  • RER emphasized that OZs have mobilized more than $120 billion in private capital nationwide, supporting affordable and workforce housing, retail, mixed-use developments, and small-business growth in low-income communities.
  • Without timely IRS action, uncertainty could delay projects already underway, disrupt financing, and undermine the long-term policy goals Congress reinforced by making the program permanent.
  • RER urged the IRS to adopt a clear “safe harbor” allowing certain TCJA OZ projects to be treated as “grandfathered” for compliance purposes if their working capital plans contemplated development before zone designations expired and investments remain consistent with those plans.

Prompt administrative guidance is essential to prevent a policy gap in 2026 and keep capital, jobs, and housing investment flowing to the communities OZs were designed to serve. OZs will be discussed at the next in-person TPAC meeting at RER’s State of the Industry Meeting scheduled for Jan. 21-22, 2026.

Roundtable Commends Treasury for Proposed Repeal of FIRPTA “Look-Through” Rule, Urges Quick Adoption of Final Regulations

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) submitted a comment letter this week urging the Treasury Department and IRS to finalize proposed regulations (REG-109742-25) that would repeal the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA) “look-through” rule for domestically controlled real estate investment trusts (REITs). (Letter, Dec. 5)

RER Advocacy

  • In October, Treasury and IRS issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to repeal the FIRPTA “look-through” rule, a major policy shift advocated by RER, which has opposed the rule since it was first proposed in 2022. (Roundtable Weekly, Oct. 24)
  • In 2024, in an act of broad regulatory overreach, Treasury finalized a new look-through rule to determine whether an entity qualifies as domestically controlled for FIRPTA purposes. The practical effect was to subject a significant share of previously tax-exempt foreign investment in U.S. real estate to U.S. capital gains tax. The rule was finalized with only modest transition relief.
  • In March, RER submitted a letter to the new administration outlining concerns with the regulation and urging its withdrawal on the grounds that the look-through rule reversed decades of well-settled tax law, severely misconstrued the statute, and contradicted congressional intent. (Roundtable Weekly, March 21)
  • Treasury’s proposed rule would restore prior law by treating domestic C corporations as non-look-through entities, removing a regulatory barrier that has discouraged foreign investment in U.S. real estate and infrastructure.
  • This week’s letter highlighted the importance of foreign capital to U.S. construction, development, and housing production. In recent years, foreign investors have committed more than $40 billion to U.S. multifamily housing, financing new development, supporting construction jobs, and helping expand housing supply nationwide. (Letter, Dec. 5)

House Ways & Means Hearing – International Tax

  • The House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Tax held a hearing on Wednesday, “Promoting Global Competitiveness for American Workers and Businesses,” focused on how international tax policy affects U.S. competitiveness, investment, job creation, and economic growth. (Watch Hearing)
  • Former Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady testified that post One Big Beautiful Bill Act Treasury guidance can provide critical certainty and stability, adding that Treasury appears eager, as in 2017, to implement Congress’s intent in writing the law. (Brady Testimony)
  • Members also discussed the Organization of Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) global minimum tax framework and the unresolved “side-by-side” agreement intended to shield U.S. companies from Pillar Two taxes.
  • House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) renewed his warning that Congress is prepared to reconsider retaliatory measures, including Section 899, if other nations fail to honor commitments to exempt the U.S. from the OECD global minimum tax framework.
  • Chairman Smith (R-MO) said, “The time for action is now for those G7 countries. We expect to see the technical work that has been done in these negotiations move forward this week.” (PoliticoPro, Dec. 4)

RER and other industry groups have warned that reviving Section 899 could negatively impact U.S. commercial real estate by deterring foreign investment, weakening capital formation, increasing borrowing costs, and dampening property values.

Treasury Proposes Repeal of FIRPTA Look-Through Rule for Domestically Controlled REITs

Posted on by abigail_grenadier
IRS building in Washington, DC

The Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on Monday released a new Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would repeal the FIRPTA “look-through” rule for domestically controlled real estate investment trusts (REITs)—a significant policy shift strongly supported by The Real Estate Roundtable (RER).

Proposed Change

  • Under the proposed regulation, the domestic corporation look-through rule would be removed, treating all domestic C corporations as non-look-through persons when determining whether a REIT is domestically controlled, and thus exempt from FIRPTA. (National Law Review, Oct. 23)
  • Once finalized, taxpayers could elect to apply the new rule retroactively to transactions occurring on or after April 25, 2024, when the prior regulations were finalized. (Thomas Reuters, Oct. 21)

RER Advocacy

  • RER was a vocal critic of the look-through rule when it was first proposed in 2022, and urged its removal from the regulations.
  • The rule was finalized last year with only modest transition relief. In March, RER submitted a letter to Treasury outlining concerns with the regulation and again calling for its repeal. (Roundtable Weekly, March 21)
  • Those issues were also raised and discussed with Treasury at RER’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC) meeting this summer.
  • Backed by detailed data on foreign capital flows provided by CBRE, RER’s March submission emphasized the chilling impact that the regulations were having on foreign investment into U.S. real estate. TPAC member David Polster (Skadden) and his colleague Nick Gianou drafted RER’s legal and technical arguments with significant input from the RER’s FIRPTA Working Group.

Treasury Acknowledges Industry Concerns

  • In its release, Treasury cited the practical difficulty of tracing upstream ownership without reliable data and acknowledged the legal uncertainty, operational complexity, and potentially negative effect on investment in U.S. real estate generated by the 2024 regulations.
  • The preamble also notes that stakeholders argued the look-through rule conflicted with congressional intent, as Section 897(h)(4)(B) does not include explicit corporate look-through provisions.

Roundtable on the Road

  • RER SVP and Counsel Ryan McCormick discussed the recent FIRPTA developments and other real estate and pass-through tax policy issues this week at NYU’s Institute on Federal Taxation in New York City.
  • His presentation highlighted key provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act,  potential future legislation, implementation priorities, and major tax litigation affecting partnerships and real estate.

RER will continue to engage with Treasury on areas where further guidance or regulatory changes are needed.

Roundtable Urges Treasury to Clarify, Confirm Eligibility of Real Estate for Bonus Depreciation under the OB3 Act

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) wrote to the Treasury Department this week, urging guidance to ensure the One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3) Act’s restored 100 percent bonus depreciation provision is successful in spurring real estate investment, job creation, and economic growth. (Letter, Oct. 17)

Background

  • The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 capped taxpayers’ ability to deduct their interest expense on business debt. At the same time, the law created an exception that allows real estate businesses to fully deduct their interest expense if they make a “real property trade or business (RPTOB) election.”
  • Taxpayers who make the RPTOB election are subject to the alternative depreciation system and ineligible for bonus depreciation.
  • By modifying the business interest limitation rules, the OB3 Act made it easier for property owners to fully deduct their business interest and qualify for bonus depreciation. However, the legislation did not expressly clarify that existing property owners could revoke or reverse a prior RPTOB election.
  • Guidance is needed to ensure taxpayers’ ability to change a RPTOB election and claim the full benefit of the bonus depreciation provision. (Letter, Oct. 17)

Why It Matters

  • The restoration of 100 percent expensing for capital expenditures, including tenant and nonresidential property improvements, is among the most significant provisions in the OB3 Act.
  • The Tax Foundation estimates bonus depreciation will boost long-run GDP by 0.6 percent and generate the equivalent of 145,000 jobs. (Tax Foundation, July 4)
  • In the absence of additional tax guidance, however, many taxpayers will not qualify for bonus depreciation with respect to their property improvements.

RER Recommendations & Perspective

  • Ample precedent and authority exist for Treasury to clarify that, in light of the changes made in the OB3 Act, taxpayers can amend and change their prior RPTOB elections. (See Revenue Procedure 2020-22, issued following passage of the CARES Act of 2020)
  • With clear implementing rules, bonus depreciation “will facilitate the modernization and repurposing of real estate assets, including underutilized office buildings, shopping centers, hotels, and mixed-use properties,” the RER submission stated.
  • “Small businesses will benefit from the ability to immediately expense their leasehold improvements,” the letter continued. “The capital expenditures spurred by expensing will create new spaces for commerce to flourish, boost property values, and strengthen communities by increasing local tax revenue critical for public services like schools and law enforcement.”

The submission from RER President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer was addressed to Treasury Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy and Acting IRS Chief Counsel Kenneth J. Kies. RER’s Tax Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC) is continuing to review and develop recommendations for Treasury with respect to the implementation of the monumental tax legislation signed into law this summer.

OB3 Act Ends “Phantom Income” Tax Penalty on Condominium Development

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

A new PwC analysis highlights the significance of tax accounting reforms in the One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3) Act, which end a long-standing burden on condominium developers—a change long advocated by The Real Estate Roundtable.

Why It Matters

  • The OB3 Act expands eligibility for the completed contract method (CCM) of accounting, allowing residential condominium projects to defer income recognition until projects are substantially complete. (PwC Study, Sept. 18)
  • This reform aligns tax liability with actual receipts and ends the problem of phantom income that often arises when condo units are pre-sold to buyers prior to completion. The change closely tracks standalone legislation, the Fair Accounting for Condominium Construction Act, long championed by RER. (RER Annual Report, July 2025)
  • Mixed-use projects with a substantial residential component can also qualify if 80% or more of the costs are tied to dwelling units. (PWC Study, Sept. 18)
  • Prior tax rules forced developers to use the percentage-of-completion method (PCM), requiring them to pay taxes on projected profits before projects were completed or units were sold.
  • PwC notes the expansion “opens the door” for general contractors and subcontractors to benefit, particularly in high-cost urban markets where new housing is most needed.

Roundtable Advocacy – Condominium Construction

  • Since 2015, RER has sought to promote housing construction by repealing the discriminatory tax accounting rule that unfairly creates phantom income for condo developers.
  • New condominium developments can take years to complete. Developers often market units and collect deposits to secure financing, but contractual restrictions typically limit access to those funds until closing.
  • Recent sponsors of the Fair Accounting for Condominium Construction Act have included Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL) in the House and Sen. Todd Young (R-IN) in the Senate.

RER will continue advocating for policies that encourage capital formation, housing construction, and rational taxation of real estate.

Congressional Democrats Reintroduce Bill to Tax Unrealized Gains

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced the bicameral Billionaires Income Tax Act this week with support from 20 Senate Democrats. The legislation mirrors the version first introduced by Sen. Wyden in 2023, and would tax the appreciation of wealthy individuals’ assets. Identical legislation was introduced in the House by Reps. Donald Beyer (D-VA) and Steve Cohen (D-TN). (PoliticoPro, Sept. 17)

Billionaires Income Tax Act (BITA)

  • Under BITA, tradable, liquid assets would be marked-to-market and taxed annually on their appreciation, while illiquid assets would be subject to a “deferral recapture” tax when sold—or if certain other currently nontaxable events occur, such as death, a transfer to a trust, or a like-kind exchange. (Bill text | Press release | One-pager, Sept. 17)
  • The bill would apply to taxpayers with more than $100 million in annual income or more than $1 billion in assets for at least three consecutive years. (PoliticoPro, Sept. 17)
  • The legislation is not limited to future appreciation of assets. It would also apply to accumulated, unrealized gains at the time of enactment. Tax on these built-in gains could be paid over five years.
  • Additional rules would govern unrealized losses, as well as assets held in partnerships.

Roundtable View      

  • Real Estate Roundtable (RER) President and CEO Jeffrey DeBoer said: “Taxing unrealized gains would upend over 100 years of federal taxation, require an unprecedented IRS intrusion into household finances, and create harmful unintended consequences. Deferring taxes until assets are sold supports entrepreneurs while encouraging long-term investment and productive risk-taking. This proposal lacks broad policy support, carries considerable risk, and should be rejected.”
  • Past attempts at wealth taxes in other countries have also collapsed—largely abandoned due to administrative problems, lack of public support, and minimal impact on income distribution (Roundtable Weekly, 2023)

Roundtable Spotlight

  • At the American College of Real Estate Lawyers (ACREL) Annual Meeting this week, RER’s Ryan McCormick (SVP & Counsel) and DeBoer highlighted how the One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3) Act supports jobs, economic growth, investment, and avoids harmful tax changes. They also discussed the nation’s housing shortage and the future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
  • Longtime and revered RER President’s Council member Jay Epstien received the Fred Lane Award for his lifetime of contributions to the real estate legal profession at the ACREL meeting.

McCormick was also a featured speaker on the Engineered Tax Services webinar this week to discuss the OB3 Act and its wide-ranging implications for commercial real estate, including permanent extensions of 100 percent expensing, Opportunity Zone incentives, affordable housing credits, and other key provisions. (Watch ETS Webinar)