New York State Bans Private Transfer Fee Obligations; Joins Majority

On September 23, 2011, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law Senate Bill 5203A and Assembly Bill 7358A, codified as the “Private Transfer Fee Obligation Act” in Article 15 of the New York Real Property Law. The new law imposes a ban on all new private transfer fees (“PTFs”), and provides notice, disclosure and remedy procedures for existing private transfer fee obligations. With the passage of this law, New York has joined the majority of states which have enacted legislation that completely bans, limits and/or requires the disclosure of PTFs.

In practice, PTFs have also been dubbed “Wall Street home resale fees,” “private transfer taxes,” “reconveyance fees,” “capital recovery fees,” “residential transfer fees,” and “transfer fee covenants.” These charges, whatever they may be called, usually amount to one percent (1%) or more of the sales price and are automatically inserted into the contract of sale on real property, to be paid by the seller to the original developer of the property or their designee, oftentimes a third party that holds no ownership interest in the property, every time the property is transferred for up to 99 years. They are usually buried within dozens or hundreds of pages of documents, or, in some instances, are found in a separate declaration affecting the property filed by the original developer. Prospective buyers and owners may not be aware of these fees until closing or, worse, when they try to sell the home years later and the fee shows up in a document obtained in connection with a title search of the property. The failure to pay the PTFs at closing typically results in a lien being imposed on the property.

Unlike traditional deed covenants, PTFs run with and burden the land without benefiting it. Although the fees may benefit a homeowners’ association, conservation land bank, non-profit organization, etc., they have been found to not be proportional or related to the purposes for which the fees were to be collected. Furthermore, PTFs are also used by builders and developers to provide themselves with an income stream long after a development is complete. The American Law Institute has described such PTFs as “unconscionable;” the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has publicly opposed the use of PTFs, stating that “PTFs violate HUD’S regulations at 2 C.F.R. 203.41, which prohibit ‘legal restrictions on conveyance,’ defined to include limits on the amount of sales proceeds retainable by the seller.” In addition, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, determining that “such covenants are adverse to the liquidity and stability of the housing finance market and to financial safety and soundness,” has issued a proposed rule, published at 76 F.R. 6702 (Feb. 8, 2011), that would restrict the regulated entities – the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), and the Federal Home Loan Banks – from investing in most mortgages on properties encumbered by PTFs.

Similarly, the New York State Legislature has determined that PTFs conflict with a preferred state public policy favoring “the marketability of real property and the transferability of interests in real property free of title defects or unreasonable restraints on alienation.” The legislature also declared that “a private transfer fee obligation shall not run with the title to property or otherwise bind subsequent owners of property under any common law or equitable principle.”


Real Property Law Section 472 defines a private transfer fee as “a fee, charge or any portion thereof, required by a private transfer fee obligation and payable, directly or indirectly, upon the transfer of an interest in real property, or payable for the right to make or accept such transfer, regardless of whether the fee or charge is a fixed amount or is determined as a percentage of the value of the property, the purchase price, or other consideration give for the transfer.” Expressly excluded from this definition are: (a) the purchase price of the real property being transferred; (b) any real estate broker commissions; (c) the interest, fees and charges associated with a loan secured by a mortgage against real property; (d) rent payable under a lease; (e) payments to holders of options to purchase and rights of first refusal or purchase; (f) any taxes, fees, assessments, etc. imposed by governmental authorities; (g) fees paid to homeowners’, condominium, cooperative, mobile home or property owners’ associations that use them to directly benefit owners of the encumbered property; (h) fees payable for the benefit of certain non-profit organizations; and (i) fees pertaining to the purchase or transfer of a club membership relating to real property owned by the member. “Transfer” means “the sale, gift, conveyance, assignment, inheritance, or other transfer of an ownership interest in real property located in [New York] state.” 

The Private Transfer Fee Obligation Act prohibits entering into or recording PTFs after its effective date, and declares all such new PTFs void and unenforceable, not running with the land, and not binding on subsequent purchasers. Anyone who records or enters into an agreement imposing a private transfer fee obligation in their favor after the effective date would be liable for any damages resulting from that obligation, including the PTFs, attorneys’ fees and other costs to quiet title. Notwithstanding this strict prohibition and repercussions, section 475 further underscores the significance of disclosing any  PTFs by requiring the seller to furnish to the buyer, prior to closing, a written statement memorializing their existence, describing the PTFs and referencing the new law.

Moreover, PTFs entered into and/or recorded prior to the new law’s effective date of September 23, 2011, are not to be presumed valid and enforceable. The new law requires the receiver of the PTFs to give notice to subsequent buyers by recording, within six months of the law’s effective date, a document disclosing the existence of PTFs along with the additional information required under section 476, including the PTFs’ amounts and purposes. Failure to record would result in the agreement being unenforceable, and the real property could then be conveyed free and clear of the PTFs.

The Private Transfer Fee Obligation Act also sets up a mechanism by which an individual transferor can free the property of private transfer fee obligations currently burdening his real property. If a receiver of the PTFs does not provide a written statement of their payment within thirty (30) days of the written request asking for such a disclosure, then the transferor, after recording an affidavit describing its efforts to reach the receiver, may convey any interest in the real property to any transferee without paying the PTFs. From that point on, the real property would be free and clear of the PTFs.

Supported by the New York State Association of REALTORS, New York Taxpayers for Economic Justice, Inc., Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, and the Coalition to Stop Wall Street Home Resale Fees (formed by the National Association of Realtors and the American Land Title Association), among many others, Private Transfer Fee Obligation Act became effective immediately. 

2011 Amendments to the New Jersey Bulk Sale Law and Their Application to Single- and Two-Family Residences

On Wednesday, September 14, 2011, Governor Christie signed into law amendments to the New Jersey Bulk Sale Law. Enacted as chapter 124 of the Public Laws of 2011, these amendments narrow the scope of N.J.S.A. 54:50-38, signed into law on June 28, 2007 by Governor Corzine, by exempting the sale, transfer or assignment of single- and two-family homes and of seasonal rental property from the bulk sale notification requirements.

The 2007 law expanded the scope of the 1966 New Jersey Sales and Use Tax Act which set forth bulk sale notification requirements designed to provide the N.J. Division of Taxation with notice of asset sales for the purpose of collecting any outstanding tax liabilities owed by a seller. The 1966 law did not, however, apply to commercial real estate transactions unless the transaction was part of the sale of business assets which included real estate, e.g., the sale of an existing hotel business.

The 2007 law dramatically changed the landscape of bulk sale notification requirements by compelling such notice to be a part of all transactions in which a bulk sale was made. Specifically, the pertinent sections of the law provided:  
 

"Whenever a person required to collect tax shall make a sale, transfer, or assignment in bulk of any part or the whole of his business assets, otherwise than in the ordinary course of business, the purchaser, transferee or assignee shall at least 10 days before taking possession of the subject of said sale, transfer or assignment, or paying therefor, notify the director by registered mail of the proposed sale and of the price, terms and conditions thereof whether or not the seller, transferrer or assignor, has represented to, or informed the purchaser, transferee or assignee that he owes any tax pursuant to this act, and whether or not the purchaser, transferee, or assignee has knowledge that such taxes are owing, and whether any such taxes are in fact owing.

Whenever the purchaser, transferee or assignee shall fail to give notice . . . or whenever the director shall inform the purchaser, transferee or assignee that a possible claim for such tax or taxes exists, any sums of money, property or choses in action, or other consideration, which the purchaser, transferee or assignee is required to transfer over to the seller, transferrer or assignor shall be subject to a first priority right and lien for any such taxes theretofore or thereafter determined to be due from the seller, transferrer or assignor to the State, and the purchaser, transferee or assignee is forbidden to transfer to the seller, transferrer or assignor any such sums of money, property or choses in action to the extent of the amount of the State's claim. For failure to comply with the provisions of this section the purchaser, transferee or assignee, . . . shall be personally liable for the payment to the State of any such taxes theretofore or thereafter determined to be due to the State from the seller, transferrer or assignor, and such liability may be assessed and enforced in the same manner as the liability for tax under this act."


For purposes of the 2007 law: (i) “‘Business’ mean[t] any endeavor from which revenue or consideration is realized for the purpose of generating a profit or loss,” and (ii) “‘Business assets,’ tangible or intangible, include[d] . . . realty if the primary use of the realty [was] to support a business on its premises.” See N.J. Div. of Tax. Tech. Bull. 60 (July 3, 2008). On the contracting parties’ end, proper notification consisted of inserting a provision into the Contract of Sale that both parties would comply with the statute; the seller preparing and delivering to the purchaser the Asset Transfer Tax Declaration, in which seller was to disclose information that would assist the Director in estimating the gain on the transfer of asset(s) and the estimated tax on the gain; the purchaser preparing Form C-9600, which provided basic information regarding the sale, transfer, or assignment of property; and, finally, submitting both forms and a fully executed and complete purchaser agreement by registered mail to the Director at least ten business days prior to the date of closing.

The 2007 law made it apparent that, with the exception of building contractors who sold houses as inventory in the regular course of their business, single family residences used solely for that purpose, and other unique transactional situations, all real estate transactions required the statutory notification of a bulk sale.  The notice requirements attached to sales of vacant land owned by a business; single-family homes used to obtain rental income; single-family homes used as a home office, if expensed as such on the homeowner’s tax return to receive a tax benefit; and even transactions where the seller was a tax-exempt or non-profit organization.

(Case law also established that bulk sale notification requirements applied to deeds in lieu of foreclosure. For further discussion, see The New Bulk Sales Notification Requirements and Their Application to New Jersey Real Estate Transactions - Part II).

The 2011 amendments take effect immediately and apply retroactively to sales, transfers and assignments on or after August 1, 2007.

Under the 2011 amendments, the bulk sale notification requirements of N.J.S.A. 54:50-38 will not apply to “the sale, transfer or assignment of a simple dwelling house if the seller, transferrer or assignor is an ‘individual,’ ‘estate,’ or ‘trust’ as those terms are used for the purposes of the ‘New Jersey Gross Income Tax Act,’ N.J.S. 54A:1-1 et seq.” A “simple dwelling house” is defined as a one-family or two-family dwelling unit and includes cooperatives and condominium units. Still subject to the law, however, are structures “containing more than two units of dwelling space or containing, according to the municipal property tax assessor, commercial property including, or in addition to the units of dwelling space.”

Furthermore, the 2011 amendments attempt to resolve the ambiguity of whether the bulk sale law applies to the sale of a residential property that is only being rented for a short period of time. The law as amended now also exempts the sale, transfer or assignment of a “seasonable rental unit” or “of a lease for the seasonable use or rental or real property” if the seller is an individual, estate or trust. For purposes of the law, a “seasonal rental unit” is a timeshare estate (N.J.S.A. 45:15-16.51) or “a dwelling unit rented for a term of not more than 125 consecutive days for residential purposes by a person having a permanent residence elsewhere.”

Again, the above exemptions extend only to sellers who are individuals, estates or trusts. “Business entities,” including but not limited to corporations or partnerships, must continue adhering to the 2007 bulk sale notification requirements.

 

 

Commercial Clients are Urged to Consider Whether a Tax Appeal Makes Sense in Today's Troubling Real Estate Market

The 2011 Property Tax Environment is Ripe for Appeals and Represents a Real Opportunity for Significant Tax Reductions:

With measurable declines in the real estate market, evidenced by continued high vacancy and historically low rental rates, the pursuit of a real property tax appeal has never been more compelling. In fact, municipalities are again bracing themselves for what is expected to be another tsunami of tax appeal filings. Last year, unprecedented levels of appeals were filed and towns have been left scrambling since. Adjustments to assessment levels were largely in order for 2010 and will continue to be justified in the present tax year. Towns are aware that their property assessments are not in line with the current economic climate and declining property values. It is therefore expected that significant adjustments are either going to occur voluntarily, through compromise, or involuntarily, by virtue of the mandates of Tax Court judgments. Consequently, for those who take action, it is likely that a reduction in assessment and a resulting reduction in taxes will be achieved.

The only way to take advantage of the opportunity to realize significant tax savings and improve one’s bottom line is to pursue a timely filed tax appeal. The 2011 tax appeal filing deadline is April 1, 2011 so there is little time to waste.

The first step is for a property owner, or a tenant who is responsible for the payment of taxes, to review the Property Tax Assessment Notice, which will be mailed by towns to taxpayers, in the form of a postcard, in the next several weeks. This Notice identifies the property tax assessment imposed upon the property for 2011.

This assessment number can be deceptive, however, as it does not always indicate the true value of the property. Many taxpayers are falsely lulled into believing that their property assessment equals true value and is therefore correct. This error could be an expensive mistake.

Towns employ what is called an average or "equalization" ratio in order to convert the property tax assessment to true value (the so-called “equalization value”). Only by comparing the equalization value to the true value of the property can a property owner determine whether an appeal has merit. Taxpayers who take no action are thus often left paying an ever increasing tax bill.

Once the Property Tax Assessment Notice is received, a property owner should promptly schedule an appointment with an attorney to determine the merits of a possible appeal. By taking this simple but important step, a property owner can ensure that it is paying only its fair share of the municipal real property tax burden. This is where the involvement of an experienced attorney from Cole Schotz can be of tremendous help. Our experience and relationships with professional appraisers allows us to perform, at no cost to you, a preliminary analysis to determine if an appeal is warranted.

Don't Lose Your Right to Challenge Your Tax Assessment

Many property owners lose their right to challenge their real property tax assessment by ignoring the annual request by their local Tax Assessor to complete an Income and Expense Statement.  This request is authorized by N.J.S.A. 54:4-34 and is known as a Chapter 91 filing.  If you are served with a Chapter 91 request you must respond to same within the required time period otherwise the municipality can move to dismiss any subsequent tax appeal filed.


Unfortunately, many property owners either ignore the Chapter 91 request because they do not believe that they own income-producing property or they fail to complete the Income and Expense Statement properly.  A common misconception is that any income derived in order to be reportable must be between unrelated parties and must be an arms’ length transaction.  This is simply not correct.  Chapter 91 applies to all properties whether residential or commercial, whether owner occupied or tenanted, whether leased or totally vacant.  The test is not the amount of income derived but rather whether the property is capable of deriving income.  This means that if you have a vacant building and are served by the Tax Assessor with a Chapter 91 request you must still complete the Income and Expense Statement and return it to the Tax Assessor within the 45-day time period.  We suggest that you return the completed form by certified mail so that you have proof of compliance within the requisite time.


Another common misconception is that if you own two entities and one owns the property and another leases the property then there is no need to complete the Chapter 91 filing.  Simply because the two entities may be related or the rent being paid is not “market rate” and the transaction is not arms’ length does not serve as an exemption for completing a Chapter 91 request.


A further mistake that is often encountered is a property owner failing to include income from all sources.  Income derived from cell antennas, parking leases, ATM machines, food service concessions, bank kiosks and other relatively small service providers must be included on the Chapter 91 request.


In these difficult economic times, don’t lose your ability to reduce your real property taxes.  Complete and file your Chapter 91 response in a timely manner.
 

Tax Appeal Seminar Urges Property Owners to Take Action to Reduce Their Tax Bills

Cole Schotz, along with professional appraisers from Integra Realty Resources, presented an informative seminar to clients and interested commercial property owners, managers and brokers titled "The Time to Fight City Hall is Now -- Why a Real Estate Tax Appeal Makes Sense" on March 3, 2010. The presenters covered the nuts and bolts of tax assessments, the appeal process, strategies to win on appeal, as well as a market-wide survey of current conditions and expectations, laying out a roadmap for action.

Because a property's tax burden can represent one of the more significant components of its operating costs, conducting an annual review of a property's assessment with your professionals: lawyers and appraisers alike, is critical to good management. Last year saw record filings with the tax court. This year, with the commercial real estate market continuing in recession, significant filings are again expected.

Despite this trend, the amount of qualified candidates filing appeals continues however to represent only a fraction of those who should be availing themselves of the tax appeal procedure. In a market where major sectors: Office, Retail, Industrial and Multifamily have experienced increased vacancy rates and greater demand for rent concessions and landlord work letters, the market values of these properties have decreased resulting in overassessments for real estate tax purposes.

Tax appeals must be filed by April 1, 2010.

The Annual Real Property Tax Appeal Countdown Has Begun

The 2010 Property Tax Environment is Ripe for Appeals and Represents a Real Opportunity for Significant Tax:

With measurable declines in the real estate market, evidenced, by rising vacancy and falling rental rates, the pursuit of a real property tax appeal has never been more compelling. In fact, municipalities are already bracing themselves for what is expected to be a tsunami of tax appeal filings. Last year, unprecedented levels of appeals were filed and towns have been left scrambling since. Adjustments to assessment levels were largely in order for 2009 and will continue to be justified in the present tax year. Towns are aware that their property assessments are not in line with the current economic climate and declining property values. It is therefore expected that significant adjustments are either going to occur voluntarily, through compromise, or involuntarily, by virtue of the mandates of Tax Court judgments. Consequently, for those who take action, it is likely that a reduction in assessment and a resulting reduction in taxes will be achieved.

The only way to take advantage of the opportunity to realize significant tax savings and improve one’s bottom line is to pursue a timely filed tax appeal. The 2010 tax appeal filing deadline is April 1, 2010 so there is little time to waste.

The first step is for a property owner or a tenant, responsible for a majority of the property tax obligation, to review the Property Tax Assessment Notice (post card), which will be mailed to taxpayers by the towns in the next few weeks. This post card identifies the property tax assessment imposed upon the property for 2010.

This assessment number is, however, deceptive, as it does not, without proper adjustment, tell the owner the true value at which the town has assessed the property. Many taxpayers are falsely lulled into believing that their property assessment equals true value and is therefore correct. This error could be an expensive mistake.

Towns employ what is called an average or ”equalization” ratio in order to convert the property tax assessment to the value (the so-called “equalization value”). Only by comparing this adjusted assessment number (“equalization value”) to the actual value of the property, may a proper analysis be undertaken to determine whether an appeal has merit. Taxpayers who take no action are thus often stuck with paying an ever-increasing tax bill.

Once the Property Tax Assessment card is reviewed, a property owner should therefore quickly move to schedule an appointment with an attorney experienced in this area in order to determine the merits of a possible appeal. By taking this simple, but important step, a property owner can ensure that it is paying only its fair share of the municipal real property tax burden. This is where the involvement of an experienced attorney can be of tremendous help. With our experience and relationships with professional appraisers, we are able to perform, at no cost to you, a preliminary analysis to determine if an appeal is warranted. If so, the preparation and filing of a tax appeal complaint will be recommended and pursued at your election.
 

Short Cuts Will Not Be Tolerated When it Comes to Real Property Value Determinations

In a newly decided New Jersey Appellate Division case, Pansini Custom Design Associates LLC v. City of Ocean City, the court, made clear that application of the simpleton approach of merely averaging comparables or the results of competing appraisal reports, will not do. In Pansini, the court found that such an approach to valuation represents a shirking of the fact-finder's responsibility to reach a "reasoned, just and factually supported conclusion of value." The court went on to hold that relying upon such a "simple mathematical formula is an unacceptable methodology for fulfilling one's role as a fact-finder."

Moreover the Tax Court of New Jersey has also recognized that permitting the use of averaging would only serve to encourage appraisal experts to slant their conclusions to the extremes. It has been recognized that permitting averaging to be utilized would mean appraisers would "intentionally distort and skew the values to insure a high or low number without concern that the fact finder must resolve the issue with a careful analysis of data that may result in adoption of one appraisal figure over another.”

In the end, the analysis which must be conducted should instead include a careful assessment of sales data, making appropriate and reasoned adjustments to reflect a host of factors, including: the time of sale, location, amenities, physical characteristics, utility and desirability of the properties held up for comparison. Importantly, the Pansini decision also served to reinforce the well-settled principle that comparable sale data is only of value to a reasoned valuation analysis where the gross magnitude of necessary adjustments to the “comparables” do not serve to belie comparability.

Anytime valuation of real property is at issue, whether in connection with parties’ contractual arrangements, or a tax court or condemnation proceeding, it is incumbent upon parties and professionals alike to ensure that the ultimate value conclusions reached by their appraisal experts are based upon empirical data and observations of existing and surrounding conditions and not simply a mathematical exercise.