Page images
PDF
EPUB

SUITE 520, KIRKEBY CENTER / 10889 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD / LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024 / (213) 473-0901 · (213) 879-0333

September 15, 1969

Senate Finance Committee

2227 New Senate Office Building Washington, D. C.

Gentlemen:

It is my considered opinion that it would be a mistake to eliminate accelerated depreciation as proposed in the Tax Reform Bill as reported out of the House Of Representatives.

As you are well aware, the present real estate market is in a state of extreme depression. It is very difficult to purchase investment quality real estate and even more difficult to sell investment real estate at a price sufficient to yield a reasonable return on the initial investment. The price of real estate is a function of the economic return that it generates. A substantial portion of the return generated by real estate through the present time has been the tax benefits created by the interest and depreciation deduction allowed to the owner of the

real estate.

Our firm specializes in purchasing, for our clients, investment quality
real estate. By the end of 1969 our real estate holdings will exceed
fifty million dollars. In many cases we will purchase apartment houses
where the cash return is quite low but where the tax benefits to the
investor are substantial and the potential for appreciation, we feel,

Page Two
September 15, 1969

is great.

If there were no substantial tax benefits to be gained by owning real

estate we would have three courses of action open to us.

1. Pay considerably less money for the real estate, which
would result in a higher cash yield to the investor.

2. Pay the same price for the real estate but raise the rents
substantially after the purchase.

3. Find another suitable investment vehicle other than real

estate.

It is my opinion that the effect of the reduced tax savings will be a

substantial across the board increase in rents to raise the return to

real estate investors so that the need for residential units can be met.

The argument is made that accelerated depreciation is continued to be allowed to original owners of apartment houses. That in itself is not satisfactory because firms such as ours only buy existing structures. The initial builders must be able to anticipate a profit on sale or they will not build the building even through the builder may receive the

tax benefits.

There are two reasons for this.

1. As you know the tax benefits to the original builder, under

Page Three

September 15, 1969

the new law, will be illusory because of the recapture

provisions.

2. There will be no market to re-sell the property because

the second buyers will not receive any tax benefits.

It is my opinion that the economy is a self adjusting device that adjusts for tax benefits. In other words, an investor expects a 15% yield on his invested dollars. He is willing to take part of his yield in tax benefits if they are available. If they are not available then he must have a greater cash yield to off-set the lost tax benefits. The net result of this is that if you remove the tax benefits from real estate the yield on real estate will have to rise which will cause increased rents and

greater inflation.

Very truly yours,

CAPITAL CONCEPTS CORPORATION

Danilure 21

Lawrence M. Schulner
President

LMS: mtb

« PreviousContinue »