FINANCE
TAX CREDIT PARTNERSHIPS
Valuing General Partner Interests
BY R. LEE HARRIS, CRE, CPM
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FINANCE • JANUARY 2008
A number of general partner
interests in tax credit
partnerships was offered
to the market during
2007. Valuing these
interests can be very complex and
extremely tricky at best. In this article,
I’ll explore some of the key elements to
determining how to analyze general partner
interests.
Billionaire Warren Buffett learned
from his mentor,
Benjamin Graham, that
there is very clearly a difference
between price
and value. Price is what
you pay, and value is
what you get. It is critical
to assess the relationship
between price and
value because failing to
do so is simply speculation. Nothing
could be truer than when viewing tax
credit partnership interests.
The first step in the valuation process
is to have a clear understanding of the
terms and conditions of the limited partnership
agreement. This agreement spells
out how the waterfall of benefits flows
through the partnership. Percentage of
ownership seldom has much to do with
the way the benefits pie is sliced. The general
partner may have a miniscule ownership
interest in the partnership yet
receive a much higher percentage of the
cash flow, another percentage of refinancing
proceeds, and still another percentage
of sale proceeds.
Other important factors to abstract
from the limited partnership agreement
include exactly what rights the limited
partners have at the end of the initial
Land Use Restriction Agreement (LURA)
period to force the sale of the property;
who is responsible for assuming the tax
consequences of unpaid developer fees
used in calculating basis; and what personal
guarantees are being assumed on
the part of the new general partner.
If the limited partner can force a sale
at the end of the LURA, the purchaser of
the general partner interest needs to
decide what impact this can have on
long-term strategy. Many projects have
deferred developer fees, and at some
point the Internal Revenue Service
expects those fees to be paid. If they
aren’t, the general partner typically has to
contribute capital that is then repaid in
the form of developer fees, but not without
creating taxable income for the general
partner.
Understanding the loans must also
be on the checklist. What sort of pre-payment
lockouts and penalties exist? Does
the first mortgage mature simultaneously
with the expiration of the initial LURA
period? Are there soft second and/or
third loans? Does the forgiveness of such
loans cause a cancellation-of-debt issue
from a tax perspective?
Looking at operations
The next step in the analysis is to
scrutinize the historical physical and
financial operation of the underlying
asset. The best document for this purpose
is the annual audit. Look at the last three
years’ worth of audited financial statements.
The first place to start is in the
accompanying notes to the financials.
The notes are a treasure trove of information,
and can include gems such as the
amount of deferred developer fee plus
accrued interest; extraordinary income
and expenses that may have been
incurred; accounts payable; various debt
provisions, which might be difficult to dig
out of loan documents; and the status of
equity installments still due from the limited
partner. Ultimately the prospective
general partner/purchaser wants to
derive a clear picture of the cash flows
that are generated by the property. Simply
looking at financial statements without
carefully reviewing the notes does not
necessarily present the true picture.
Subsequently, a thorough understanding
of the market will be necessary.
Is the community growing or shrinking?
What is the property’s reputation? Is it
located in a good or bad neighborhood?
Remember, you can fix a property, but
you can’t fix a neighborhood.
What is the capture rate for the property—
in other words, what share of qualified
renters in the market does the property
have to capture to achieve and maintain
100 percent occupancy? A 5 percent
capture rate is very healthy for a family
apartment community. A rate above 10
percent begins to raise eyebrows.
A look at historical occupancy rates
for the subject property can cast light on
how it has performed within the market.
If the property has typically operated at
87 percent occupancy, why would anyone
project future occupancy at a higher rate
when valuing the general partner interest?
Of course it might be possible to
achieve higher occupancies as a result of
better management or market conditions,
but why would a prospective purchaser
pay for this “blue sky?”
The physical condition of the property
is an obvious piece of the valuation
puzzle. What is the overall quality of
construction? What is the current physical
condition? How many carpets and
appliances have been replaced? Have
any roofs been replaced? What is the
annual contribution to the replacement
reserve and what is the current balance
in that replacement reserve?
Do a comprehensive physical
inspection with an eye toward estimating
the remaining useful life of the major
physical components—roofs, parking
lots, sidewalks, HVAC equipment, carpet,
appliances, cabinets, hot water
heaters, windows—and the amount of
funding needed over the next several years to undertake the necessary
replacements.
Future cash flow
Eventually, cash benefit projections
become the focus. In a traditional valuation
model, a net operating income is
derived and capitalized at a selected rate
of return. The valuation of a general partner
interest is not quite as straightforward.
The most logical approach is to
project the stream of cash benefits going
to the general partner over a defined period
of time. These benefits may include
incentive management fees, cash flow
allocations, refinancing proceeds, and
sale proceeds. A significant portion of the
benefits will be difficult to precisely calculate
because they may not occur until far
into the future—a sale for instance. And
no one can really predict what market
conditions will be at the time a sale is
anticipated to occur. If the asset has been
generating distributable cash each year,
that income stream can be expected to be
more durable. So what to do?
A discounted cash flow model is the
fairest way to value the general partner
interest. The challenge comes in determining
what discount rate to use. One
approach that has merit is to use more
than one discount rate. For example, if
distributable cash flow has been steady on
a historical basis, then projecting it into
the future would seem to be logical. Thus
it may be assumed that cash flows are less
risky than the property’s market valuation
at sale.
The fact that many properties are
subject to extended LURAs muddles the
opportunity to sell in the future. There
are many hoops to jump through to void
the extended LURA, causing uncertainty
as to when the property may actually be
sold and for how much. As a result, a
prospective purchaser of the general partner
interest might use a lower discount
rate for the annual distributable cash
flows, and a higher discount rate for the
projected benefits from a sale years into
the future. Blending the discounted cash
flows produces the amount that the general
partner interest may be valued by a
prospective purchaser.
Still, other issues need to be considered.
What happens if the cash flows historically
have been negative or leveled
off? Does this mean that the general partner
interest is worthless? If a prospective
purchaser of the general partner interest
is able to take steps necessary to produce
positive distributable cash flow in the
future, should any of that be incorporated
into the value for the withdrawing general
partner?
Another complication is the market
itself. This is where price and value can
definitely diverge. For example, the
stream of cash benefits may indicate that
the general partner interest should be valued
at “X,” but the market in which the
property is located has hot money pouring
in and there is a possibility that someone
would purchase the property at a
price higher than its value. Intelligent
investors will negotiate for the general
partner interest on the basis of the true
value, and if the price exceeds that value,
then they will walk away.
At the beginning of this article, I
mentioned the philosophy of Benjamin
Graham and Warren Buffett. Another
mantra of these two superstar investors is
“margin of safety.”
Purchasing a general partner interest
can be extremely risky. So how does one
go about building an adequate margin of
safety? Certainly, it’s up to the purchaser
to perform extensive due diligence on the
asset and the market. Beyond that, the
purchaser must be conservative with
future projections and also build a margin
of safety into the discount rates being
used. In fact, the discount rates (or rates
of return) should reflect the appropriate
risk premium for the operating scenario
being acquired.
A tough asset in a tough market with
a checkered past may be worth something,
but only a small something when assessed
a risk premium. How would a general
partner interest in a property that is virtually
upside down financially be worth anything
at all? It all boils down to time. If the
LURA expires in 12 months, if if there’s a
high probability that the purchaser can opt
out of the extended LURA, and if the market
is such that the property could be sold
and converted to conventional apartments
at much higher rents, then a case could be
made for a residual value.
Purchasing general partner inte rests
can offer opportunity, but may be even
more likely to turn into quicksand. A
prospective purchaser must be ever vigilant
while trying to match a fair price
with a reasonable value that reflects the
risks involved.
Beware of general partners who may
be trying to unload portfolios of bad deals
that they are tired of feeding. Be careful
about paying for future benefits that are
actually the sweat off your own brow.
Look for every opportunity to fail and
have a plan to mitigate each potential failure
before taking the plunge. Once all of
the caveats are understood, then and only
then are you ready to fully exploit the
opportunity.
R. Lee Harris, CRE, CPM, is president of
Cohen-Esrey Real Estate Services, LLC, a
Kansas City-based commercial real estate
organization that has managed more
than 53,000 multifamily units since
1969. The firm is active in 95 markets
spanning 17 states and is involved in the
management, development, and acquisition
of conventional and affordable housing.
An affiliated company, Cohen-Esrey
Affordable Partners, LLC, purchases general
partner interests. For more information,
visit www.cohenesrey.com.
|