Here we go with carried interest again

Originally we thought it was over. Wrong. It looks like the whole carried interest debate is back. Like a cheap pair of sunglasses, it just won't go away.  They are even trying to plug ways around it now; call me silly but I would rather spend time doing deals than working out complicated tax law solutions. 

I wrote about this topic almost three years ago, and I have done so on other occasions. You can look here and here for some other thoughts. It is not something I like seeing just as signs of life are showing in the market and hopefully in development to boot.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why real estate in San Diego is so expensive

This is one reason . Good old vernal pools, those puddles that emerge in the spring and bring life to rare species of plants, and yes, even shrimp. I think an average house in America's Finest City is over $700K these days. Granted, there are other reasons for expensive housing, but CEQA is one reason for sure.
Read more

Today's legal term: deed in lieu

For you beginners, what is a deed in lieu? It is shorthand, and if you add the last two words of the phrase, you ought to get the picture: "in foreclosure." In other words, the borrower is giving the property to the lender because it can't make the loan payments or refinance the property. These deals are often very heavily negotiated and can get ugly. Here's an example from Forbes, via The Real Estate Bloggers . It appears Harry Macklowe has reached a tentative deal to give back seven New York buildings he bought for $7 billion (no misprint) to his lender, Deutsche Bank, which holds the $5.8 billion mortgage. Is this deal part of the commercial credit crunch, an indicator that prices are plummeting, a sign that Macklowe overpaid, a combination of events or something else? I have an opinion but will sit on it for now.
Read more

Interesting trend - don't buy the dirt, buy the developer

Private Equity Real Estate has a good article (free sub. required) about a trend among private equity players: instead of buying up property or finished buildings or even developments, they are buying all or chunks of development or doing equity participation deals with them. I've seen the latter trend forever, of course. And it is a wise move on their part to do so. Take the undercapitalized developer, bring in a money source with cash to place, give the money partner a preferred return and the developer a nice promote and you have a total win-win situation. Buying the developer itself is an interesting twist. The upside is guaranteed stability. The downside? Are you expected to work exclusively on the owner's deals? What happens to the promotes -- are they there in the form of high bonuses or gone? The flexibility may not be there. But I still find the idea intriguing.
Read more