Property fund structures

It is common for large real estate investment transactions to have structured aspects to them, eg the properties being purchased may be held in a company, unit trust, partnership or another vehicle. The buyer may decide to acquire the relevant structured vehicle (rather than the property) and then hold the property through it. Alternatively, several investors may wish to invest together to acquire and/or develop property, and set up a joint venture structure or investment fund, often with separate management agreements appointing specialists to manage the property. See Precedents: Short form property management agreement and Long form property management agreement.

This topic sets out the more common structures for holding property for investment or development purposes.

For detailed tax guidance on the tax aspects of property funds, see: Property holding structures and tax—overview and Tax on property funds—overview. For real estate finance aspects of financing property investment, see: Methods of investing in real estate—overview.

For further guidance on funds generally, see the Funds collection and in particular Funds collection—Property funds and JVs.

Property funds

Property funds come in many different

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Property News

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at section 75A FA 2003 applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Property by content type :

Popular documents