Opinion: Key Factors to Consider for California Property Owners in 1031 Exchanges

1031 exchanges present a fascinating opportunity for investors to trade one investment property for others while postponing state tax (if applicable), federal capital gains tax, depreciation recapture, and net investment income tax. While the 1031 exchange mechanism is a federal statute, there are specific considerations at the state level that may influence its appeal, particularly in California.

California’s high capital gains tax rate of 13.3% makes the ability to defer state tax particularly attractive for property owners in the state. Only New York (10.9%) and New Jersey (10.75%) have capital gains tax rates exceeding 10%, while eight states have no capital gains tax at all, including Alaska, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming.

One crucial factor to keep in mind is California’s clawback provision, which is also found in only three other states: Massachusetts, Montana, and Oregon. This provision comes into play if an individual initially participates in a 1031 exchange but decides not to use it for a subsequent property sale.

For instance, if you buy a property in California for $200,000 and later sell it for $1 million, you would typically owe capital gains tax on the $800,000 profit. However, if you conduct a 1031 exchange for that property, defer the capital gains tax, and acquire another property in Texas as part of the exchange, California will come back with a tax bill for the sale of the initial property if you later sell the Texas property without using a 1031 exchange.

Due to the higher value of real estate in California compared to many other states, a trend has emerged where people sell their assets in California and move to states where they can get more for their money. For example, retirees might choose to sell their California property to retire in Florida.

They plan to do a 1031 exchange on the California property, purchase a Florida investment property, and rent it out for a few years before moving in. While this strategy defers federal capital gains tax (as Florida has none), California’s capital gains tax would still apply if the purchased property becomes their primary residence. Many investors are unaware of this clawback provision, and it can significantly impact the viability of a real estate strategy.

Additionally, it’s important to understand that conducting a 1031 exchange does not require accredited investor status, but it becomes necessary to utilize a Delaware Statutory Trust (DST) within the exchange. DSTs allow individuals to co-invest in direct real estate properties without having to hold or manage them directly.

Accredited investor status requires individuals to earn more than $200,000 annually (or $300,000 with a spouse) or have a net worth exceeding $1 million, excluding the value of their home.

The Equal Opportunity for All Investors Act, passed by the House of Representatives with a bipartisan vote of 383-18, aims to expand the pool of accredited investors. This bill proposes allowing accredited investor certification after successfully completing an examination designed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). If the bill becomes law, it could be a game-changer for the DST industry by removing a significant entry barrier.

However, it’s essential to recognize that 1031 exchanges and the use of DSTs may not be suitable or advisable for every investor or situation. Conducting thorough research and due diligence is crucial before making any investment decisions. To learn more about the tax advantages of DSTs and the pros and cons of 1031 exchanges, visit our website at https://www.1031crowdfunding.com/.

Leave a Comment