The Department already issued an Advisory Opinion on my $1 sale-leaseback-repurchase structure for the Brooklyn Bridge Park redevelopment (TSB-A-06(3)R), which said the eventual assignment of my lease to the condominium's Board of Managers would automatically be taxed like a sponsor-to-cooperative-housing-corporation conveyance. On further review, does that specific conclusion still hold?

Plain-English summary

This is a "MODIFIED ADVISORY OPINION" — the Department revisiting and correcting one specific conclusion from its own prior TSB-A-06(3)R opinion (issued November 30, 2006) on the exact same facts and petition. The underlying deal is unchanged: 360 Brooklyn Investors, LLC would sell its property at 360 Furman Street, Brooklyn to the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation (BBPDC, an Empire State Development Corporation subsidiary) for $1.00, simultaneously lease the property back for up to 99 years to build a mixed-use residential/commercial/parking condominium project as part of the Brooklyn Bridge Park redevelopment, and repurchase the fee for $1.00 upon the lease's expiration or termination.

As in the original opinion, the Department reaffirmed that the $1 Sale, the Lease's creation, and the $1 Reconveyance together qualify as RETT-exempt debt-security financing under Tax Law §1405(b)(2) — because the owner never intends to relinquish control of the property and continues bearing the practical benefits and burdens of ownership, with the eventual reconveyance simply representing satisfaction of the financing arrangement (following TSB-A-03(1)(R), the Milstein Brothers 42nd Street precedent, and Matter of Atlantic Cement Company, Inc. v. Murphy). This exemption still depends on the same critical condition: the Tenant must have the same beneficial ownership, in the same proportionate share, as the original owner throughout — any actual change in beneficial interest makes that step taxable, with the original owner (as true beneficial owner) treated as the grantor.

The correction: the original TSB-A-06(3)R opinion had stated, without qualification, that "the assignment of the Lease by Tenant to the Condo Board is subject to tax as provided by section 575.11(a)(12) of the Regulations" — treating the eventual transfer of the leasehold interest to the resulting condominium's Board of Managers the same as an always-taxable sponsor-to-cooperative-housing-corporation conveyance. This modified opinion removes that unconditional rule. Instead, it now states that "a subsequent assignment of the Lease to a Permitted Assignee OR THE CONDO BOARD would be subject to tax to the extent there is a change in beneficial interest" — folding the Condo Board assignment into the same conditional, beneficial-interest-based test that already governed assignments to a "Permitted Assignee." In other words: if the Lease's assignment to the Condo Board doesn't actually change who beneficially owns the property, it is no longer automatically taxed just because the recipient is a condominium governance entity.

What this means for you

Always read the MOST RECENT opinion on a matter, not just the first one issued

This ruling exists specifically because the Department caught and corrected an overly broad statement in its own prior opinion on identical facts -- if you're relying on TSB-A-06(3)R for the Condo Board assignment question, you need this modification, which changes that specific conclusion.

Assigning a redevelopment lease to a condominium's Board of Managers is not automatically taxable

Contrary to the general rule that a sponsor-to-cooperative-housing-corporation conveyance is always taxable (20 NYCRR §575.11(a)(12)), this modified opinion confirms that assigning YOUR leasehold interest to a condominium Board of Managers under a debt-security financing structure like this one is taxed only if it actually changes beneficial ownership -- not automatically, just because a condominium entity is now the recipient.

The core debt-security exemption and its beneficial-ownership condition are unchanged

Everything else from the original opinion carries forward unmodified: the $1 sale-leaseback-repurchase sequence is RETT-exempt financing as long as beneficial ownership of the Tenant position never actually changes, and any genuine change in beneficial interest (whether via Permitted Assignee or Condo Board assignment) remains taxable.

Common questions

Q: Does this modified opinion change whether the initial $1 sale and leaseback are RETT-exempt?
A: No -- that core holding (RETT-exempt as debt-security financing, conditioned on unchanged beneficial ownership) is unchanged from the original opinion; only the Condo Board assignment conclusion was corrected.

Q: Why would the Department issue a "modified" opinion instead of just a new one?
A: The Department expressly frames this as revisiting the SAME petition after "further review of the matter" -- it's a formal correction mechanism for when the Department concludes part of its own prior published guidance was stated too broadly.

Q: If my lease is assigned to a condo board and beneficial ownership genuinely doesn't change, do I owe RETT on that assignment?
A: Under this modified opinion, no -- the Condo Board assignment is taxable only to the extent there's an actual change in beneficial interest, the same standard that applies to a Permitted Assignee assignment.

Citations and references

Statutes, guidance, and case law:

• Section 1402(a) of the Tax Law
• Section 1401(d) of the Tax Law
• Section 1401(e) of the Tax Law
• Section 1401(f) of the Tax Law
• Section 1405(b) of the Tax Law
• Section 575.7(d)(1) of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Regulations
• Section 575.10 of the Regulations
• Section 575.11 of the Regulations
• TSB-A-06(3)R (the original, now-modified opinion on the same petition, November 30, 2006)
• TSB-A-03(1)(R) (Urban Development Corporation/Milstein Brothers 42nd Street LLC, October 9, 2003)
• Matter of Atlantic Cement Company, Inc. v. Murphy, 30 A.D.2d 456 (1968), aff'd 28 N.Y.2d 502 (1971)
• TSB-A-98(69)S, (3)R (Beth Israel Medical Center, October 7, 1998)
• TSB-A-01(7)R (Time Warner, Inc., July 26, 2001)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.tax.ny.gov/pubs_and_bulls/advisory_opinions/real_estate_tran_ao_2006.htm
• Opinion: https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/advisory_opinions/real_estate/a06_3_1r.pdf

Original ruling text

New York State Department of Taxation and Finance

Office of Tax Policy Analysis
Technical Services Division

TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

STATE OF NEW YORK
COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION AND FINANCE
MODIFIED ADVISORY OPINION

PETITION NO. M060622A

On June 22, 2006, the Department of Taxation and Finance received a Petition for
Advisory Opinion from 360 Brooklyn Investors, LLC, c/o RAL Development Services, LLC,
86 Chambers Street, Suite 704, New York, NY 10007.
The issue raised by Petitioner, 360 Brooklyn Investors, LLC, is whether a sale-leaseback
transaction and a repurchase transaction related to property located at 360 Furman Street,
Brooklyn, New York, are subject to the real estate transfer tax imposed by Article 31 of the Tax
Law.
On November 30, 2006, an Advisory Opinion in response to the Petition was issued.
Upon further review of the matter, the aforementioned Advisory Opinion is modified as
hereinafter set forth.
Petitioner submits the following facts as the basis for this Advisory Opinion.
Petitioner is the owner of the property known as 360 Furman Street, Brooklyn, New York
(the “Property”). Petitioner recently entered into an Amended and Restated Memorandum of
Understanding, dated February 24, 2006, and amended by letter dated June 13, 2006,
(collectively, the “MOU”) with the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation
(“BBPDC”). BBPDC is a subsidiary of the New York State Urban Development Corporation
d/b/a Empire State Development Corporation.
Pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the parties contemplate the redevelopment of the
Property as a mixed-use condominium project containing residential apartments, commercial
space, and a parking garage consistent with the objectives of the BBPDC in accordance with the
General Project Plan (“GPP”) adopted for the Brooklyn Bridge Park (the “Park”).
Under the terms of the MOU, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, Petitioner will sell
and convey fee title to the Property to BBPDC for $1.00 (the “Sale”). Simultaneously, Petitioner
will enter into a ground lease (“Lease”) of the Property with the BBPDC. Together, the Sale and
Lease constitute the “Sale-Leaseback Transaction.” Upon the expiration or termination of the
Lease, Petitioner or its successor-in-interest will have an option to repurchase fee title to the
Property for $1.00 (the “Reconveyance Transaction”).

-2­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

The Sale
In connection with the Sale, current mortgage liens against the fee interest in the Property
will be released from the fee interest and Petitioner may (1) spread such existing mortgage liens
to Petitioner’s leasehold interest under the Lease, including Petitioner’s option to repurchase the
Property pursuant to the Lease, and (2) encumber Petitioner’s leasehold interest under the Lease
with additional leasehold mortgages, in each case, in accordance with the MOU and transaction
documents. Petitioner has also agreed to pay the New York State and New York City transfer
taxes in connection with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction and the Reconveyance Transaction, if
any are determined to be due.
The Lease
Under the terms of the Lease, BBPDC will be landlord and Petitioner, or another entity
owned and controlled by Robert A. Levine (“Levine”) or AIG Global Real Estate Corp. (“AIG”)
or an affiliate of Levine or AIG, will be the developer of the Property (“Developer”) and initial
tenant (“Tenant”) under the Lease. The term of the Lease will not exceed 99 years and Tenant
will have the option to repurchase the Property upon (1) expiration of the Lease or (2)
termination of the Lease under certain conditions throughout the life of the Lease.
In addition to the Lease, the parties will execute a declaration of covenants, conditions
and restrictions (“CCR Declaration”). BBPDC and Developer will be the initial parties to the
CCR Declaration. Developer or any of its successors is referred to as “Owner” with respect to
the CCR Declaration. The term of the CCR Declaration is 99 years.
Tenant or Owner (as the case may be) may assign its interest in the Lease or the CCR
Declaration to a “Permitted Assignee” in the event of default by Developer under the financing
for the acquisition and/or construction of the Property. In addition, the parties intend that, upon
submission of the Property to condominium ownership, (1) Tenant’s interest in the Lease will be
assigned to the condominium board of managers (“Condo Board”) and (2) the Condo Board will
assume the obligations of Tenant set forth in the Lease and the obligations of Owner set forth in
the CCR Declaration.
Payments under the Lease will be in the form of payments in lieu of taxes (“PILOT”) to
BBPDC in an amount equivalent to the real property taxes and assessments that the City of
New York would levy on the Property if it were not owned by BBPDC or a tax-exempt entity.
The parties intend that, after the Property is subdivided into condominium units, the owner of
each condominium unit, rather than Tenant, will be responsible for the payment of each owner’s
proportionate share of the PILOT payment. Neither Tenant nor the owner of any condominium
unit will be obliged to make PILOT payments under the Lease during any period for which the

-3­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

Property or any condominium unit is subject to real estate taxes or assessments payable to the
City of New York. Tenant (or after expiration or termination of the Lease, Owner) will be
responsible for payment of all water, sewer, and other charges that the City of New York levies
against the Property, which amounts will be paid directly to the City when due.
The CCR Declaration will provide that Owner will pay to BBPDC a “Park Contribution.”
The initial amount of the Park Contribution is $1,250,000 per year and will be increased by 3%
on the third anniversary of the contribution commencement date and on each anniversary
thereafter. The Park Contribution will be used to pay for park maintenance, repair, and
replacements. Owner’s obligation to make Park Contributions will cease upon the expiration of
the CCR Declaration.
The Lease and CCR Declaration will provide certain remedies in the event of default. If
Tenant or Owner (as the case may be) fails to pay amounts due or perform any obligations under
the Lease or CCR Declaration, the lenders will be given a reasonable time to cure. If not cured
timely, BBPDC will have the right to pursue remedies to enforce payment and performance of
any obligations under the Lease or CCR Declaration and have the right to terminate the Lease.
The Reconveyance
Upon expiration or termination of the Lease, Tenant will have the option to purchase
BBPDC’s fee interest in the Property for the sum of $1.00 plus the amount of any unpaid
payments under the Lease for the period through the date of purchase.
Development Agreement
The MOU indicates that the parties will enter into a “Development Agreement.” Among
other provisions, the Development Agreement provides that Petitioner, or another entity owned
and controlled by Levine or AIG or an affiliate of AIG, will be the Developer.
Developer will make payments in lieu of sales tax (''PILOST'') to BBPDC on materials,
goods, fixtures, equipment, and other items that Developer, its contractors, and subcontractors do
not pay as a result of the Property being owned by BBPDC or a tax-exempt entity.
Developer will pay to BBPDC an amount equal to the New York State and New York
City mortgage recording taxes (''MRT'') that would be due on any mortgage financing or
refinancing secured by the Property or the Lease if the landlord was not a corporate
governmental entity of New York State. BBPDC agrees to be a party to any mortgage financing
or refinancing secured by the Property or the Lease, provided BBPDC will have no obligations

-4­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

under such mortgage. Amounts due for MRT payments will be due on the date of closing of the
mortgage financing or refinancing. Petitioner will be entitled to any credits available from the
payment of MRT in connection with mortgages on the Property or the Lease for which Petitioner
has paid MRT. The amount of any credit due to Petitioner will be credited against any future
payments due under the Lease, the CCR Declaration, or the Development Agreement.
Developer has agreed to make a significant fixed payment upon the earlier of (1) the
lease, sale, or refinancing of the construction loan for the condominium unit(s) situated at the
rear of the second floor of the Development or (2) the second anniversary of the date of issuance
of the first certificate of occupancy for residential condominium units. Developer will also make
other payments based on a percentage of the gross revenues generated by the sale of
condominium units.
When the condominium declaration is recorded, the CCR Declaration will be assumed by
the Condo Board. Upon such assumption, Developer will guaranty all payments due under the
CCR Declaration (the “Guaranty”) until (a) 75% of the residential condominium units are sold to
bona fide purchasers, and (b) Developer has paid the PILOST and MRT payments referred to
above. Once the conditions under (a) and (b) are satisfied, Developer will be released from any
further liability under the Guaranty except to the extent Developer is the owner of unsold
condominium units.
Developer’s obligation to make all payments required under the Guaranty and the
Development Agreement will be secured by a mortgage on all unsold condominium units (the
“Developer Mortgage”). BBPDC will enter into an intercreditor agreement with respect to the
Developer Mortgage. The intercreditor agreement will provide that BBPDC will be prohibited
from foreclosing on such mortgage or otherwise exercising any remedies thereunder during the
period that any senior financing is outstanding provided the senior lender will have adequate
notice and cure periods upon a default by Developer. The intercreditor agreement will contain
other customary intercreditor provisions.
Developer will obtain and maintain during construction (or will cause Developer’s
contractor or construction manager to obtain and maintain) a payment and performance bond
naming BBPDC as obligee, or a letter of credit naming BBPDC as beneficiary.
Applicable law and regulations
Section 1402(a) of the Tax Law imposes the real estate transfer tax on each conveyance
of real property or interest therein and provides, in part:

-5­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

A tax is hereby imposed on each conveyance of real property or interest therein
when the consideration exceeds five hundred dollars, at the rate of two dollars for each
five hundred dollars or fractional part thereof;...
Section 1401(d) of the Tax Law provides, in part:
"Consideration" means the price actually paid or required to be paid for the real
property or interest therein, including payment for an option or contract to purchase real
property, whether or not expressed in the deed and whether paid or required to be paid by
money, property, or any other thing of value. It shall include the cancellation or discharge
of an indebtedness or obligation. It shall also include the amount of any mortgage,
purchase money mortgage, lien or other encumbrance, whether or not the underlying
indebtedness is assumed or taken subject to.
(i) In the case of a creation of a leasehold interest or the granting of an option with
use and occupancy of real property, consideration shall include but not be limited to the
value of the rental and other payments attributable to the use and occupancy of the real
property or interest therein, the value of any amount paid for an option to purchase or
renew and the value of rental or other payments attributable to the exercise of any option
to renew.
Section 1401(e) of the Tax Law provides:
"Conveyance" means the transfer or transfers of any interest in real property by
any method, including but not limited to sale, exchange, assignment, surrender, mortgage
foreclosure, transfer in lieu of foreclosure, option, trust indenture, taking by eminent
domain, conveyance upon liquidation or by a receiver, or transfer or acquisition of a
controlling interest in any entity with an interest in real property. Transfer of an interest
in real property shall include the creation of a leasehold or sublease only where (i) the
sum of the term of the lease or sublease and any options for renewal exceeds forty-nine
years, (ii) substantial capital improvements are or may be made by or for the benefit of
the lessee or sublessee, and (iii) the lease or sublease is for substantially all of the
premises constituting the real property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, conveyance of
real property shall not include a conveyance pursuant to devise, bequest or inheritance;
the creation, modification, extension, spreading, severance, consolidation, assignment,
transfer, release or satisfaction of a mortgage; a mortgage subordination agreement, a
mortgage severance agreement, an instrument given to perfect or correct a recorded
mortgage; or a release of lien of tax pursuant to this chapter or the internal revenue code.
Section 1401(f) of the Tax Law provides:

-6­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

"Interest in the real property" includes title in fee, a leasehold interest, a beneficial
interest, an encumbrance, development rights, air space and air rights, or any other
interest with the right to use or occupancy of real property or the right to receive rents,
profits or other income derived from real property. It shall also include an option or
contract to purchase real property. It shall not include a right of first refusal to purchase
real property.
Section 1405(b) of the Tax Law provides, in part:
The tax shall not apply to the following conveyances:
*

*

*

2. Conveyances which are or were used to secure a debt or other obligation;
   *

*

*

6. Conveyances to effectuate a mere change of identity or form of ownership or
   organization where there is no change in beneficial ownership, other than conveyances to
   a cooperative housing corporation of the real property comprising the cooperative
   dwelling or dwellings;
   Section 575.7(d)(1) of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Regulations (“Regulations”)
   provides:
   An interest in real property includes a leasehold interest and an option or contract
   to purchase real property. Therefore, the transfer of a leasehold interest, regardless of the
   term, or the transfer of an option or contract to purchase real property, by assignment or
   surrender, is a conveyance subject to tax.
   Section 575.10 of the Regulations provides, in part:
   To the extent that a conveyance effectuates a mere change of identity or form of
   ownership or organization and there is no change in beneficial ownership, the real estate
   transfer tax does not apply….
   Section 575.11 of the Regulations provides, in part:
   (a) The following are examples of conveyances which are subject to the real
   estate transfer tax.
   *

*

*

-7­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

(13) A conveyance of real property to an industrial development agency (IDA) by
a person who is not the beneficiary of the IDA financing, at the direction of such
beneficiary, with such beneficiary subsequently leasing the property from the IDA, is
subject to tax. In such a conveyance, the beneficiary of the IDA financing and not the
IDA is deemed to be the grantee, and therefore the exemption described at section
575.9(c)(1) of this Part does not apply.
(14) A conveyance of real property by an IDA to a person who is not the
beneficiary of the IDA financing where such conveyance is made at the direction of such
beneficiary is subject to tax. In such a conveyance, the beneficiary of the IDA financing
is deemed to be the grantor of the conveyance.
Opinion
When the intent of the parties to a sale-leaseback transaction is to secure a debt or
obligation and there is no change in the beneficial ownership, the transaction is not a conveyance
subject to the real estate transfer tax. In such case, the reconveyance of the fee interest at the
end of the lease represents the satisfaction of the instrument securing the debt or obligation. See
Matter of Atlantic Cement Company, Inc. v Murphy, 30 AD2d 456 (1968), aff’d 28 NY2d 502
(1971); Beth Israel Medical Center, Adv Op T&F, October 7, 1998, TSB-A-98(69)S, (3)R; Time
Warner, Inc., Adv Op T&F, July 26, 2001, TSB-A-01(7)R.
The provisions outlined in the MOU make it clear that Petitioner does not intend to
relinquish its control of the Property and will continue to enjoy the benefits and responsibilities
of ownership. Rather, the parties are entering into the Sale-Leaseback Transaction as a means of
securing Petitioner’s payments and obligations under the Lease, CCR Declaration, and
Development Agreement. Upon expiration or termination of the Lease, BBPDC will convey fee
title back to Petitioner or its successor-in-interest in release or satisfaction of its security interest.
Accordingly, viewed as a single financing transaction, the conveyance of fee title by Petitioner to
BBPDC, the creation of the Lease, and the reconveyance of fee title by BBPDC to Petitioner
upon expiration or termination of the Lease are not subject to real estate transfer tax. See
sections 1401(e) and 1405(b)(2) of the Tax Law and Urban Development Corporation (d/b/a
Empire State Development Corporation) and Milstein Brothers 42nd Street LLC, Adv Op T&F,
October 9, 2003, TSB-A-03(1)(R).
However, this conclusion is based upon the assumption that Petitioner is the initial
Tenant or the entities that may assume the obligations of Tenant have the same ownership as
Petitioner in the same proportionate share with no change in beneficial interest. To the extent
there is a change in beneficial interest in connection with the Lease or Reconveyance, the real
estate transfer tax will apply. Similar to the IDA transaction discussed in section 575.11(a)(14)
of the Regulations, in such a conveyance, Petitioner, as beneficial owner of the property, would

-8­
TSB-A-06(3.1)R
Real Estate Transfer Tax
April 30, 2007

be considered to be the grantor and not BBPDC. Consideration would be computed in
accordance with the applicable provisions of section 1401(d) of the Tax Law.
It should also be noted that a subsequent assignment of the Lease to a Permitted Assignee
or the Condo Board would be subject to tax to the extent there is a change in beneficial interest.
(See sections 575.7(d)(1) and 575.10 of the Regulations.)

DATED: April 30, 2007

NOTE:

/s/
Jonathan Pessen
Tax Regulations Specialist IV
Technical Services Division

The opinions expressed in Advisory Opinions are
limited to the facts set forth therein.