If any hospitality managers that we may engage do not qualify as “eligible independent contractors,” or if our hospitality properties are not “qualified lodging facilities,” we may fail to qualify as a REIT. Rent paid by a lessee that is a “related party tenant” of ours generally will not be qualifying income for purposes of the two gross income tests applicable to REITs, but an exception is provided, however, for leases of “qualified lodging facilities” to a TRS so long as the hotels are managed by an “eligible independent contractor” and certain other requirements are satisfied. We expect to lease all or substantially all of our hotels to our TRS lessee. We expect that the TRS lessee will engage hotel managers and third- party property managers that are intended to qualify as “eligible independent contractors.” Among other requirements, in order to qualify as an eligible independent contractor, the hotel manager must not own, directly or through its equity owners, more than 35% of our outstanding stock, and no person or group of persons can own more than 35% of our outstanding stock and the equity interests of the hotel manager, taking into account certain ownership attribution rules. The ownership attribution rules that apply for purposes of these 35% thresholds are complex, and monitoring actual and constructive ownership of our stock by our hotel managers and their owners may not be practical. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that these ownership levels will not be exceeded. In addition, for a hotel management company to qualify as an eligible independent contractor, such company or a related person must be actively engaged in the trade or business of operating “qualified lodging facilities” (as defined below) for one or more persons not related to the REIT or its TRS at each time that such company enters into a hotel management contract with a TRS or its TRS lessee. No assurances can be provided that any hotel managers that we may engage will in fact comply with this requirement in the future. Failure to comply with this requirement would require us to find other managers for future contracts, and if we hired a management company without knowledge of the failure, it could jeopardize our status as a REIT. Finally, each property that we lease to our TRS lessee must be a “qualified lodging facility.” A “qualified lodging facility” is a hotel, motel, or other establishment more than one-half of the dwelling units in which are used on a transient basis, including customary amenities and facilities, provided that no wagering activities are conducted at or in connection with such facility by any person who is engaged in the business of accepting wagers and who is legally authorized to engage in such business at or in connection with such facility. The REIT provisions of the Code provide only limited guidance for making determinations under the requirements for qualified lodging facilities, and there can be no assurance that these requirements will be satisfied. Recharacterization of sale-leaseback transactions may cause us to lose our REIT status. We may purchase real properties and lease them back to the sellers of such properties. We cannot guarantee that the IRS will not challenge our characterization of any sale-leaseback transactions. In the event that any such sale-leaseback transaction is challenged and recharacterized as a financing transaction or loan for federal income tax purposes, deductions for depreciation and cost recovery relating to such property would be disallowed. If a sale-leaseback transaction were so recharacterized, we might fail to satisfy the REIT qualification “asset tests” or the “gross income tests” and, consequently, lose our REIT status. Alternatively, the amount of our REIT taxable income could be recalculated which might also cause us to fail to meet the distribution requirement for a taxable year. Sales of our properties at gains are potentially subject to the prohibited transaction tax, which could reduce the return on a stockholder’s investment. Our ability to dispose of property is restricted as a result of our REIT status. Under applicable provisions of the Code regarding prohibited transactions by REITs, we will be subject to a 100% tax on any gain realized on the sale or other disposition of any property (other than foreclosure property) we own, directly or through a subsidiary entity, including our Operating Partnership, but excluding our TRSs, that is deemed to be inventory or property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of trade or business unless a safe harbor applies under the Code. Whether property is inventory or otherwise held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business depends on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding each property. We intend to avoid the 100% prohibited transaction tax by (i) conducting activities that may otherwise be considered prohibited transactions through a TRS, (ii) conducting our operations in such a manner so that no sale or other disposition of an asset we own, directly or through any subsidiary other than a TRS, will be treated as a prohibited transaction, or (iii) structuring certain dispositions of our properties to comply with certain safe harbors available under the Code. However, no assurance can be given that any particular property will not be treated as inventory or property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business or that a safe harbor will apply. Characterization of the repurchase agreements we enter into to finance our investments as sales for tax purposes rather than as secured borrowing transactions could adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT. We have entered into repurchase agreements with a variety of counterparties to finance assets in which we invest. When we enter into a repurchase agreement, we generally sell assets to our counterparty to the agreement and receive cash from the counterparty. The counterparty is obligated to resell the assets back to us at the end of the term of the transaction. We believe that, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we will be treated as the owner of the assets that are the subject of repurchase agreements and that the repurchase agreements will be treated as secured borrowing transactions notwithstanding that such agreements may transfer
57
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker