Commercial Real Estate Stimulus Pushed by Architecture 2030

A bigger tax deduction for energy-efficiency improvements would benefit the troubled commercial real estate (CRE) sector and help prevent climate change, according to Ed Mazria, FAIA, and the nonprofit Architecture 2030. In a new report, “The Imminent Commercial Real Estate Crisis and The CRE Solution,” Architecture 2030 argues for increasing the federal Section 179D tax deduction for efficiency improvements to commercial properties from $1.80/ft² to $3–$9/ft² for projects meeting the energy reduction targets of the 2030 Challenge.

The proposed solution is well timed. As discussed in the report, the construction industry lost 35,000 jobs in May alone (mostly in the commercial sector); CRE values have dropped 40%, and CRE transactions have decreased 90% in only three years. CRE loans totaling an estimated $200–$300 billion will be due in 2011—many will require refinancing, while some are already in default.

Mazria’s 2030 Challenge calls for an immediate 60% reduction in fossil fuel use with a goal of carbon neutrality by 2030. Through the “CRE Solution,” Mazria proposes a tiered series of tax deductions for buildings meeting and exceeding the 60% goal (which is embedded in the Waxman-Markey Climate Change Bill that’s in Congress). According to the report, the result would be at least $6 billion in tax benefits resulting in an invigorated CRE market with $73.4 billion in spending and one million new jobs.

According to experts EBN spoke with, however, Mazria’s CRE solution doesn’t do enough to address the limitations of the current 179D deduction. According to Paul Naumoff, principal and national director for business incentives and tax credits at accounting firm Ernst & Young, 179D and proposals to increase the deductible have the following limitations:

• It is essentially an accelerated depreciation—it allows an immediate deduction on energy-efficiency investments, but it also reduces the basis that the owner can depreciate in the future. In this way, it offers more of a timing benefit than an overall financial benefit, and the increased certification steps required by 179D may not be worth the trouble.

• Many companies are already losing money and not paying much in taxes, so the 179D deduction is not helpful. Naumoff suggests transforming the deduction into a refundable tax credit or grant instead.

Naumoff suggests that the most beneficial options right now for property owners are utility incentives.

– Emily Catacchio

For more information:

Architecture 2030
www.architecture2030.org

---

There are no comments for this page yet.

Log in to add comments - Help with comments

---

---

IMAGE CREDITS:
1. Source: Architecture 2030, “The CRE Solution”

DISCUSSIONS There are no comments for this page yet. Log in to add comments RELATED GREEN DESIGN Government Finance Programs More related green design

BuildingGreen.com