- 27 - The Opinion Letter Blanco, Tackabery, Combs & Matamoros, P.A., Kaplan’s law firm, has provided an opinion letter stating that various parts of the lease agreement indicate that title to the leasehold improvements immediately vested with KQC and that Texas had only possessory rights subject to the lease agreement. According to this letter, the following are specific provisions of the lease that support this interpretation: • In the event of an entire condemnation, the award for any such taking shall be paid to the Lessor; • Property owned by KQC is identified to in- clude “improvements erected or located on the Parcel, or affixed thereto”; • All insurance proceeds with regard to the building and improvements are the property of KQC; • Texas is required, upon termination of the lease, to surrender the possession of the premises, which includes all improvements. The Lease The Lease Agreement contains no specific mention of conveying the title to the improvements. See the Lease Agreement, dated April 1997, for specific lease terms and conditions negotiated between Texas and KQC. ISSUES Were the leasehold improvements made by Texas the property of KQC prior to the termination of the lease, thereby entitling KQC to a charitable contribution deduction under IRC �170(b)(1)(C) equal to the fair market value of the renovated property? CONCLUSION There is exposure in taking the position that once the improvements to the property were made [by TMC], title to such improvements vested immediately with KQC. Due to the substantial dollar amount involved, the IRS is likely to question the ownership of the improvements located on the property. Based on previous determina- tions made in this area, it is very likely that the IRS will take the position that these improvements shouldPage: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011