综合租赁:结构融资、财务会计和税务所有权

D. Weidner
{"title":"综合租赁:结构融资、财务会计和税务所有权","authors":"D. Weidner","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.219588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The term \"synthetic lease\" is in vogue in the world of commercial real estate finance. In a synthetic lease transaction, money is borrowed based on the financial strength of a tenant and on that tenant's agreement to pay rent. The lender expects the debt to be serviced from the rental obligation of the tenant rather than from the financial resources of the nominal owner and borrower. The lease is \"synthetic\" insofar as it is designed to achieve a blended treatment: the tenant reports it as an operating lease for financial accounting purposes but as a mortgage for federal income tax purposes. This article explains synthetic lease transactions in the broader context of asset securitization and structured finance and contrasts the treatment of synthetic leases under financial accounting standards, mortgage law and federal income tax law. Although leases have long been treated differently for financial accounting purposes and tax law purposes, the article takes the position that the present divergence is too great. It takes the position that what needs fixing is not the tax law but the standards of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (\"FASB\"). It argues that FASB should eliminate the sharp distinction between sale-leaseback transactions and transactions in which an SPE acquires title from a third party. In particular, it argues that FASB should require balance sheet disclosure when the sine qua non of a transaction is an ex ante agreement that the tenant, not the landlord, will report that it is the substantive owner of an encumbered asset for federal income tax purposes.","PeriodicalId":83094,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of corporation law","volume":"25 1","pages":"445"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Synthetic Leases: Structured Finance, Financial Accounting and Tax Ownership\",\"authors\":\"D. Weidner\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.219588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The term \\\"synthetic lease\\\" is in vogue in the world of commercial real estate finance. In a synthetic lease transaction, money is borrowed based on the financial strength of a tenant and on that tenant's agreement to pay rent. The lender expects the debt to be serviced from the rental obligation of the tenant rather than from the financial resources of the nominal owner and borrower. The lease is \\\"synthetic\\\" insofar as it is designed to achieve a blended treatment: the tenant reports it as an operating lease for financial accounting purposes but as a mortgage for federal income tax purposes. This article explains synthetic lease transactions in the broader context of asset securitization and structured finance and contrasts the treatment of synthetic leases under financial accounting standards, mortgage law and federal income tax law. Although leases have long been treated differently for financial accounting purposes and tax law purposes, the article takes the position that the present divergence is too great. It takes the position that what needs fixing is not the tax law but the standards of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (\\\"FASB\\\"). It argues that FASB should eliminate the sharp distinction between sale-leaseback transactions and transactions in which an SPE acquires title from a third party. In particular, it argues that FASB should require balance sheet disclosure when the sine qua non of a transaction is an ex ante agreement that the tenant, not the landlord, will report that it is the substantive owner of an encumbered asset for federal income tax purposes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of corporation law\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"445\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"27\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of corporation law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.219588\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of corporation law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.219588","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

摘要

“综合租赁”一词在商业房地产金融领域很流行。在综合租赁交易中,借钱是基于承租人的财务实力和承租人支付租金的协议。出借人希望从承租人的租赁义务中偿还债务,而不是从名义上的所有者和借款人的财政资源中偿还债务。该租赁是“合成的”,因为它旨在实现混合处理:承租人将其报告为财务会计目的的经营租赁,但将其报告为联邦所得税目的的抵押贷款。本文在资产证券化和结构性融资的更广泛背景下解释了综合租赁交易,并对比了财务会计准则、抵押法和联邦所得税法对综合租赁的处理。尽管长期以来,出于财务会计目的和税法目的对租赁进行了不同的处理,但本文认为目前的分歧太大。它采取的立场是,需要修正的不是税法,而是财务会计准则委员会(FASB)的标准。它认为FASB应该消除售后回租交易和SPE从第三方获得所有权的交易之间的明显区别。特别是,它认为FASB应该要求资产负债表披露,当交易的必要条件是一项事先协议,即承租人(而不是房东)将报告其是联邦所得税负担资产的实质性所有者时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Synthetic Leases: Structured Finance, Financial Accounting and Tax Ownership
The term "synthetic lease" is in vogue in the world of commercial real estate finance. In a synthetic lease transaction, money is borrowed based on the financial strength of a tenant and on that tenant's agreement to pay rent. The lender expects the debt to be serviced from the rental obligation of the tenant rather than from the financial resources of the nominal owner and borrower. The lease is "synthetic" insofar as it is designed to achieve a blended treatment: the tenant reports it as an operating lease for financial accounting purposes but as a mortgage for federal income tax purposes. This article explains synthetic lease transactions in the broader context of asset securitization and structured finance and contrasts the treatment of synthetic leases under financial accounting standards, mortgage law and federal income tax law. Although leases have long been treated differently for financial accounting purposes and tax law purposes, the article takes the position that the present divergence is too great. It takes the position that what needs fixing is not the tax law but the standards of the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB"). It argues that FASB should eliminate the sharp distinction between sale-leaseback transactions and transactions in which an SPE acquires title from a third party. In particular, it argues that FASB should require balance sheet disclosure when the sine qua non of a transaction is an ex ante agreement that the tenant, not the landlord, will report that it is the substantive owner of an encumbered asset for federal income tax purposes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信