Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey100
Good question, but here's the way I see it. Had the bonds issued been taxable bonds, they would have cost the borrowers less than nontaxable bonds, assuming they both had the same coupon rate. We'd have to go back in time and see the bond prices at the time of bond issuance to see exactly the spread between taxable and non-taxable bond prices. Anyways, the developer would have had to sell more bonds to obtain the same amount of money, so he would have paid a similar amount of interest. Not to mention there may have been additional tax writeoffs, depreciation etc., to be considered. I am no bond expert, and neither I expect are you, but we both know bond issuance and underwriting, etc., is complicated.
My chief complaint has been that the developer was warned back in 2003 about the legalities of the bond issuance, and he continued to do so. Here's what W. Mark Scott, director of the IRS' tax-exempt bond division, wrote to the district on Jan. 29, 2003, when the bonds got a thumbs up after an earlier audit.
"Our closing of these cases, however, should not be construed as an approval of your method of operations. We have concerns regarding: the amount of control the developer has over the issuer; the questions of value of the assets sold by the developer to the issuer as these are not arm's length [transactions]; the treatment of income and expenses (whether income is properly reported and expenses deducted only once); compliance with state law."
Please note above , the IRS said directly that they had concerns with the developer's compliance with state law. I'm sorry you don't like my term "dancing around the law" but when they were warned and continued to push the limits of the law, so be it.
Now, many years later, if the bonds have to be re-issued and we the residents have to pay the IRS penalties, we are concerned about the financial consequences to The Villages and our amenities.
|
Couple of things.
The developer most assuredly has a staff of legal and tax people at his disposal. I would expect their advice to him was that the bnd issue was legal and proper. The IRS expresses some concern but closes the case. Don't forget the IRS is a department that tells taxpayers to come to them for advice on their tax returns, but, if the advice they give is faulty, the taxpayer owes the tax plus interest and penalties. I don't have such confidence in the IRS that I would automatically assume everything they say is 100% accurate. I suspect Morse went back to his advisors and had them review the issue and was told it was proper. Regarding state law, I remember the IRS has in their recent (last few years) review made statements that indicated they did not understand the CDD form of governance as established in Florida.
I would not say I'm completely comfortable with the CDD situation either. It seems that efforts have been made to further dilute the ability of the residential CDDs to have any say in finances especially with regards to the Project Wide funding. However, might this also somewhat shield the residents in this IRS dispute? The dispute is nominally between the central districts and the IRS. The amenities fee is capped by CPI. So the risk to us is the central district having to deplete its funds to pay the government or the bondholders or ??? and the effect that may have on maintaining the amenities to the level we are accustomed. I don't see any way the residents are on the hook for the total that may be due.
The Morse family has created a wonderful community here through some risk and hard work. They do not appear to me to be the type that would sit back and let the community go down the drain by allowing the amenities to deteriorate. They still have significant investments in this community, and they live here as well. Yes, you can sell the commercial property, the real estate office, and the championship golf courses. But the negative publicity of the residents being cheated out of the lifestyle they bought into while the family bolts for greener pastures would assuredly cut into the selling price. Truth is, they can likely make much more money by keeping this place up to the usual standard.
But I agree we need to be alert and aware.