In cases where a sale includes parcels of real property located in more than one county, a separate real estate excise tax affidavit must be filed with each county, however, the selling price for purposes of the graduated tax rates is unaffected. For more information on completing affidavits see WAC 458-61A-303.
Example 1. Single arm's length transaction.
Facts: Sam Moore has owned three separate but adjacent retail parcels located in Thurston County for several years. Mr. Moore decides to sell all three of the parcels, which share a parking lot, and lists/markets the properties as a single sale. Mr. Moore agrees to sell the properties to Michelle Smith. The sale occurs on June 1, 2020, with a total selling price of $1,000,000 for the three parcels of real property. Individually each property is valued by the Thurston County assessor at $250,000, $275,000, and $375,000 respectively.
Result: The total selling price for determining the applicable tax rate is $1,000,000.
Example 2. Separate arm's length transactions.
Facts: Assume the facts from example 1, except that Mr. Moore separately markets and lists each parcel of real property for sale. During the month of June 2020, Mr. Moore receives three separate offers for each parcel of real property, which he accepts. The purchaser of each property is a separate unrelated party. Mr. Moore is unrelated to each of the buyers and each of the sales are completed at arm's length. The selling price of each parcel of real property is $300,000, $300,000, and $400,000.
Result: Mr. Moore made three separate sales of real property. The REET rate applicable to each sale is determined by the selling price of each parcel of real property.
Example 3. Single arm's length transaction (property located in multiple counties).
Facts: Anna Carter owns and leases two buildings to the same lessee, which the lessee uses to operate his nail salon businesses located in Yelm, Washington and Roy, Washington. Rather than list the properties for sale with an agent, Ms. Carter decides to sell both properties to the lessee, James Wright. The sale occurs on August 1, 2020, and the selling price is $900,000.
Result: For purposes of determining the applicable tax rate, Ms. Carter must use the total selling price of $900,000 when applying the tax rate thresholds. Because the sale involves real property parcels located in multiple counties, a separate affidavit must be filed with each county.
Thus, in cases where a county assessor indicates the buyer's intended use of classified land reflects continued use of the land as agricultural land or timberland, the seller will treat the real property as agricultural land or timberland for purposes of determining the predominant use of real property included in the sale.
In cases where the county assessor indicates the buyer's intended use would remove the property from the agricultural land or timberland classification, the real property is nonclassified land for purposes of determining its predominant use for REET purposes.
Real property is only treated as classified land if:
Example 4. Real property sale involving classified and nonclassified land - Predominantly classified land.
Facts: A real property sale of 2 parcels of real property, Parcel A and Parcel B. The selling price is $1,500,000. Parcel A is classified land (agricultural land) and Parcel B is nonclassified land. Parcel A is 3,600,000 square feet. Parcel B is 400,000 square feet. The county assessed value of Parcel A is $150,000. The county assessed value of Parcel B is $1,100,000. The real property's predominant use is determined as follows:
Result: The predominant use of the property sold is for a classified purpose. If the buyer intends to continue using the land in a qualifying manner and the county assessor approves the real property for continued designation as classified land, the sale is subject to a flat tax rate of 1.28 percent. The tax liability is $25,600.
Example 5. Tax avoidance - Series of sales of a partial interest in a single parcel of real property.
Facts: In February 2020, Prime Office Inc. (Prime) agrees to buy a large office building in Seattle for $3,500,000 from King Commercial Inc. (King). In order to pay the lowest rate of tax, the parties agree to structure the sale as seven separate sales of a one-seventh interest in the parcel of real property, each with a selling price of $500,000 (1/7 x $3,500,000). The sales are completed and recorded during the month of February 2020. As a result of the arrangement, the total real estate excise tax paid on the transactions is $38,500 (1.1% tax rate x $3,500,000).
Result: The department will disregard the reported form of the separate transactions and treat the arrangement as a single sale, with a selling price of $3,500,000. As a result, the proper amount of tax due for the transaction is $74,550. The department will assess $36,050 in additional real estate excise tax.
Example 6. Tax avoidance - Multiple owners of a single real property parcel - Individual interests sold separately.
Facts: Juan and Li are business partners who each own a 50 percent interest in an LLC that owns one residential property in Washington. Juan and Li agree to sell the residential property to an unrelated third party, Mike, for $1,000,000. In order to reduce the amount of real estate excise tax due on the transaction, prior to completing the sale, Juan and Li each redeem their 50 percent interest in the LLC for a 50 percent interest in the real property held by the LLC. Afterwards, each party separately conveys their fifty percent interest in the property as separate sales to Mike. Juan and Li complete separate REET affidavits for these transactions. As a result of the arrangement, the total real estate excise tax paid on the transactions is $11,000 ((1.1% tax rate x $500,000 selling price) + (1.1% tax rate x $500,000 selling price)).
Result: The department will disregard the reported form of the separate transactions and treat the arrangement as a single sale, with a selling price of $1,000,000. As a result, the proper amount of tax due for the transaction is $11,900. The department will assess $900 in additional real estate excise tax.
Example 7. Tax avoidance - Sale of adjacent real property parcels separately.
Facts: Wei owns two adjacent parcels of real property in Kennewick, a retail shopping plaza and an adjacent parking lot used by patrons of the shopping plaza. Wei advertises the sale of both parcels for a single price of $1,920,000. Wei sells both parcels to Hui on June 15, 2020. Instead of completing a single real estate excise tax affidavit to include both parcels in the reported sale, Wei completes separate affidavits for each parcel, disclosing a selling price of $1,450,000 for the retail shopping plaza and $470,000 for the adjacent parking lot. As a result of the arrangement, the total real estate excise tax paid on the transactions is $22,830 ($17,660 for the retail shopping plaza and $5,170 for the parking lot).
Result: The department will disregard the form of the separate transactions and treat the arrangement as a single sale, with a selling price of $1,920,000. As a result, the proper amount of tax due for the transaction is $29,850. The department will assess $7,020 in additional real estate excise tax.
Example 8. Tax avoidance - Real property sale involving classified and nonclassified land.
Facts: Janice is selling 2 parcels of real property, Parcel A and Parcel B, to Samuel. The selling price is $5,000,000. Parcel A is classified land (agricultural land that is approved by the County Assessor for continued use by Samuel) and Parcel B is nonclassified land. Parcel A is 1,500,000 square feet. Parcel B is 500,000 square feet. The county assessed value of Parcel A is $900,000. The county assessed value of Parcel B is $3,600,000. The predominant use factors, discussed in subsection (7)(a) of this rule, for Parcels A and B are computed as follows:
* Square footage factor: 0.75 (1,500,000 sq. ft./2,000,000 sq. ft.);
* Value factor: 0.20 ($900,000/$4,500,000).
Adding the two factors and dividing by two yields 0.475 ((0.80 + 0.16)/2). Because this result is less than 0.5, a combined sale of Parcels A and B would be treated as nonclassified land subject to the graduated tax rates.
After determining that the combined sale of Parcels A and B would be subject to graduated tax rates and a total tax liability of $119,550, Janice and Samuel agree to restructure the transaction as two separate sales. Parcel A is sold for $1,000,000 and Parcel B is sold for $4,000,000, resulting in a REET liability of $102,350.
Result: Based on the intent of the parties to restructure the transaction as two separate transactions to avoid tax, the department will disregard the form of the reported sales and treat the sales as a single transaction.
Example 9. Tax avoidance - Real property sale involving classified and nonclassified land.
Facts: Property, Inc. is selling property used as a motor vehicle sales and service center, located in Seattle, WA (Property A). The area of Property A is 130,680 square feet, and its selling price is $23,500,000. Property, Inc. is separately selling a 297 acre parcel (12,937,320 square feet) of agricultural land located in Lincoln County (Property B). The selling price of Property B is $300,000.
Auto Dealer agrees to purchase Property A, which it will use to operate an auto dealership in Seattle. Property, Inc. and Auto Dealer also agree to include Property B in the sale (approved for continued use as classified land by the County Assessor). Auto Dealer is not capable of using the classified land as agricultural land. The agreement between Property, Inc. and Auto Dealer requires Property, Inc. to assist Auto Dealer in reselling Property B and cover certain selling expenses.
At the time of completing the sale, Property, Inc. completes REET affidavits reporting a combined sale of both properties subject to a flat REET rate of 1.28 percent for the entire transaction, and a total liability of $304,640 in state REET. Had Property A and Property B been sold separately, the total REET on the transactions would have been $678,390, a difference of $373,750. Thus, the potential tax savings exceeded the price of including Property B in the sale.
The parties do not provide a substantial nontax reason for arranging the sale of both properties as a single transaction.
Result: The circumstances indicate the transaction was designed to avoid tax. Therefore, the department will disregard the form and treat the transaction as two separate sales.
Wash. Admin. Code § 458-61A-1001