Content by Jim Duffy

Generally, the tax consequences to a debtor of debt cancellation depend in large part upon whether the debt is recourse or non-recourse debt. Non-recourse debt is debt where the lender has no recourse against the borrower, but its remedy for nonpayment is limited to property that has been pledged or mortgaged to secure the debt. By contrast, a lender making a recourse loan may have a security interest in property of the debtor, but will also have the ability to seek repayment from the debtor to the extent that the property securing the loan is not adequate for full repayment.

The tax consequences of cancellation of debt are generally as follows. For recourse debt if the lender forecloses (or the debtor gives a deed in lieu of foreclosure), the debtor (i) will have capital gain to the extent that the value of the property transferred to the lender exceeds the debtor’s tax basis in that property and (ii) will have ordinary income (“COD income”) to the extent that the amount of the canceled debt exceeds the value of the property transferred. By contrast, with respect to non-recourse debt, upon the transfer of the collateral to the lender, the debtor will have capital gain equal to the excess of the amount of debt forgiven over the lender’s tax basis in the property. The debtor does not have any COD income in that case even if the value of the collateral is less than the outstanding debt.

Whether a creditor’s security interest in collateral is perfected on either a recourse loan or a non-recourse loan does not affect the foregoing tax treatment of loan cancellation. The significance of perfection of a security interest is that it determines the priority of that security interest vis the other creditors. It does not affect the tax consequences of foreclosure or cancellation.

Bottom Line: If a lender forecloses on an unperfected security interest in collateral, the tax consequences will be the same as foreclosing on a perfected security interest.

Ebenezer Scrooge: Let us deal with the eviction notices for tomorrow, Mr. Cratchit.
Kermit the Frog: Uh, tomorrow’s Christmas, sir.
Ebenezer Scrooge: Very well. You may gift wrap them.” – A Muppet Christmas Carol

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of James Duffy James Duffy

Jim is a partner in Taft’s Tax practice and practices principally in the areas of federal tax law; tax credit financing; individual, partnership and corporate tax planning; M&A; tax-exempt organizations and general commercial and corporate law.

Jim has been actively practicing in the

Jim is a partner in Taft’s Tax practice and practices principally in the areas of federal tax law; tax credit financing; individual, partnership and corporate tax planning; M&A; tax-exempt organizations and general commercial and corporate law.

Jim has been actively practicing in the area of the New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC) program since its inception in 2001. He has organized community development entities (CDEs) and represented CDEs, borrowers and other parties in structuring and closing numerous NMTC transactions. Jim also advises clients regarding Qualified Opportunity Zone matters.

Jim advises LLCs, partnerships, corporations and individuals in connection with the formation of new companies, mergers and acquisitions, formation of joint ventures, like-kind exchanges, ownership succession planning, and general business operations. These clients are involved in a variety of industries, including banking, venture capital, real estate, construction, consulting and investing.

Jim also advises charitable and non-charitable tax-exempt organizations, including health care entities, schools, religious and civic organizations. In addition to advising management of these organizations with respect to matters pertaining to general operation and maintenance of tax-exempt status, Jim has assisted clients in forming, restructuring and dissolving tax-exempt organizations, as well as forming donor- advised funds.

Prior to joining the firm, Jim worked at the law firm of Lewis Rice and Fingersh in St. Louis, Missouri, where he concentrated his practice in federal and state taxation. He also clerked for the Hon. Robert P. Ruwe of the U.S. Tax Court in Washington, D.C.