2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Rayman, you're right that tax rates are lower for timberland investors than for old timber companies (Vertically-Integrated Forest Products Companies, VIFPCs). This is because the VIFPCs are taxed as C-Corporations (see page 5), which means they are taxed at the shareholder and corporate levels. This is referred to as "double taxation." Both REITs and TIMOs avoid this double taxation.

In addition, the long-term capital gains rate is beneficial for corporations (see page 4). Basically, this rate places a cap on taxable income.

Other policies, as well, have encouraged the ownership transition, including a federal act from 1974 (ERISA) that mandates portfolio diversification for pension funds and has led many pension funds to look to timber as an alternative investment. But taxes are, indeed, a primary reason that the timberlands are changing hands.

-Erin Kelly

posted 3 years, 8 months ago
view in context