How to Navigate Real Estate Impairment

Real estate entities are facing a spectrum of market variables and uncertainties, including the availability of financing, leasing activities, cost management, tenant demand and geopolitical factors. These evolving trends and risks are exerting pressure on real estate values.

Understanding the causes and effects of real estate impairment allows for better strategic planning. It enables proactive assessment and management of the real estate assets, financing and financial reporting obligations.

The challenge

When market conditions change or volatilities exist, historical cost reporting entities are required to assess real estate for potential impairment. The evaluation of impairment requires significant judgement and thoughtful analysis and is crucial to the accurate reflection of property values in financial statements and transparent financial reporting.

If an entity uses the fair value reporting framework, the following guidance related to potential triggering events and the calculation of fair value is relevant.

---

READ ALSO: Ready, Set, Cut!

---

The guidance

Accounting Standards Codification 360-10, Impairment and Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, provides the accounting guidance for the impairment of assets that are held for use, held for sale and to be disposed of by other means.

The following provides an overview of the evaluation of impairment for real estate held for use. Real estate assets that are held and used are those assets that an entity uses in its operations or intends to recover through use and for which the held-for-sale criteria have not been met.

Real estate assets that are classified as held and used are tested for impairment only when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the long-lived asset might not be recoverable. Accordingly, entities do not need to routinely perform tests of recoverability. However, entities are responsible for routinely assessing whether impairment indicators are present and should have systems and processes to document the evaluation of impairment indicators.

Under ASC 360, assets are evaluated for impairment at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are available. Many real estate owners maintain financial information at the property level. As such, the evaluation of impairment is performed at the individual property level.

The following three steps are required to identify, recognize and measure the impairment of real estate:

1. Identify triggering events
2. Perform a recoverability test
3. Calculate the impairment loss

Triggering events

The following are examples of potential triggering events for real estate. These examples are not all-inclusive and careful analysis of the factors for each real estate asset is required:

Significant underperformance—asset level

• Operating or cash flow losses
• Projections or forecasts that illustrate continuing losses
• Flat or negative rent growth patterns with increasing expenses
• Increasing vacancy rates or loss of a significant tenant
• Project lease-up occurring at much slower rates than originally forecast
• Projects under development or significant renovation during a down market
• Cost overruns or an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected

Market decline

• A significant decline in market prices for similar properties
• Negative market absorption of comparable space
• Macroeconomic and local conditions that negatively impact property values
• Damage to the property that reduces its value
• Changes that make the property obsolete or less desirable such as building heights, low parking ratios or size of property
• Overbuilding or hyper supply in the market for similar properties

Inability to hold the asset

• Increasing interest rates on variable debt or maturing debt
• Inability to refinance debt or unavailability of financing for similar assets
• Inability to service the debt, maturing debt, or debt defaults
• Significant legal factors or contingencies that could affect the value

Changes in use

• Changes in local government zoning or environmental regulations
• Inability to complete construction or renovations
• Using the asset in a modified manner
• Decisions to abandon an asset or sell an asset

Recoverability test

As asset should be tested for recoverability by comparing the net carrying value of the asset to the property’s undiscounted cash flows to be generated from the use and eventual disposition of that asset. Cash flow estimates should reflect conditions and assumptions that exist as of the triggering event date and should not reflect subsequent events.

Estimating cash flows for the recoverability test is subjective. The entity should support each assumption used, preferably with third-party data when available. The estimated cash flows should be consistent with other information the entity has available, such as forecasts, budgets or data for the asset or similar assets.

Current market data as well as future expectations of operations should be considered in preparing the estimated cash flows. For example, the possibility of lower market rents, declines in occupancy, or increases in costs. If future expenditures are required to maintain the asset and sustain the current cash flows, such cash outflow amounts should be included.

However, future capital improvements that would increase the service potential of the asset are excluded.

Analyze potential cash flow scenarios

If different courses of action or potential scenarios are under consideration, it may be necessary to prepare a range of future cash flow scenarios. ASC 360-10 allows entities to use either a single most likely estimate or a range of possible future cash flows.

For example, management may consider that there is a 10 percent possibility that the asset will be sold at the end of year one and a 90 percent chance it will be sold at the end of three years. If a range of possible future cash flows is considered, the scenarios are weighted for their respective probabilities.

The length of the cash flow period to be analyzed varies but is generally equal to the entity’s anticipated holding period of the asset, the debt expiration or an anticipated near-term sale of the asset.

The cash flow period is rarely more than 10 years and may only be one year if the owner’s intent is to sell the asset immediately. If the intent is not to sell the asset immediately, the owner will need to support their ability and intent to hold the asset over the estimated cash flow term.

If the undiscounted net cash flows exceed the net carrying value of the assets, an impairment should not be recognized. However, if the undiscounted cash flows do not exceed the net carrying value of the asset, an impairment loss should be recognized.

Calculating the impairment loss

If the asset fails the recoverability test, an impairment loss is recognized. The impairment charge is equal to the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds its fair value. The fair value is determined in accordance with ASC 820, which defines the fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset between market participants at the triggering event date.

The three most common approaches to valuing real estate include:

• Cost approach
• Sales comparison
• Income approach

In this situation, the income and sales approach are most commonly used.

ASC 820 does not prioritize the use of one valuation technique over another, but rather prioritizes the use of observable inputs over unobservable inputs when applying valuation techniques.

Therefore, the availability of comparable transactions and market data is crucial to the determination of fair value. However, in the early stages of a downturn, sales activity may be extremely limited and it would not be appropriate to use older sales to estimate value in the current market.

The sales comparison approach is often used as a reasonableness test for the income approach as opposed to a primary approach. Vacant land would still use the sales comparison approach first and then the income approach if a holding period is warranted for potential buyers.

Sales and transfer taxes costs must be considered in the reversion year of an income analysis to properly estimate the fair value of the asset. Sales and transfer taxes are not deducted from the fair value estimate of the asset overall but are deducted in the cash flows from disposition of the property to determine fair value. Likewise, these costs are not deducted in a sales comparison technique from the overall asset value.

The cash flow period analyzed in a fair value estimate is equal to the anticipated holding period of the asset by a potential market-based buyer, typically five to 10 years.

Carrie Shagat, CPA, of Moss Adams has practiced public accounting since 2001, serving both public and private real estate clients, including real estate investment trusts, investment funds, developers, commercial property owners and managers, broker dealers, and restaurants. Steve Klett, CPA, is the national leader of the firm’s real estate Consulting Valuation Services group. He focuses on fair value of real estate assets, debt and equity, corporate real estate, M&A, bankruptcy and reorganization, public and private tax incentives, and litigation and disputes. Moss Adams is a regular Viewpoint contributor. You can find their latest article here.