In such scenarios, taxpayers often turn to a “qualified intermediary” to facilitate the exchange. The deferred exchange regulations outline four secure avenues that involve specific security and guarantee arrangements. The use of a qualified intermediary is a common approach, as it’s one of the safe harbors that can demonstrate that the taxpayer hasn’t actually received money or other property. A qualified intermediary enters into an agreement with the taxpayer to facilitate the exchange. This intermediary acquires the taxpayer’s property, transfers it to another party, and transfers replacement property to the taxpayer.
The identity of the person acquiring the taxpayer’s property and the person from whom the taxpayer receives property may be known or unknown to the taxpayer – everything is managed through the intermediary.
Note: A qualified intermediary cannot be the taxpayer’s agent, such as someone who acted as the taxpayer’s employee, attorney, accountant, investment banker or broker, or real estate agent or broker within the two years preceding the transfer. Additionally, the intermediary cannot have a certain relationship to the taxpayer. An example is the case of Frank J. Blangiardo, where a like-kind exchange failed because there wasn’t a direct exchange of like-kind property. Even though an intermediary was used, it was determined that the intermediary (the taxpayer’s son, who was an attorney) was not qualified due to his relationship to the taxpayer.
The qualified intermediary is responsible for ensuring that the exchange occurs within the required timeframe, that legal obligations such as title recordings are fulfilled, and that the taxpayer does not receive cash or unlike property until the exchange is finalized.
In most cases, the exchange is considered complete when the title to the replacement property is transferred to the taxpayer.