INSTITUTIONAL MULTIFAMILY · IRS PUB. 5653 · REV. PROC. 87-56 · K-1 READY · BENCHMARKS 2026
MF · CostSeg INSTITUTIONAL
Pricing Send your deal →
METHODOLOGY · ENGINEERING FRAMEWORK

How the engineered study holds up under examination.

IRS Publication 5653 framework plus Revenue Procedure 87-56 MACRS class lives, applied to multifamily-specific component patterns. The standard partnership CPAs and IRS examiners both accept.

01 · FRAMEWORK

Authority and the methodology stack

Cost segregation is a methodology, not a special tax election. The Internal Revenue Code already permits accelerated depreciation on personal property and land improvements under MACRS — what the engineered study does is identify those components inside a building purchase and document the allocation defensibly.

For deeper reference material on each of these, see irsdepreciationrules.com.

02 · COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION

What gets identified inside a multifamily property

An engineered MF study identifies and prices components at the asset class level. The four buckets, with multifamily-typical examples:

5-YEAR · §1245 PERSONAL PROPERTY
In-unit appliances · cabinetry · carpet and vinyl flooring · decorative lighting · window treatments · ceiling fans · communications and security wiring · decorative millwork · signage · pool and spa equipment · gym equipment in common areas
7-YEAR · §1245
Office equipment in property-management offices · clubhouse and amenity furniture · select decorative items
15-YEAR · §1250 LAND IMPROVEMENTS
Asphalt and concrete paving · sidewalks · exterior lighting · site utilities · landscaping · irrigation · fencing · retaining walls · site drainage · monument signage · pool decking
27.5-YEAR · §1250 RESIDUAL BUILDING
Building shell and structure · integrated HVAC · plumbing core systems · electrical core service · roof · exterior envelope · structural framing · permanent interior walls · structural finishes

Component pricing draws from RSMeans construction-cost data adjusted for regional cost factors, building age, and finish-level grade derived from the property's measurable characteristics.

03 · RECLASSIFICATION RANGES

What reclass percentages look like for institutional MF

Reclassification percentages for multifamily are driven by amenity buildout, finish level, and unit-mix density.

Deal shape 5-yr 15-yr 27.5-yr
Stabilized core, basic finishes 6–8% 5–7% 85–89%
Value-add, mid-tier finishes 8–11% 6–9% 80–86%
Class-A new construction 10–14% 7–10% 76–83%
Garden-style, older vintage 5–7% 4–6% 87–91%

RANGES REFLECT TYPICAL OUTCOMES FROM ENGINEERED STUDIES ACROSS THE COST SEG SMART NETWORK. INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES VARY.

04 · LOOKBACK

Form 3115 §481(a) for prior-year acquisitions

Multifamily acquired in a prior year doesn't lose access to cost segregation. Section 481(a) permits a catch-up adjustment: all previously-missed accelerated depreciation lands in a single year on the current return, with no amended prior-year returns required.

Common use: value-add MF acquired 2–4 years prior where the original tax preparer ran straight-line 27.5-year only.

05 · DELIVERABLES

What lands in the CPA's inbox

Engagement output is a workpaper package, not just a report PDF.

  1. Engineered study report (40+ page PDF) — component breakdown, methodology citation, basis allocation, property characteristics
  2. Basis schedule (Excel) — formatted for partnership return integration
  3. MACRS reclassification tables — broken by recovery class with §1245/§1250 designation
  4. Form 3115 §481(a) calculation (if applicable) — formatted for direct attachment to the partnership return
  5. Methodology memo — short narrative explaining the framework
06 · AUDIT POSTURE

What happens if the partnership return is examined

IRS examination of a partnership return rarely focuses on cost segregation specifically — depreciation is a methodology question, not a facts question. When it does come up, the examiner works from Publication 5653 (their own playbook).

Audit defense for the specific study is an hourly engagement quoted separately if a deal is selected for examination. Historically rare; the standard methodology has been settled law since the late 1990s.

Concretely: the framework applied to a $18M value-add

Ready to apply this to a specific deal?

Send the deal →