Conservation Easement Deductions: A Primer on Key Provisions

Share this Article
Facebook Icon LinkedIn Icon Twitter Icon
Jason B. Freeman

Jason B. Freeman

Managing Member


Mr. Freeman is the founding member of Freeman Law, PLLC. He is a dual-credentialed attorney-CPA, author, law professor, and trial attorney.

Mr. Freeman has been named by Chambers & Partners as among the leading tax and litigation attorneys in the United States and to U.S. News and World Report’s Best Lawyers in America list. He is a former recipient of the American Bar Association’s “On the Rise – Top 40 Young Lawyers” in America award. Mr. Freeman was named the “Leading Tax Controversy Litigation Attorney of the Year” for the State of Texas for 2019 and 2020 by AI.

Mr. Freeman has been recognized multiple times by D Magazine, a D Magazine Partner service, as one of the Best Lawyers in Dallas, and as a Super Lawyer by Super Lawyers, a Thomson Reuters service. He has previously been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Top 100 Up-And-Coming Attorney in Texas.

Mr. Freeman currently serves as the chairman of the Texas Society of CPAs (TXCPA). He is a former chairman of the Dallas Society of CPAs (TXCPA-Dallas). Mr. Freeman also served multiple terms as the President of the North Texas chapter of the American Academy of Attorney-CPAs. He has been previously recognized as the Young CPA of the Year in the State of Texas (an award given to only one CPA in the state of Texas under 40).

The IRS has been focused on enforcement efforts targeting conservation easement transactions.  And IRS data indicates that more enforcement efforts lie ahead.  The Senate Finance Committee, which has been engaged in a years-long investigation into the tax play, recently released a report noting a “significant increase in conservation easement transactions,” and its chairman expressed concerns about what he characterized as the “serious and persistent abuse of the syndicated conservation easement program.”  The IRS, in virtual lockstep, has used similar rhetoric, vowing to use “[e]very available enforcement option . . . including civil penalties and . . . criminal investigations” to carry out its “pursuit of everyone involved in the creation, marketing, promotion and wrongful acquisition of artificial, highly inflated deductions” associated with syndicated conservation easement transactions.  See our prior blog post here.

This enforcement focus has given rise to newfound interest—both from politicians and the public—in conservation easements, though they are anything but a new phenomenon.  And while the concept and focus has given rise to a fair amount of public fodder and rhetoric, the truth is that the tax-compliance aspects of conservation easements are quite complex.  In this article, we will canvass a number of the fundamental tax provisions with respect to conservation easement deductions.

The Internal Revenue Code permits a deduction for a charitable contribution, as that term is defined in section 170(c).  Under Section 170(c), a charitable contribution is a contribution or gift to or for the use of certain qualifying organizations.

Under section 170(f)(3)(A), a taxpayer generally may not take a deduction for a contribution of less than the taxpayer’s entire interest in property.  Section 170(f)(3)(B)(iii), however, provides an exception to this general rule when it comes to a “qualified conservation contribution.”

Section 170(h)(1) and section 1.170A-14(a) of the Treasury Regulations define a “qualified conservation contribution” as a contribution of a qualified real property interest to a qualified organization exclusively for conservation purposes.

All of these phrases have some fairly nuanced definitions.  Let’s explore them below:

The Exclusivity and Perpetuity Requirements

In order to qualify, the Code and the regulations provide that a contribution must be exclusively for conservation purposes. The Code provides that a contribution shall not be treated as exclusively for conservation purposes unless the conservation purpose is protected in perpetuity. Section 1.170A-14(g)(1) of the regulations provides that any interest retained by the donor (and the donor’s successors in interest) must be subject to legally enforceable restrictions (for example, by recordation in the land records of the jurisdiction in which the property is located) that will prevent use of the donor’s retained interest that is inconsistent with the conservation purposes of the donation.

Section 1.170A-14(e)(2) sets forth specific rules relating to inconsistent use. It provides that a deduction will not be allowed if the contribution would accomplish one of the enumerated conservation purposes but would permit destruction of other significant conservation interests.

Section 1.170A-14(g)(5)(i) of the regulations requires that for a deduction to be allowable under this section the donor must make available to the donee, prior to the time the donation is made, documentation sufficient to establish the condition of the property at the time of the gift in the case of a donation made after February 13, 1986 of any qualified real property interest when the donor reserves rights the exercise of which may impair the conservation interests associated with the property.  The referenced documentation is designed to protect the conservation interests associated with the property, which could be adversely affected by the exercise of the reserved rights even though they are protected in perpetuity by the easement. This documentation may include:

Required Right of Inspection and Legal Remedies.  Section 1.170A-14(g)(5)(ii) provides that the donee must have a right of inspection and legal remedies. It states that in the case of any donation referred to in paragraph (g)(5)(i) of that section, the donor must agree to notify the donee, in writing, before exercising any reserved right, e.g. the right to extract certain minerals. The terms of the donation must provide a right of the donee to enter the property at reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the property to determine if there is compliance with the terms of the donation. Additionally, the terms of the donation must provide a right of the donee to enforce the conservation restrictions by appropriate legal proceedings, including but not limited to, the right to require the restoration of the property to its condition at the time of the donation.

Changed Circumstances.  Section 1.170A-14(g)(6)(i) provides that if circumstances change making impossible or impractical the continued use of the property for conservation purposes, then the easement will be treated as protected in perpetuity if the restrictions are extinguished by judicial proceedings and all of the proceeds received by the donee are used by the donee in a manner consistent with the conservation purposes of the original contribution. Section 1.170A-14(g)(6)(ii) provides that the donor must agree that the donation of the perpetual conservation restriction gives rise to a property right with a fair market value that is at least equal to the proportionate value that the perpetual conservation restriction at the time of the gift bears to the value of the property as a whole. It further provides that proportionate value of the donee’s property rights shall remain constant.


Conservation Easement Defense 

In recent years, the IRS has prioritized tax enforcement efforts against syndicated conservation easements that it believes to be abusive. Freeman Law’s tax controversy practice regularly represents clients in conservation easement tax disputes. Schedule a consultation or call (214) 984-3000 to discuss your conservation easement concerns or questions.