UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K/A
Amendment No. 2 to Form 10-K
(Mark One)
[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000
-----------------------------------------------------
OR
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934 [NO FEE REQUIRED]
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 0-20029
-------
American Income Fund I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership
-------------------------------------------------------------
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Massachusetts 04-3127244
(State or other jurisdiction of (IRS Employer
incorporation or organization) Identification No.)
88 Broad Street, Boston, MA 02110
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code (617) 854-5800
--------------
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act NONE
----
Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
883,829.31 Units Representing Limited Partnership Interest
----------------------------------------------------------
(Title of class)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No
-
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item
405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained herein,
to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definite proxy or information
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any
amendment to this Form 10-K. [ ]
State the aggregate market value of the voting stock held by nonaffiliates
of the registrant. Not applicable. Securities are nonvoting for this purpose.
Refer to Item 12 for further information.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
After American Income Fund I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership ("the
Partnership") filed its Annual Report on Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1 to Form
10-K (the "2000 10-K") for the year ended December 31, 2000 with the United
States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), the Partnership determined
that the accounting treatment for the loan receivable from Echelon Residential
Holdings LLC ("Echelon Residential Holdings") required revision, as explained
below.
As reported in the 2000 10-K, on March 8, 2000, the Partnership and 10
affiliated partnerships (the ''Exchange Partnerships'') collectively loaned $32
million to Echelon Residential Holdings, a newly formed real estate company.
The Partnership's loan to Echelon Residential Holdings is $4,790,000. Echelon
Residential Holdings, through a wholly owned subsidiary (Echelon Residential
LLC), used the loan proceeds to acquire various real estate assets from Echelon
International Corporation, an unrelated Florida-based real estate company. The
loan has a term of 30 months, maturing on September 8, 2002 and an annual
interest rate of 14% for the first 24 months and 18% for the final six months.
Interest accrues and compounds monthly and is payable at maturity. In connection
with the transaction, Echelon Residential Holdings has pledged a security
interest in all of its right, title and interest in and to its membership
interests in Echelon Residential LLC to the Exchange Partnerships as collateral.
The loan receivable was previously accounted for and reported in accordance
with the guidance for Acquisition, Development and Construction Arrangements
("ADC arrangements") in the Partnership's financial statements as of and for the
year December 31, 2000. The loan was presented as an investment in a real
estate venture and was presented net of the Partnership's share of losses in
Echelon Residential Holdings. The Partnership was allocated its proportionate
share of the unconsolidated real estate venture's net loss, excluding the
interest expense on the loan, based on the balance of its loan receivable in
relation to the real estate venture's total equity and notes payable, including
the ADC arrangements. For the period ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership's
share of losses in Echelon Residential Holdings was $363,578 and was reflected
on the Statement of Operations as ''Partnership's share of unconsolidated real
estate venture's loss''.
Subsequent to the issuance of the Partnership's financial statements for
the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership determined that the loan
receivable should be accounted for consistent with its legal form and the
Partnership should recognize the interest income, as calculated per the
contractual terms of the loan agreement to the extent such interest income was
evaluated as likely to be collected. The loan receivable and related interest
should be evaluated for impairment under Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 114 "Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan".
Accordingly, the Partnership reversed the proportionate share of
losses in Echelon Residential Holdings of $363,578 previously recorded and
recognized interest income of $587,020, resulting in a decrease in the net loss
for the year ended December 31, 2000 of $950,598, or $1.02 per limited
partnership unit. As a result, the accompanying financial statements for the
year ended December 31, 2000 have been restated from the amounts previously
reported. In addition, during the second quarter of 2001 the General Partner
determined that recoverability of the loan receivable had been impaired and at
June 30, 2001 recorded an impairment of $419,125, reflecting the General
Partner's current assessment of the amount of loss that is likely to be incurred
by the Partnership. In addition to the write-down recorded at June 30, 2001, the
Partnership reserved all accrued interest of $777,417 recorded on the loan
receivable through March 31, 2001 and has ceased accruing interest on its loan
receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings, effective April 1, 2001.
A summary of the significant effects of the restatement is as follows:
As of and for the Year Ended
December 31, 2000:
As
Previously As
Statement of Operations Reported Restated
------------ ------------
Income:
Operating lease revenue $ 1,254,943 $ 1,254,943
Sales-type lease revenue 2,231 2,231
Interest income 167,138 167,138
Interest income - loan receivable - 587,020
Interest income - affiliate 93,872 93,872
Gain on sale of equipment 186,364 186,364
------------ ------------
Total income 1,704,548 2,291,568
------------ ------------
Expenses:
Depreciation 698,894 698,894
Interest expense 222,126 222,126
Equipment management fees - affiliate 60,456 60,456
Operating expenses - affiliate 599,807 599,807
Partnership's share of unconsolidated
real estate venture's loss 363,578 -
------------ ------------
Total expenses 1,944,861 1,581,283
------------ ------------
Net income (loss) $ (240,313) $ 710,285
============ ============
Net income (loss) per limited partnership unit $ (0.26) $ 0.76
============ ============
Balance Sheet Data:
Total assets $13,391,568 $14,342,166
============ ============
Total liabilities $ 2,801,857 $ 2,801,857
Partners' capital (deficit)
General Partner (444,865) (397,335)
Limited Partnership Interests 11,034,576 11,937,644
------------ ------------
Total partners' capital $10,589,711 $11,540,309
============ ============
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E,
A MASSACHUSETTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
FORM 10-K/A
AMENDMENT NO. 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PART I
Item 1. Business 3
Item 2. Properties 7
Item 3. Legal Proceedings 7
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders 7
PART II
Item 5. Market for the Partnership's Securities and Related Security Holder Matters 8
Item 6. Selected Financial Data 10
Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 10
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks 18
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 19
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 42
PART III
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Partnership 43
Item 11. Executive Compensation 44
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management 45
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions 46
PART IV
Item 14. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules and Reports on Form 8-K 48
PART I
Item 1. Business.
- -------------------
(a) General Development of Business
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership (the
"Partnership"), was organized as a limited partnership under the Massachusetts
Uniform Limited Partnership Act (the "Uniform Act") on August 29, 1991, for the
purpose of acquiring and leasing to third parties a diversified portfolio of
capital equipment. Partners' capital initially consisted of contributions of
$1,000 from the General Partner (AFG Leasing VI Incorporated) and $100 from the
Initial Limited Partner (AFG Assignor Corporation). On December 4, 1991, the
Partnership concluded an Interim Closing and issued 587,079.96 units of limited
partnership interest (the "Units") to 654 investors for a purchase price of
$14,569,875. Included in the 587,079.96 units are 4,284.96 bonus units. On
January 31, 1992 the Partnership concluded its Final Closing. An additional
296,749.35 units (including 626.35 bonus units) were purchased for an additional
purchase price of $7,403,075 and an additional 735 investors became Limited
Partners of the Partnership. As of January 31, 1992, an aggregate total of
883,829.31 units (including 4,911.31 bonus units) had been purchased for an
aggregate total purchase price of $21,972,950 and an aggregate of 1,089
investors had become Limited Partners of the Partnership. The Partnership has
one General Partner, AFG Leasing VI Incorporated, a Massachusetts corporation
formed in 1990 and an affiliate of Equis Financial Group Limited Partnership
(formerly known as American Finance Group), a Massachusetts limited partnership
("EFG" or the "Manager"). The common stock of the General Partner is owned by
EFG. The General Partner is not required to make any other capital
contributions except as may be required under the Uniform Act and Section 6.1(b)
of the Amended and Restated Agreement and Certificate of Limited Partnership
(the "Restated Agreement, as amended", or the "Partnership Agreement").
(b) Financial Information About Industry Segments
The Partnership is engaged in only one operating industry segment:
financial services. Historically, the Partnership has acquired capital
equipment and leased the equipment to creditworthy lessees on a full payout or
operating lease basis. Full payout leases are those in which aggregate
undiscounted noncancellable rents equal or exceed the acquisition cost of the
leased equipment. Operating leases are those in which the aggregate
undiscounted noncancellable rental payments are less than the acquisition cost
of the leased equipment. Industry segment data is not applicable. In the year
ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership also entered into a sales-type lease,
described in Note 3 to the financial statements included in Item 8 herein.
Industry segment data is not applicable.
See "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations" included in Item 7 herein.
In connection with a preliminary settlement agreement for a Class Action
Lawsuit described in Note 11 to the financial statements, included in Item 8
herein, the court permitted the Partnership to invest in any new investment,
including but not limited to new equipment or other business activities, subject
to certain limitations. On March 8, 2000, the Partnership loaned $4,790,000 to a
newly formed real estate company, Echelon Residential Holdings LLC ("Echelon
Residential Holdings") to finance the acquisition of real estate assets by that
company. Echelon Residential Holdings, through a wholly owned subsidiary
(Echelon Residential LLC), used the loan proceeds, along with the loan proceeds
from similar loans by ten affiliated partnerships representing $32 million in
the aggregate, to acquire various real estate assets from Echelon International
Corporation, an unrelated Florida-based real estate company. Echelon
Residential Holding's interest in Echelon Residential LLC is pledged pursuant to
a pledge agreement to the partnerships as collateral for the loans.
(c) Narrative Description of Business
The Partnership was organized to acquire a diversified portfolio of capital
equipment subject to various full payout and operating leases and to lease the
equipment to third parties as income-producing investments. More specifically,
the Partnership's primary investment objectives were to acquire and lease
equipment that would:
1. Generate quarterly cash distributions;
2. Preserve and protect Partnership capital; and
3. Maintain substantial residual value for ultimate sale.
The Partnership has the additional objective of providing certain federal
income tax benefits.
The Closing Date of the Offering of Units of the Partnership was December
4, 1991. Significant operations commenced with the initial purchase of
equipment and the associated lease commitments on December 4, 1991. The
Partnership concluded its Final Closing on January 31, 1992. The acquisition of
the equipment and its associated leases is described in Note 4 to the financial
statements included in Item 8, herein. The Restated Agreement, as amended,
provides that the Partnership will terminate no later than December 31, 2002.
However, the Partnership is a Nominal Defendant in a Class Action Lawsuit, the
outcome of which could significantly alter the nature of the Partnership's
organization and its future business operations. The General Partner does not
expect that the Partnership will be dissolved until such time that the Class
Action Lawsuit is settled or adjudicated.
The Partnership has no employees; however, it is managed pursuant to a
Management Agreement with EFG or one of its affiliates. The Manager's role,
among other things, is to (i) evaluate, select, negotiate, and consummate the
acquisition of equipment, (ii) manage the leasing, re-leasing, financing, and
refinancing of equipment, and (iii) arrange the resale of equipment. The
Manager is compensated for such services as provided for in the Restated
Agreement, as amended, described in Item 13 herein, and in Note 8 to the
financial statements included in Item 8, herein.
The Partnership's investment in equipment is, and will continue to be,
subject to various risks, including physical deterioration, technological
obsolescence, credit quality and defaults by lessees. A principal business risk
of owning and leasing equipment is the possibility that aggregate lease revenues
and equipment sale proceeds will be insufficient to provide an acceptable rate
of return on invested capital after payment of all debt service costs and
operating expenses. Another risk is that the credit quality of the lease may
deteriorate after a lease is made. In addition, the leasing industry is very
competitive. The Partnership is subject to considerable competition when
re-leasing or selling equipment at the expiration of its lease terms. The
Partnership must compete with lease programs offered directly by manufacturers
and other equipment leasing companies, many of which have greater resources,
including limited partnerships and trusts organized and managed similarly to the
Partnership and including other EFG sponsored partnerships and trusts, which may
seek to re-lease or sell equipment within their own portfolios to the same
customers as the Partnership. The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 and
the commencement of hostilities thereafter may adversely affect the
Partnership's ability to re-lease or sell equipment. In addition, default by a
lessee under a lease may cause equipment to be returned to the Partnership at a
time when the General Partner or the Manager is unable to arrange for the
re-lease or sale of such equipment. This could result in the loss of anticipated
revenue.
The Partnership holds a note receivable from and common stock in Semele
Group Inc. ("Semele"). The note receivable is subject to a number of risks
including, Semele's ability to make loan payments which is dependent upon the
liquidity of Semele and primarily Semele's ability to sell or refinance its
principal real estate asset consisting of an undeveloped 274-acre parcel of land
near Malibu, California. The market value of the Partnership's investment in
Semele common stock has generally declined since the Partnership's initial
investment in 1997. In 1998, the General Partner determined that the decline in
market value of the stock was other-than-temporary and wrote down the
Partnership's investment. Subsequently, the market value of the Semele common
stock has fluctuated. The market value of the stock could decline in the future.
Gary D. Engle, President and Chief Executive Officer of EFG the sole shareholder
of the General Partner is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Semele and
James A. Coyne, Executive Vice President of EFG is Semele's President and Chief
Operating Officer. Mr. Engle and Mr. Coyne are both members of the Board of
Directors of, and own significant stock in, Semele.
The loan made by the Partnership to Echelon Residential Holdings is, and
will continue to be, subject to various risks, including the risk of default by
Echelon Residential Holdings, which could require the Partnership to foreclose
under the pledge agreement on its interests in Echelon Residential LLC. The
ability of Echelon Residential Holdings to make loan payments and the amount the
Partnership may realize after a default would be dependent upon the risks
generally associated with the real estate lending business including, without
limitation, the existence of senior financing or other liens on the properties,
general or local economic conditions, property values, the sale of properties,
interest rates, real estate taxes, other operating expenses, the supply and
demand for properties involved, zoning and environmental laws and regulations,
rent control laws and other governmental rules. A default by Echelon
Residential Holdings could have a material adverse effect on the future cash
flow and operating results of the Partnership.
The Restated Agreement, as amended, prohibits the Partnership from making
loans to the General Partner or its affiliates. Since the acquisition of the
several parcels of real estate from the owner had to occur prior to the
admission of certain independent third parties as equity owners, Echelon
Residential Holdings and its wholly owned subsidiary, Echelon Residential LLC,
were formed in anticipation of their admission. The General Partner agreed to
an officer of the Manager serving as the initial equity holder of Echelon
Residential Holdings and as an unpaid manager of Echelon Residential Holdings.
The officer made a $185,465 equity investment in Echelon Residential Holdings.
His return on his equity investment is restricted to the same rate of return as
the partnerships realize on their loans. There is a risk that the court may
object to the General Partner's action in structuring the loan in this way since
the officer may be deemed an affiliate and the loans in violation of the
prohibition against loans to affiliates and the court's statement in its order
permitting New Investments that all other provisions of the Partnership
Agreements governing the investment objectives and policies of the Partnership
shall remain in full force and effect. The court may require the partnerships
to restructure or divest the loan.
The Investment Company Act of 1940 (the "1940 Act") places restrictions on
the capital structure and business activities of companies registered
thereunder. The Partnership has active business operations in the financial
services industry, including equipment leasing, the loan to Echelon Residential
Holdings and its ownership of securities of Semele. The Partnership does not
intend to engage in investment activities in a manner or to an extent that would
require the Partnership to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act.
However, it is possible that the Partnership may unintentionally engage in an
activity or activities that may be construed to fall within the scope of the
1940 Act. The General Partner is engaged in discussions with the staff of the
Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") regarding whether or not the
Partnership may be an inadvertent investment company as a consequence of the
above-referenced loan. If the Partnership were determined to be an unregistered
investment company, its business would be adversely affected.The 1940 Act, among
other things, prohibits an unregistered investment company from offering
securities for sale or engaging in any business in interstate commerce and,
consequently, leases and contracts entered into by partnerships that are
unregistered investment companies may be voidable. The General Partner has
consulted counsel and believes that the Partnership is not an investment
company. The General Partner has determined to take action to resolve the
Partnership's status under the 1940 Act by means that may include disposing or
acquiring certain assets that it might not otherwise dispose or acquire.
On May 11, 2001, the general partners of the Partnerships that are nominal
defendants in the Class Action Lawsuit received a letter dated May 10, 2001 from
the Associate Director and Chief Counsel of the Division of Investment
Management of the SEC informing the general partners that the staff of the
Division believes that American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership,
American Income Partners V-B Limited Partnership, American Income Partners V-C
Limited Partnership, American Income Partners V-D Limited Partnership, American
Income Fund I-A, American Income Fund I-B, American Income Fund I-E and AIRFUND
II International Limited Partnership (the "Designated Partnerships") are
investment companies as defined in Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act. The SEC
staff noted that Section 7 of the 1940 Act makes it unlawful for an unregistered
investment company, among other things, to offer, sell, purchase or acquire any
security or engage in any business in interstate commerce. Accordingly, Section
7 would prohibit any partnership that is an unregistered investment company from
engaging in any business in interstate commerce, except transactions that are
merely incidental to its dissolution. The SEC staff asked that the general
partners advise them within the next 30 days as to what steps the Designated
Partnerships will take to address their status under the 1940 Act. The SEC
staff asserts that the notes evidencing the loans to Echelon Residential
Holdings are investment securities and the ownership of the notes by said
partnerships cause them to be investment companies and that, in the case of
American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership and V-B Limited Partnership,
they may have become investment companies when they received the Semele
securities as part of the compensation for the sale of a vessel to Semele in
1997. The general partners have consulted with counsel who specializes in the
1940 Act and, based on counsel's advice, do not believe that the Designated
Partnerships are investment companies.
The letter also stated that the Division is considering whether to commence
an enforcement action with respect to this matter. Noting that the parties to
the Class Action Lawsuit were scheduled to appear before the court in the near
future to consider a proposed settlement, and that the SEC staff believed that
its views, asexpressed in the letter, would be relevant to the specific matters
that will be considered by the court at the hearing, the SEC staff submitted the
letter to the court for its consideration.
On May 15, 2001, Defendants' Counsel filed with the court Defendants'
Status Report pursuant to the court's March 12, 2001 Order. Defendants reported
that, notwithstanding the parties' best efforts, the staff of the SEC has not
completed its review of the solicitation statement in connection with the
proposed settlement of the Class Action Lawsuit. Nonetheless, the Defendants
stated their belief that the parties should continue to pursue the court's final
approval of the proposed settlement. In this regard, the Defendants also have
maintained, on the advice of special 1940 Act counsel that, even if the 1940 Act
applies to the Designated Partnerships, the 1940 Act does not prohibit going
forward with the proposed settlement, as that transaction is merely incidental
to a dissolution of the Partnerships and therefore is not subject to the
prohibitions of Section 7 of the 1940 Act.
The Defendants also referred to the SEC staff's letter of May 10, 2001
asserting that certain of the partnerships are investment companies and to
special 1940 Act counsel's submissions to the SEC staff setting forth the
reasons why the 1940 Act does not apply to the Designated Partnerships, noting
that counsel had informed the staff of the Division of Investment Management
that, based upon counsel's understanding of the surrounding circumstances and
after an in-depth analysis of the applicable law, if asked, counsel would be
willing to issue an opinion of the firm that none of the partnerships is an
investment company under the 1940 Act. The Defendants stated their belief that
the proposed settlement is still viable and in the best interests of the parties
and that final approval should be pursued. The Defendants advised the court
that they believe that if the court were to address the issue of whether or not
the 1940 Act applies to the partnerships and the proposed consolidation, it
could remove the major obstacle to the settlement being finally consummated.
The Defendants also requested that the court schedule a hearing to address on a
preliminary basis the objection to the proposed settlement raised in the SEC
staff's May 10, 2001 letter.
Plaintiffs' Counsel also submitted a Plaintiffs' Status Report to the court
on May 15, 2001 in which they reported that the SEC review has not been
concluded and that they notified the Defendants that they would not agree to
continue to stay the further prosecution of the litigation in favor of the
settlement and that they intend to seek court approval to immediately resume
active prosecution of the claims of the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' Counsel stated
in the Report that the "[p]laintiffs continue to believe that the settlement is
in the best interests of the Operating Partnership Sub-class. However, since
the SEC has yet to complete its review of the proxy, the Plaintiffs do not
believe that the litigation should continue to be stayed so that the SEC may
continue its regulatory review for an indefinite period of time." Plaintiffs
requested a pre-trial conference to schedule filing of Plaintiffs' motion for
class certification on or before May 29, 2001 and resumption of merits discovery
and discovery related to the class certification motion. Subsequently, after
the May 31, 2001 status conference, on June 4, 2001 the court ordered a March 4,
2002 trial date and referred the case to mediation and to discovery before a
magistrate judge.
Subsequently, after the May 31, 2001 status conference, on June 4, 2001 the
court ordered a March 4, 2002 trial date and referred the case to mediation and
to discovery before a magistrate judge. The Defendants and Plaintiffs' Counsel
have continued to negotiate toward a settlement and have reached agreement as to
its principal business terms. As part of the settlement terms, EFG has agreed
to buy the loans made by the Partnerships to Echelon Residential
Holdings for an aggregate $32 million plus interest at 7.5% per annum, if they
are not repaid prior to or at their maturity date. Upon completion of a
stipulation of settlement, the parties will submit the settlement to the court
for approval.
Revenue from individual lessees which accounted for 10% or more of
lease revenue during the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 is
incorporated herein by reference to Note 4 to the financial statements included
in Item 8, herein. Refer to Item 14(a)(3) for lease agreements filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
EFG is a Massachusetts limited partnership formerly known as American
Finance Group ("AFG"). AFG was established in 1988 as a Massachusetts general
partnership and succeeded American Finance Group, Inc., a Massachusetts
corporation organized in 1980. EFG and its subsidiaries (collectively, the
"Company") are engaged in various aspects of the equipment leasing business,
including EFG's role as Manager or Advisor to the Partnership and several other
direct-participation equipment leasing programs sponsored or co-sponsored by EFG
(the "Other Investment Programs"). The Company arranges to broker or originate
equipment leases, acts as remarketing agent and asset manager, and provides
leasing support services, such as billing, collecting, and asset tracking.
The general partner of EFG, with a 1% controlling interest, is Equis
Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation owned and controlled entirely by Gary
D. Engle, its President, Chief Executive Officer and sole Director. Equis
Corporation also owns a controlling 1% general partner interest in EFG's 99%
limited partner, GDE Acquisition Limited Partnership ("GDE LP"). Mr. Engle
established Equis Corporation and GDE LP in December 1994 for the sole purpose
of acquiring the business of AFG.
In January 1996, the Company sold certain assets of AFG relating primarily
to the business of originating new leases, and the name "American Finance
Group," and its acronym, to a third party. AFG changed its name to Equis
Financial Group Limited Partnership after the sale was concluded. Pursuant to
terms of the sale agreements, EFG specifically reserved the rights to continue
using the name American Finance Group and its acronym in connection with the
Partnership and the Other Investment Programs and to continue managing all
assets owned by the Partnership and the Other Investment Programs.
(d) Financial Information About Foreign and Domestic Operations and Export Sales
Not applicable.
Item 2. Properties.
- ---------------------
Incorporated herein by reference to Note 4 to the financial statements
included in Item 8.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
- -----------------------------
Incorporated herein by reference to Note 11 to the financial statements
included in Item 8.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
None.
PART II
Item 5. Market for the Partnership's Securities and Related Security Holder
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matters.
- --------
(a) Market Information
There is no public market for the resale of the Units and it is not
anticipated that a public market for resale of the Units will develop.
(b) Approximate Number of Security Holders
At December 31, 2000, there were 1,034 record holders in the Partnership.
(c) Dividend History and Restrictions
Historically, the amount of cash distributions paid to the Partners had
been determined on a quarterly basis. Each quarter's distribution may have
varied in amount and was made 95% to the Limited Partners and 5% to the General
Partner. Generally, cash distributions were paid within 15 days after the
completion of each calendar quarter.
The Partnership is a Nominal Defendant in a Class Action Lawsuit described
in Note 11 to the financial statements included in Item 8, herein. Commencing
with the first quarter of 2000, the General Partner suspended the payment of
quarterly cash distributions pending final resolution of the Class Action
Lawsuit. Accordingly, future cash distributions are not expected to be paid
until the Class Action Lawsuit is settled or adjudicated.
In any given year, it is possible that Limited Partners will be allocated
taxable income in excess of distributed cash. This discrepancy between tax
obligations and cash distributions may or may not continue in the future, and
cash may or may not be available for distribution to the Limited Partners
adequate to cover any tax obligation.
Distributions declared in 2000 and 1999 were as follows:
. General Limited
Total Partner Partners
-------- -------- ---------
Total 2000 distributions declared .
$ -- $ -- $ --
Total 1999 distributions declared .
941,996 47,100 894,896
-------- -------- ---------
Total . $941,996 $ 47,100 $ 894,896
======== ======== =========
There are no formal restrictions under the Restated Agreement, as amended,
that materially limit the Partnership's ability to pay cash distributions,
except that the General Partner may suspend or limit cash distributions to
ensure that the Partnership maintains sufficient working capital reserves to
cover, among other things, operating costs and potential expenditures, such as
refurbishment costs to remarket equipment upon lease expiration. In addition to
the need for funds in connection with the Class Action Lawsuit, liquidity is
especially important as the Partnership matures and sells equipment, because the
remaining equipment base consists of fewer revenue-producing assets that are
available to cover prospective cash disbursements. Insufficient liquidity could
inhibit the Partnership's ability to sustain its operations or maximize the
realization of proceeds from remarketing its remaining assets.
In particular, the Partnership must contemplate the potential liquidity
risks associated with its investment in commercial jet aircraft. The management
and remarketing of aircraft can involve, among other things, significant costs
and lengthy remarketing initiatives. Although the Partnership's lessees are
required to maintain the aircraft during the period of lease contract, repair,
maintenance, and/or refurbishment costs at lease expiration can be substantial.
For example, an aircraft that is returned to the Partnership meeting minimum
airworthiness standards, such as flight hours or engine cycles, nonetheless may
require heavy maintenance in order to bring its engines, airframe and other
hardware up to standards that will permit its prospective use in commercial air
transportation.
At December 31, 2000, the Partnership's equipment portfolio included
ownership interests in four commercial jet aircraft, one of which is a Boeing
737 aircraft. The Boeing 737 aircraft is a Stage 2 aircraft, meaning that it is
prohibited from operating in the United States unless it is retro-fitted with
hush-kits to meet Stage 3 noise regulations promulgated by the Federal Aviation
Administration. During 2000, the aircraft was re-leased to Air Slovakia BWJ,
Ltd., through September 2003. The remaining aircraft in the Partnership's
portfolio already are Stage 3 compliant. These aircraft have lease terms
expiring in April 2001, January 2003, and September 2004, respectively.
In October 2000, the Partnership and certain of its affiliates executed a
conditional sales agreement with Royal Aviation Inc. for the sale of the
Partnership's interest in a Boeing 737-2H4 aircraft. The sale of the aircraft
has been recorded by the Partnership as a sales-type lease, with a lease term
expiring in January 2002. The title to the aircraft transfers to Royal Aviation
Inc. at the expiration of the lease term.
Cash distributions consist of Distributable Cash From Operations and
Distributable Cash From Sales or Refinancings.
"Distributable Cash From Operations" means the net cash provided by the
Partnership's normal operations after general expenses and current liabilities
of the Partnership are paid, reduced by any reserves for working capital and
contingent liabilities to be funded from such cash, to the extent deemed
reasonable by the General Partner, and increased by any portion of such reserves
deemed by the General Partner not to be required for Partnership operations and
reduced by all accrued and unpaid Equipment Management Fees and, after Payout,
further reduced by all accrued and unpaid Subordinated Remarketing Fees.
Distributable Cash From Operations does not include any Distributable Cash From
Sales or Refinancings.
"Distributable Cash From Sales or Refinancings" means Cash From Sales or
Refinancings as reduced by (i)(a) amounts realized from any loss or destruction
of equipment which the General Partner determines shall be reinvested in similar
equipment for the remainder of the original lease term of the lost or destroyed
equipment, or in isolated instances, in other equipment, if the General Partner
determines that investment of such proceeds will significantly improve the
diversity of the Partnership's equipment portfolio, and subject in either case
to satisfaction of all existing indebtedness secured by such equipment to the
extent deemed necessary or appropriate by the General Partner, or (b) the
proceeds from the sale of an interest in equipment pursuant to any agreement
governing a joint venture which the General Partner determines will be invested
in additional equipment or interests in equipment and which ultimately are so
reinvested and (ii) any accrued and unpaid Equipment Management Fees and, after
Payout, any accrued and unpaid Subordinated Remarketing Fees.
"Cash From Sales or Refinancings" means cash received by the Partnership
from sale or refinancing transactions, as reduced by (i)(a) all debts and
liabilities of the Partnership required to be paid as a result of sale or
refinancing transactions, whether or not then due and payable (including any
liabilities on an item of equipment sold which are not assumed by the buyer and
any remarketing fees required to be paid to persons not affiliated with the
General Partner, but not including any Subordinated Remarketing Fees whether or
not then due and payable) and (b) general excess and current liabilities of the
Partnership (other than any portion of the Equipment Management Fee which is
required to be accrued and the Subordinated Remarketing Fee) and (c) any
reserves for working capital and contingent liabilities funded from such cash to
the extent deemed reasonable by the General Partner and (ii) increased by any
portion of such reserves deemed by the General Partner not to be required for
Partnership operations. In the event the Partnership accepts a note in
connection with any sale or refinancing transaction, all payments subsequently
received in cash by the Partnership with respect to such note shall be included
in Cash From Sales or Refinancings, regardless of the treatment of such payments
by the Partnership for tax or accounting purposes. If the Partnership receives
purchase money obligations in payment for equipment sold, which are secured by
liens on such equipment, the amount of such obligations shall not be included in
Cash From Sales or Refinancings until the obligations are fully satisfied.
"Payout" is defined as the first time when the aggregate amount of all
distributions to the Limited Partners of Distributable Cash From Operations and
Distributable Cash From Sales or Refinancings equals the aggregate amount of the
Limited Partners' original capital contributions plus a cumulative annual
distribution of 11% (compounded quarterly and calculated beginning with the last
day of the month of the Partnership's Closing Date) on their aggregate
unreturned capital contributions. For purposes of this definition, capital
contributions shall be deemed to have been returned only to the extent that
distributions of cash to the Limited Partners exceed the amount required to
satisfy the cumulative annual distribution of 11% (compounded quarterly) on the
Limited Partners' aggregate unreturned capital contributions, such calculation
to be based on the aggregate unreturned capital contributions outstanding on the
first day of each fiscal quarter.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
- ------------------------------------
The following data should be read in conjunction with Item 7, "Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" and
the financial statements included in Item 8 herein.
For each of the five years in the period ended December 31, 2000:
Summary of Operations 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996
- -------------------------------------- ------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
. Restated (1)
Operating and sales-type lease revenue $ 1,257,174 $ 2,106,199 $ 2,430,065 $ 5,115,146 $ 5,328,237
Interest income . . . . . . . . $ 848,030 $ 395,312 $ 306,920 $ 152,995 $ 158,602
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 710,285 $ 1,649,283 $ 137,523 $ 1,252,723 $ 1,062,652
Per Unit:
Net income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 0.76 $ 1.77 $ 0.15 $ 1.35 $ 1.14
Cash distributions declared . . . . . $ -- $ 1.01 $ 1.01 $ 1.27 $ 2.40
Financial Position
- --------------------------------------
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 14,342,166 $14,289,258 $14,457,880 $15,908,093 $18,074,828
Total long-term obligations. . . . . . $ 2,249,301 $ 2,651,371 $ 3,688,947 $ 4,768,982 $ 6,586,970
Partners' capital. . . . . . . . . . . $ 11,540,309 $10,912,512 $10,136,041 $10,706,355 $10,865,261
(1) See Note 1 to the financial statements, included in Item 8 herein, regarding
the restatement of the Partnership's 2000 financial statements.
Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
of Operations.
- ---------------
Year ended December 31, 2000 compared to the year
ended December 31, 1999 and the year ended December 31, 1999
compared to the year ended December 31, 1998
Subsequent to the issuance of the Partnership's financial statements as of
and for the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership revised its method of
accounting for the loan receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings. As a
result, the financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2000
have been restated from amounts previously reported. The effects of the
restatement are presented in Note 1 to the financial statements, included in
Item 8 and have been reflected herein. The following should be read in
conjunction with the restated Financial Statements, including notes thereto.
The following discussion compares the restated financial condition and results
of operations for the year ended December 31, 2000 to the year ended December
31, 1999 and the year ended December 31, 1999 to the year ended December 31,
1998.
Certain statements in this Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 2 of the Partnership
that are not historical fact constitute "forward-looking statements" within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are subject
to a variety of risks and uncertainties. There are a number of factors that
could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any
forward-looking statements made herein. These factors include, but are not
limited to, the outcome of the Class Action Lawsuit described in Note 11 to the
financial statements included in Item 8 herein, the remarketing of the
Partnership's equipment and the performance of the Partnership's non-equipment
assets.
Overview
- --------
The Partnership was organized in 1991 as a direct-participation equipment
leasing program to acquire a diversified portfolio of capital equipment subject
to lease agreements with third parties. Presently, the Partnership is a Nominal
Defendant in a Class Action Lawsuit, the outcome of which could significantly
alter the nature of the Partnership's organization and its future business
operations. See Note 11 to the financial statements included in Item 8 herein.
Pursuant to the Restated Agreement, as amended, the Partnership is scheduled to
be dissolved by December 31, 2002. However, the General Partner does not expect
that the Partnership will be dissolved until such time that the Class Action
Lawsuit is settled or adjudicated.
The 1940 Act places restrictions on the capital structure and business
activities of companies registered thereunder. The Partnership has active
business operations in the financial services industry, including equipment
leasing, the loan to Echelon Residential Holdings and its ownership of
securities of Semele. The Partnership does not intend to engage in investment
activities in a manner or to an extent that would require the Partnership to
register as an investment company under the 1940 Act. However, it is possible
that the Partnership may unintentionally engage in an activity or activities
that may be construed to fall within the scope of the 1940 Act. The General
Partner is engaged in discussions with the staff of the SEC regarding whether or
not the Partnership may be an inadvertent investment company as a consequence of
the above-referenced loan. If the Partnership were determined to be an
unregistered investment company, its business would be adversely affected.The
1940 Act, among other things, prohibits an unregistered investment company from
offering securities for sale or engaging in any business in interstate commerce
and, consequently, leases and contracts entered into by partnerships that are
unregistered investment companies may be voidable. The General Partner has
consulted counsel and believes that the Partnership is not an investment
company. The General Partner has determined to take action to resolve the
Partnership's status under the 1940 Act by means that may include disposing or
acquiring certain assets that it might not otherwise dispose or acquire.
On May 11, 2001, the general partners of the Partnerships that are nominal
defendants in the Class Action Lawsuit received a letter dated May 10, 2001 from
the Associate Director and Chief Counsel of the Division of Investment
Management of the SEC informing the general partners that the staff of the
Division believes that American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership,
American Income Partners V-B Limited Partnership, American Income Partners V-C
Limited Partnership, American Income Partners V-D Limited Partnership, American
Income Fund I-A, American Income Fund I-B, American Income Fund I-E and AIRFUND
II International Limited Partnership (the "Designated Partnerships") are
investment companies as defined in Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act. The SEC
staff noted that Section 7 of the 1940 Act makes it unlawful for an unregistered
investment company, among other things, to offer, sell, purchase or acquire any
security or engage in any business in interstate commerce. Accordingly, Section
7 would prohibit any partnership that is an unregistered investment company from
engaging in any business in interstate commerce, except transactions that are
merely incidental to its dissolution. The SEC staff asked that the general
partners advise them within the next 30 days as to what steps the Designated
Partnerships will take to address their status under the 1940 Act. The SEC
staff asserts that the notes evidencing the loans to Echelon Residential
Holdings are investment securities and the ownership of the notes by said
partnerships cause them to be investment companies and that, in the case of
American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership and V-B Limited Partnership,
they may have become investment companies when they received the Semele
securities as part of the compensation for the sale of a vessel to Semele in
1997. The general partners have consulted with counsel who specializes in the
1940 Act and, based on counsel's advice, do not believe that the Designated
Partnerships are investment companies.
The letter also stated that the Division is considering whether to commence
an enforcement action with respect to this matter. Noting that the parties to
the Class Action Lawsuit were scheduled to appear before the court in the near
future to consider a proposed settlement, and that the SEC staff believed that
its views, as expressed in the letter, would be relevant to the specific matters
that will be considered by the court at the hearing, the SEC staff submitted the
letter to the court for its consideration.
On May 15, 2001, Defendants' Counsel filed with the court Defendants'
Status Report pursuant to the court's March 12, 2001 Order. Defendants reported
that, notwithstanding the parties' best efforts, the staff of the SEC has not
completed its review of the solicitation statement in connection with the
proposed settlement of the Class Action Lawsuit. Nonetheless, the Defendants
stated their belief that the parties should continue to pursue the court's final
approval of the proposed settlement. In this regard, the Defendants also have
maintained, on the advice of special 1940 Act counsel that, even if the 1940 Act
applies to Designated Partnerships, the 1940 Act does not prohibit going forward
with the proposed settlement, as that transaction is merely incidental to a
dissolution of the Partnerships and therefore is not subject to the prohibitions
of Section 7 of the 1940 Act.
The Defendants also referred to the SEC staff's letter of May 10, 2001
asserting that certain of the partnerships are investment companies and to
special 1940 Act counsel's submissions to the SEC staff setting forth the
reasons why the 1940 Act does not apply to the Designated Partnerships, noting
that counsel had informed the staff of the Division of Investment Management
that, based upon counsel's understanding of the surrounding circumstances and
after an in-depth analysis of the applicable law, if asked, counsel would be
willing to issue an opinion of the firm that none of the partnerships is an
investment company under the 1940 Act. The Defendants stated their belief that
the proposed settlement is still viable and in the best interests of the parties
and that final approval should be pursued. The Defendants advised the court
that they believe that if the court were to address the issue of whether or not
the 1940 Act applies to the partnerships and the proposed consolidation, it
could remove the major obstacle to the settlement being finally consummated.
The Defendants also requested that the court schedule a hearing to address on a
preliminary basis the objection to the proposed settlement raised in the SEC
staff's May 10, 2001 letter.
Plaintiffs' Counsel also submitted a Plaintiffs' Status Report to the court
on May 15, 2001 in which they reported that the SEC review has not been
concluded and that they notified the Defendants that they would not agree to
continue to stay the further prosecution of the litigation in favor of the
settlement and that they intend to seek court approval to immediately resume
active prosecution of the claims of the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' Counsel stated
in the Report that the "[p]laintiffs continue to believe that the settlement is
in the best interests of the Operating Partnership Sub-class. However, since
the SEC has yet to complete its review of the proxy, the Plaintiffs do not
believe that the litigation should continue to be stayed so that the SEC may
continue its regulatory review for an indefinite period of time." Plaintiffs
requested a pre-trial conference to schedule filing of Plaintiffs' motion for
class certification on or before May 29, 2001 and resumption of merits discovery
and discovery related to the class certification motion. Subsequently, after
the May 31, 2001 status conference, on June 4, 2001 the court ordered a March 4,
2002 trial date and referred the case to mediation and to discovery before a
magistrate judge. The Defendants and Plaintiffs' Counsel have continued to
negotiate toward a settlement and have reached agreement as to its principal
business terms. As part of the settlement terms, EFG has agreed to buy the
loans made by the Partnerships to Echelon Residential Holdings for an
aggregate $32 million plus interest at 7.5% per annum, if they are not repaid
prior to or at their maturity date. Upon completion of a stipulation of
settlement, the parties will submit the settlement to the court for approval.
Results of Operations
- -----------------------
For the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership recognized operating
lease revenue of $1,254,943 compared to $2,106,199 and $2,430,065 for the years
ended December 31, 1999 and 1998, respectively. The decrease in operating lease
revenue from 1999 to 2000 resulted primarily from the expiration of lease terms
related to the Partnership's interest in three Boeing 737-2H4 aircraft and a
McDonnell Douglas aircraft. The decrease in operating lease revenue from 1998
to 1999 resulted from lease term expirations and equipment sales. The amount of
operating lease revenue in the near term will increase due to the re-lease of
the McDonnell Douglas MD-82 aircraft and one of the Boeing 737-2H4 aircraft in
September 2000. Subsequently, operating lease revenue is expected to decline
due to primary and renewal lease term expirations and equipment sales. See
discussion below related to the Partnership's sales-type lease revenue for the
year ended December 31, 2000.
The Partnership's equipment portfolio includes certain assets in which the
Partnership holds a proportionate ownership interest. In such cases, the
remaining interests are owned by an affiliated equipment leasing program
sponsored by Equis Financial Group Limited Partnership ("EFG"). Proportionate
equipment ownership enabled the Partnership to further diversify its equipment
portfolio at inception by participating in the ownership of selected assets,
thereby reducing the general levels of risk which could have resulted from a
concentration in any single equipment type, industry or lessee. The Partnership
and each affiliate individually report, in proportion to their respective
ownership interests, their respective shares of assets, liabilities, revenues,
and expenses associated with the equipment.
The lease terms related to the three Boeing 737-2H4 aircraft, in which the
Partnership held a proportionate interest, expired on December 31, 1999 and the
aircraft were stored pending their remarketing. In July 2000, one of the Boeing
737-2H4 aircraft was sold resulting in $228,930 of proceeds to the Partnerships
and a net gain, for financial statement purposes, of $38,598 for the
Partnership's proportional interest in the aircraft. In September 2000, a second
Boeing 737-2H4 aircraft was re-leased with a lease term expiring in September
2003. Under the terms of this re-lease agreement, the Partnership will receive
rents of $316,980 over the term of the lease. The Partnership entered into a
conditional sales agreement to sell its interest in the remaining Boeing 737-2H4
aircraft as described below.
The lease term associated with a McDonnell Douglas MD-82 aircraft, in which
the Partnership holds an ownership interest, expired in January 2000. The
aircraft was re-leased in September 2000 to Aerovias de Mexico S.A. de C.V.,
with a lease term expiring in September 2004. Under the terms of this re-lease
agreement, the Partnership will receive rents of $769,344 over the term of the
lease.
Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2000 was $848,030 compared
to $395,312 and $306,920 for the years ended December 31, 1999 and 1998,
respectively. Interest income is generated principally from temporary
investment of rental receipts, equipment sale proceeds in short-term instruments
and interest earned on the loan receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings.
The amount of future interest income from the short-term instruments is expected
to fluctuate as a result of changing interest rates and the amount of cash
available for investment, among other factors.
Interest income included $93,872 in each of the years ended December 31,
2000,1999 and 1998 earned on a note receivable from Semele (see Note 7 to the
accompanying financial statements included in Item 8). The note receivable from
Semele is scheduled to mature in April 2003.
Interest income also included $587,020 for the year ended December 31, 2000
earned on the loan receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings. On March 8,
2000, the Partnership utilized $4,790,000 of available cash for the loan to
Echelon Residential Holdings. The entire principal and all accrued interest
on the loan is due at the loan's maturity on September 8, 2002. (See further
discussion included in Note 5 to the financial statements included in Item 8
herein).
The loan receivable was previously accounted for and reported in accordance
with the guidance for Acquisition, Development and Construction Arrangements
("ADC arrangements") in the Partnership's financial statements as of and for the
year December 31, 2000. The loan was presented as an investment in a real
estate venture and was presented net of the Partnership's share of losses in
Echelon Residential Holdings. The Partnership was allocated its proportionate
share of the unconsolidated real estate venture's net loss, excluding the
interest expense on the loan, based on the balance of its loan receivable in
relation to the real estate venture's total equity and notes payable, including
the ADC arrangements. For the period ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership's
share of losses in Echelon Residential Holdings was $363,578 and was reflected
on the Statement of Operations as ''Partnership's share of unconsolidated real
estate venture's loss''.
Subsequent to the issuance of the Partnership's financial statements for
the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership determined that the loan
receivable should be accounted for consistent with its legal form and the
Partnership should recognize the interest income, as calculated per the
contractual terms of the loan agreement to the extent such interest income was
evaluated as likely to be collected. The loan receivable and related interest
income should be evaluated for impairment under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 114 "Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan".
Accordingly, the Partnership reversed the proportionate share of
losses in Echelon Residential Holdings of $363,578 previously recorded and
recognized interest income of $587,020, resulting in a decrease in the net loss
for the year ended December 31, 2000 of $950,598, or $1.02 per limited
partnership unit. As a result, the accompanying financial statements for the
year ended December 31, 2000 have been restated from the amounts previously
reported. In addition, during the second quarter of 2001 the General Partner
determined that recoverability of the loan receivable had been impaired and at
June 30, 2001 recorded an impairment of $419,125, reflecting the General
Partner's current assessment of the amount of loss that is likely to be incurred
by the Partnership. In addition to the write-down recorded at June 30, 2001,
the Partnership reserved all accrued interest of $777,417 recorded on the loan
receivable through March 31, 2001 and has ceased accruing interest on its loan
receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings, effective April 1, 2001.
During the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership sold other
fully-depreciated equipment to existing lessees and third parties, resulting in
a net gain, for financial reporting purposes of $65,855.
During the year ended December 31, 1999, the Partnership sold equipment
having a net book value of $1,223,569 to existing lessees and third parties.
These sales resulted in a net gain, for financial statement purposes, of
$908,298 compared to a net gain in 1998 of $208,143 on equipment having a net
book value of $108,381.
It cannot be determined whether future sales of equipment will result in a
net gain or a net loss to the Partnership, as such transactions will be
dependent upon the condition and type of equipment being sold and its
marketability at the time of sale. In addition, the amount of gain or loss
reported for financial statement purposes is partly a function of the amount of
accumulated depreciation associated with the equipment being sold.
The ultimate realization of residual value for any type of equipment is
dependent upon many factors, including EFG's ability to sell and re-lease
equipment. Changing market conditions, industry trends, technological advances,
and many other events can converge to enhance or detract from asset values at
any given time. EFG attempts to monitor these changes in order to identify
opportunities which may be advantageous to the Partnership and which will
maximize total cash returns for each asset.
The total economic value realized for each asset is comprised of all
primary lease term revenue generated from that asset, together with its residual
value. The latter consists of cash proceeds realized upon the asset's sale in
addition to all other cash receipts obtained from renting the asset on a
re-lease, renewal or month-to-month basis. The Partnership classifies such
residual rental payments as lease revenue. Consequently, the amount of gain or
loss reported in the financial statements may not be indicative of the total
residual value the Partnership achieved from leasing the equipment.
Depreciation expense was $698,894, $948,344, and $1,438,667 for the years
ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998, respectively. For financial reporting
purposes, to the extent that an asset is held on primary lease term, the
Partnership depreciates the difference between (i) the cost of the asset and
(ii) the estimated residual value of the asset at the date of primary lease
expiration on a straight-line basis over such term. For purposes of this
policy, estimated residual values represent estimates of equipment values at the
date of primary lease expiration. To the extent that equipment is held beyond
its primary lease term, the Partnership continues to depreciate the remaining
net book value of the asset on a straight-line basis over the asset's remaining
economic life.
Interest expense was $222,126, $234,357 and $338,932 for the years ended
December 31, 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively. Interest expense in the near
term will increase as a result of the Partnership's debt refinancing in February
2001. (See Note 13 to the financial statements included in Item 8.)
Subsequently, interest expense will decline as the principal balance of notes
payable is reduced through the application of rent receipts to outstanding debt.
See additional discussion below regarding the refinancing of the debt in 2001.
Management fees were $60,456, $99,353, and $110,415 for the years ended
December 31, 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively. Management fees are based on
5% of gross lease revenue generated by operating leases and 2% of gross lease
revenue generated by full payout leases.
Write-down of investment securities-affiliate was $377,849 for the year
ended December 31, 1998. The General Partner determined that the decline in
market value of its Semele common stock was other-than-temporary. As a result,
the Partnership wrote down the cost of the Semele common stock from $15 per
share to $4.125 per share (the quoted price of Semele stock on NASDAQ at
December 31, 1998). See further discussion below.
Operating expenses were $599,807, $478,472, and $541,742 for the years
ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998, respectively. The primary reason for
the increase in operating expenses from 1999 to 2000 is storage, remarketing and
maintenance costs associated with the Partnership's aircraft. In 2000 and 1999,
the Partnership accrued approximately $97,000 and $131,000, respectively, for
the reconfiguration costs and completion of a D-Check incurred to facilitate the
remarketing of the McDonnell Douglas MD-82 aircraft released in September 2000.
In 2000, the Partnership also accrued approximately $131,000 for a required
D-check for a second McDonnell Douglas MD-82 aircraft. In addition, in 1999 the
Partnership incurred approximately $52,000 in connection with the remarketing of
an aircraft in which it held an ownership interest. The Partnership sold its
interest in this aircraft during 1999. Operating expenses in 2000, 1999 and
1998 also included approximately $41,000, $50,000 and $334,000, respectively,
related to the Class Action Lawsuit described in Note 11 to the financial
statements included in Item 8. Other operating expenses consist principally of
professional service costs, such as audit and other legal fees, as well as
printing, distribution and other remarketing expenses.
Liquidity and Capital Resources and Discussion of Cash Flows
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
The Partnership by its nature is a limited life entity. The Partnership's
principal operating activities derive from asset rental transactions.
Accordingly, the Partnership's principal source of cash from operations is
provided by the collection of periodic rents. These cash inflows are used to
satisfy debt service obligations associated with leveraged leases, and to pay
management fees and operating costs. Operating activities generated net cash
inflows of $1,130,729, $1,469,365, and $2,642,701 for the years ended 2000, 1999
and 1998 respectively. Future renewal, re-lease and equipment sale activities
will cause a decline in the Partnership's lease revenues and corresponding
sources of operating cash. Overall, expenses associated with rental activities,
such as management fees, and net cash flow from operating activities will also
continue to decline as the Partnership remarkets its equipment. The
Partnership, however, may continue to incur significant costs to facilitate the
successful remarketing of its aircraft in the future. The amount of future cash
from interest income is expected to fluctuate as a result of changing interest
rates and the level of cash available for investment, among other factors. The
loan to Echelon Residential Holdings and accrued interest thereon is due in full
at maturity on September 8, 2002.
Cash realized from asset disposal transactions is reported under investing
activities on the accompanying Statement of Cash Flows. During 2000, the
Partnership realized net proceeds of $294,785, compared to $2,131,867 and
$316,524 in 1999 and 1998, respectively. Future inflows of cash from asset
disposals will vary in timing and amount and will be influenced by many factors
including, but not limited to, the frequency and timing of lease expirations,
the type of equipment being sold, its condition and age, and future market
conditions.
At December 31, 2000, the Partnership was due aggregate future minimum
lease payments of $2,535,833 from contractual operating and sales-type lease
agreements (see Note 3 to the financial statements included in Item 8), a
portion of which will be used to amortize the principal balance of notes payable
of $2,249,301 (see Note 9 to the financial statements included in Item 8). At
the expiration of the individual primary and renewal lease terms underlying the
Partnership's future minimum lease payments, the Partnership will sell the
equipment or enter re-lease or renewal agreements when considered advantageous
by the General Partner and EFG. Such future remarketing activities will result
in the realization of additional cash inflows in the form of equipment sale
proceeds or rents from renewals and re-leases, the timing and extent of which
cannot be predicted with certainty. This is because the timing and extent of
remarketing events often is dependent upon the needs and interests of the
existing lessees. Some lessees may choose to renew their lease contracts, while
others may elect to return the equipment. In the latter instances, the
equipment could be re-leased to another lessee or sold to a third party.
In connection with a preliminary settlement agreement for a Class Action
Lawsuit described in Note 11 to the financial statements included in Item 8, the
court permitted the Partnership to invest in any new investment, including but
not limited to new equipment or other business activities, subject to certain
limitations. On March 8, 2000, the Partnership loaned $4,790,000 to a newly
formed real estate company, Echelon Residential Holdings to finance the
acquisition of real estate assets by that company. Echelon Residential
Holdings, through a wholly owned subsidiary (Echelon Residential LLC), used the
loan proceeds, along with the loan proceeds from similar loans by ten affiliated
partnerships representing $32 million in the aggregate, to acquire various real
estate assets from Echelon International Corporation, an unrelated Florida-based
real estate company. Echelon Residential Holding's interest in Echelon
Residential LLC is pledged pursuant to a pledge agreement to the partnerships as
collateral for the loans. The loan has a term of 30 months maturing on
September 8, 2002 and bears interest at the annual rate of 14% for the first 24
months and 18% for the final six months. Interest accrues and compounds monthly
and is payable at maturity.
The loan made by the Partnership to Echelon Residential Holdings is, and
will continue to be, subject to various risks, including the risk of default by
Echelon Residential Holdings, which could require the Partnership to foreclose
under the pledge agreement on its interests in Echelon Residential LLC. The
ability of Echelon Residential Holdings to make loan payments and the amount the
Partnership may realize after a default would be dependent upon the risks
generally associated with the real estate lending business including, without
limitation, the existence of senior financing or other liens on the properties,
general or local economic conditions, property values, the sale of properties,
interest rates, real estate taxes, other operating expenses, the supply and
demand for properties involved, zoning and environmental laws and regulations,
rent control laws and other governmental rules. A default by Echelon
Residential Holdings could have a material adverse effect on the future cash
flow and operating results of the Partnership. The Partnership periodically
evaluates the collectibility of the loan's contractual principal and interest
and the existence of loan impairment indicators.
The Restated Agreement, as amended, prohibits the Partnership from making
loans to the General Partner or its affiliates. Since the acquisition of the
several parcels of real estate from the owner had to occur prior to the
admission of certain independent third parties as equity owners, Echelon
Residential Holdings and its wholly owned subsidiary, Echelon Residential LLC,
were formed in anticipation of their admission. The General Partner agreed to
an officer of the Manager serving as the initial equity holder of Echelon
Residential Holdings and as an unpaid manager of Echelon Residential Holdings.
The officer made a $185,465 equity investment in Echelon Residential Holdings.
His return on his equity investment is restricted to the same rate of return as
the partnerships realize on their loans. There is a risk that the court may
object to the General Partner's action in structuring the loan in this way since
the officer may be deemed an affiliate and the loans in violation of the
prohibition against loans to affiliates and the court's statement in its order
permitting New Investments that all other provisions of the Partnership
Agreements governing the investment objectives and policies of the Partnership
shall remain in full force and effect. The court may require the partnerships
to restructure or divest the loan.
As a result of an exchange transaction in 1997, the Partnership is the
beneficial owner of 42,574 shares of Semele common stock and a beneficial
interest in the Semele Note of $938,718. The Semele Note bears an annual
interest rate of 10% and is scheduled to mature in April 2003. The note also
requires mandatory principal reductions, if and to the extent that net proceeds
are received by Semele from the sale or refinancing of its principal real estate
asset consisting of an undeveloped 274-acre parcel of land near Malibu,
California.
The exchange in 1997 involved the sale by five partnerships and certain
other affiliates of their beneficial interests in three cargo vessels to Semele
in exchange for cash, Semele common stock and the Semele Note. At the time of
the transaction, Semele was a public company unaffiliated with the general
partners and the partnerships. Subsequently, as part of the exchange
transaction, Semele solicited the consent of its shareholders to, among other
things, engage EFG to provide administrative services and to elect certain
affiliates of EFG and the general partners as members of the board of directors.
At that point, Semele became affiliated with EFG and the general partners. The
maturity date of the Semele Note has been extended. Since the Semele Note was
received as consideration for the sale of the cargo vessels to an unaffiliated
party and the extension of the maturity of the Semele Note is documented in an
amendment to the existing Semele Note and not as a new loan, the general
partners of the owner partnerships do not consider the Semele Note to be within
the prohibition in the Partnership Agreements against loans to or from the
General Partner and its affiliates. Nonetheless, the extension of the maturity
date might be construed to be the making of a loan to an affiliate of the
General Partner in violation of the Partnership Agreements of the owner
partnerships and to be a violation of the court's order with respect to New
Investments that all other provisions of the Partnership Agreements shall remain
in full force and effect.
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 115,
"Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities", marketable
equity securities classified as available-for-sale are carried at fair value.
During the year ended December 31, 1998, the Partnership decreased the carrying
value of its investment in Semele common stock to $4.125 per share (the quoted
price of the Semele stock on NASDAQ at December 31, 1998) resulting in an
unrealized loss in 1998 of $143,690. This loss was reported as a component of
comprehensive income, included in the Statement of Changes in Partners' Capital.
At December 31, 1998, the General Partner determined that the decline in market
value of the Semele common stock was other-than-temporary. As a result, the
Partnership wrote down the cost of the Semele common stock to $4.125 per share
for a total realized loss of $377,849 in 1998.
During the year ended December 31, 1999, the Partnership increased the
carrying value of its investment in Semele common stock to $5.75 per share (the
quoted price of the Semele stock on NASDAQ SmallCap market at December 31,
1999), resulting in an unrealized gain of $69,184. During the year ended
December 31, 2000, the Partnership decreased the carrying value of its
investment in Semele common stock to $3.8125 per share (the quoted price of the
Semele stock on NASDAQ Small Cap market nearest December 31, 2000), resulting in
an unrealized loss of $82,488. The unrealized gain in 1999 and unrealized loss
in 2000 were reported as a component of comprehensive income and loss,
respectively, included in the Statement of Changes in Partners' Capital.
The Semele Note and the Semele common stock is subject to a number of risks
including, Semele's ability to make loan payments which is dependent upon the
liquidity of Semele and primarily Semele's ability to sell or refinance its
principal real estate asset consisting of an undeveloped 274-acre parcel of land
near Malibu, California. The market value of the Partnership's investment in
Semele common stock has generally declined since the Partnership's initial
investment in 1997. In 1998, the General Partner determined that the decline in
market value of the stock was other-than-temporary and wrote down the
Partnership's investment. Subsequently, the market value of the Semele common
stock has fluctuated. The market value of the stock could decline in the future.
Gary D. Engle, President and Chief Executive Officer of EFG, the sole
shareholder of the General Partner, and is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
of Semele and James A. Coyne, Executive Vice President of EFG is Semele's
President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Engle and Mr. Coyne are both members
of the Board of Directors of, and own significant stock in, Semele.
The Partnership obtained long-term financing in connection with certain
equipment leases. The origination of such indebtedness and the subsequent
repayments of principal related to such indebtedness are reported as a component
of financing activities in the Partnership's Statement of Cash Flows. The
corresponding note agreements are recourse only to the specific equipment
financed and to the minimum rental payments contracted to be received during the
debt amortization period (which period generally coincides with the lease rental
term). As rental payments are collected, a portion or all of the rental payment
is used to repay the associated indebtedness. In the near term, the amount of
cash used to repay debt obligations will increase due to the refinancing
discussed below. Subsequently the amount of cash used will decline as the
principal balance of notes payable is reduced through the collection and
application of rents. However, the Partnership has a balloon payment obligation
at the expiration of the lease term related to aircraft leased by Reno Air, Inc.
of $555,597, which matures in January 2003.
In February 2000, the Partnership and certain affiliated investment
programs (collectively, the ''Programs'') refinanced the indebtedness, which
matured in January 2000 associated with a McDonnell Douglas MD-82 aircraft
re-leased in September 2000. In addition to refinancing the existing
indebtedness of $3,370,000, the Programs received additional debt proceeds of
$1,350,000 required to perform a D-Check on the aircraft. The Partnership
received $131,618 from such proceeds. The note had a fluctuating interest rate
based on LIBOR plus a margin with interest payments due monthly. The
Partnership's aggregate share of the refinanced and new indebtedness was
$458,801, which matured in August 2000. The Partnership paid interest-only on
the debt throughout 2000. In February 2001, the Programs refinanced the
outstanding indebtedness and accrued interest related to this aircraft. In
addition to refinancing the Programs' total existing indebtedness and accrued
interest of $4,758,845, the Programs received additional debt proceeds of
$3,400,177. The Partnership's aggregate share of the refinanced and new
indebtedness was $792,567 including $462,274 used to repay the existing
indebtedness on the refinanced aircraft. The Partnership used a portion of its
share of the additional proceeds of $330,293 to repay the outstanding balance of
the indebtedness and accrued interest related to the aircraft on lease to
Finnair OY of $85,579 and certain aircraft reconfiguration costs that the
Partnership had accrued at December 31, 2000. The new indebtedness bears a
fixed interest rate of 7.65%, principal is amortized monthly and the Partnership
has a balloon payment obligation at the expiration of the lease term of $264,310
in September 2004.
There are no formal restrictions under the Restated Agreement, as amended,
that materially limit the Partnership's ability to pay cash distributions,
except that the General Partner may suspend or limit cash distributions to
ensure that the Partnership maintains sufficient working capital reserves to
cover, among other things, operating costs and potential expenditures, such as
refurbishment costs to remarket equipment upon lease expiration. In addition to
the need for funds in connection with the Class Action Lawsuit, liquidity is
especially important as the Partnership matures and sells equipment, because the
remaining equipment base consists of fewer revenue-producing assets that are
available to cover prospective cash disbursements. Insufficient liquidity could
inhibit the Partnership's ability to sustain its operations or maximize the
realization of proceeds from remarketing its remaining assets. In particular,
the Partnership must contemplate the potential liquidity risks associated with
its investment in commercial jet aircraft. The management and remarketing of
aircraft can involve, among other things, significant costs and lengthy
remarketing initiatives. Although the Partnership's lessees are required to
maintain the aircraft during the period of lease contract, repair, maintenance,
and/or refurbishment costs at lease expiration can be substantial. For example,
an aircraft that is returned to the Partnership meeting minimum airworthiness
standards, such as flight hours or engine cycles, nonetheless may require heavy
maintenance in order to bring its engines, airframe and other hardware up to
standards that will permit its prospective use in commercial air transportation.
At December 31, 2000, the Partnership's equipment portfolio included
ownership interests in four commercial jet aircraft, one of which is a Boeing
737 aircraft. The Boeing 737 aircraft is a Stage 2 aircraft, meaning that it is
prohibited from operating in the United States unless it is retro-fitted with
hush-kits to meet Stage 3 noise regulations promulgated by the Federal Aviation
Administration. During 2000, this aircraft was re-leased to Air Slovakia BWJ,
Ltd. through September 2003. The remaining three aircraft in the Partnership's
portfolio already are Stage 3 compliant. These aircraft have lease terms
expiring in April 2001, January 2003, and September 2004, respectively.
Cash distributions to the General and Limited Partners had been declared
and generally paid within fifteen days following the end of each calendar
quarter. The payment of such distributions is presented as a component of
financing activities on the accompanying Statement of Cash Flows. No cash
distributions were declared for the year ended December 31, 2000, however, the
fourth quarter 1999 cash distribution of $235,495 was paid in January 2000. In
any given year, it is possible that Limited Partners will be allocated taxable
income in excess of distributed cash. This discrepancy between tax obligations
and cash distributions may or may not continue in the future, and cash may or
may not be available for distribution to the Limited Partners adequate to cover
any tax obligation.
Cash distributions paid to the Limited Partners consist of both a return of
and a return on capital. Cash distributions do not represent and are not
indicative of yield on investment. Actual yield on investment cannot be
determined with any certainty until conclusion of the Partnership and will be
dependent upon the collection of all future contracted rents, the generation of
renewal and/or re-lease rents, the residual value realized for each asset at its
disposal date and the performance of the Partnership's non-equipment assets.
The Partnership's capital account balances for federal income tax and for
financial reporting purposes are different primarily due to differing treatments
of income and expense items for income tax purposes in comparison to financial
reporting purposes (generally referred to as permanent or timing differences;
see Note 10 to the financial statements included in Item 8). For instance,
selling commissions and organization and offering costs pertaining to
syndication of the Partnership's limited partnership units are not deductible
for federal income tax purposes, but are recorded as a reduction of partners'
capital for financial reporting purposes. Therefore, such differences are
permanent differences between capital accounts for financial reporting and
federal income tax purposes. Other differences between the bases of capital
accounts for federal income tax and financial reporting purposes occur due to
timing differences. Such items consist of the cumulative difference between
income or loss for tax purposes and financial statement income or loss and the
treatment of unrealized gains or losses on investment securities for book and
tax purposes. The principal component of the cumulative difference between
financial statement income or loss and tax income or loss results from different
depreciation policies for book and tax purposes.
For financial reporting purposes, the General Partner has accumulated a
capital deficit at December 31, 2000. This is the result of aggregate cash
distributions to the General Partner being in excess of its capital contribution
of $1,000 and its allocation of financial statement net income or loss.
Ultimately, the existence of a capital deficit for the General Partner for
financial reporting purposes is not indicative of any further capital
obligations to the Partnership by the General Partner. The Restated Agreement,
as amended, requires that upon the dissolution of the Partnership, the General
Partner will be required to contribute to the Partnership an amount equal to any
negative balance which may exist in the General Partner's tax capital account.
At December 31, 2000, the General Partner had a positive tax capital account
balance.
The outcome of the Class Action Lawsuit described in Note 11 to the
financial statements included in Item 8 herein will be the principal factor in
determining the future of the Partnership's operations. Commencing with the
first quarter of 2000, the General Partner suspended the payment of quarterly
cash distributions pending final resolution of the Class Action Lawsuit.
Accordingly, future cash distributions are not expected to be paid until the
Class Action Lawsuit is settled or adjudicated.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Partnership's financial statements include financial instruments that
are exposed to interest rate risks.
The Partnership's exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates at
December 31, 2000 related primarily to certain of the Partnership's notes
payable for which the interest rates are based on the London Interbank Offering
Rate ("LIBOR"). However, subsequent to December 31, 2000, the Partnership
refinanced one of its variable rate notes payable with an instrument bearing a
fixed rate of interest. After considering the refinancing, the Partnership had
one note payable with a variable rate of interest. The effect of a 100 basis
point increase in the interest rate on this note payable would not have a
material effect on the Partnership's financial statements.
The Partnership's loan to Echelon Residential Holdings matures on September
8, 2002 and earns interest at a fixed annual rate of 14% for the first 24 months
and a fixed annual rate of 18% for the last 6 months of the loan, with interest
due at maturity. Investments earning a fixed rate of interest may have their
fair market value adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. The
effect of interest rate fluctuations on the Partnership in 2000 was not
material.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
- ----------------------------------------------------------
Financial Statements (Restated):
Report of Independent Auditors . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Statement of Financial Position
at December 31, 2000 and 1999. . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Statement of Operations
for the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 22
Statement of Changes in Partners' Capital
for the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 23
Statement of Cash Flows
for the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 24
Notes to the Financial Statements. . . . . . . . . . 25
- -----
- ------
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
-----------------------------------
To the Partners of American Income Fund I-E,
a Massachusetts Limited Partnership:
We have audited the accompanying statements of financial position of Partners of
American Income Fund I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership, as of December
31, 2000 and 1999, and the related statements of operations, changes in
partners' capital, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 2000. These financial statements are the responsibility of
the Partnership's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the
audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An
audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Partners of American Income
Fund I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership at December 31, 2000 and 1999, and
the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2000, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States.
The accompanying financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2000 have
been restated as discussed in Note 1.
/S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Tampa, Florida
March 30, 2001,
except for Note 1 and the last 7 paragraphs of Note 13, as to which the date is
November 7, 2001
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E,
A MASSACHUSETTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
DECEMBER 31, 2000 AND 1999
. 2000 1999
------------- ------------
. Restated
. (See Note 1)
ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,087,671 $ 6,089,722
Rents receivable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227,675 171,582
Accounts receivable - affiliate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85,244 555,112
Accounts receivable - other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,056 --
Interest receivable - loan receivable . . . . . . . . . . 587,020 --
Loan receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,790,000 --
Net investment in sales-type lease. . . . . . . . . . . . 215,215 --
Note receivable - affiliate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938,718 938,718
Investment securities - affiliate - at fair market value. 162,313 244,801
Equipment at cost, net of accumulated
depreciation of $4,823,912 and $6,929,313
at December 31, 2000 and 1999, respectively. . . . . . 5,216,254 6,289,323
------------- ------------
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 14,342,166 $14,289,258
============= ============
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' CAPITAL
Notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,249,301 $ 2,651,371
Accrued interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,870 25,556
Accrued liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481,926 398,951
Accrued liabilities - affiliate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,651 17,512
Deferred rental income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,109 47,861
Cash distributions payable to partners. . . . . . . . . . -- 235,495
------------- ------------
Total liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,801,857 3,376,746
------------- ------------
Partners' capital (deficit):
General Partner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (397,335) (428,725)
Limited Partnership Interests
(883,829.31 Units; initial purchase price of $25 each). 11,937,644 11,341,237
------------- ------------
Total partners' capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,540,309 10,912,512
------------- ------------
Total liabilities and partners' capital. . . . . . . . . $ 14,342,166 $14,289,258
============= ============
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E,
A MASSACHUSETTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998
. 2000 1999 1998
------------- ---------- ----------
. Restated
. (See Note 1)
Income:
Operating lease revenue . . . . . . . $ 1,254,943 $2,106,199 $2,430,065
Sales-type lease revenue. . . . . . . 2,231 -- --
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . 167,138 301,440 213,048
Interest income - loan receivable 587,020 -- --
Interest income - affiliate . . . . . 93,872 93,872 93,872
Gain on sale of equipment . . . . . . 186,364 908,298 208,143
------------- ---------- ----------
Total income . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,291,568 3,409,809 2,945,128
------------- ---------- ----------
Expenses:
Depreciation. . . . . . . . . . . . . 698,894 948,344 1,438,667
Interest expense. . . . . . . . . . . 222,126 234,357 338,932
Equipment management fees -
affiliate. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,456 99,353 110,415
Write-down of investment securities -
affiliate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- -- 377,849
Operating expenses - affiliate. . . . 599,807 478,472 541,742
------------- ---------- ----------
Total expenses. . . . . . . . . . . 1,581,283 1,760,526 2,807,605
------------- ---------- ----------
Net income $ 710,285 $1,649,283 $ 137,523
============= ========== ==========
Net income
per limited partnership unit. . . . . $ 0.76 $ 1.77 $ 0.15
============= ========== ==========
Cash distributions declared
per limited partnership unit $ -- $ 1.01 $ 1.01
============= ========== ==========
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E,
A MASSACHUSETTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' CAPITAL
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998
. General
. Partner Limited Partners
----------------
. Amount Units Amount Total
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Balance at December 31, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . $(439,033) 883,829.31 $ 11,145,388 $10,706,355
Net income - 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,877 -- 130,646 137,523
Unrealized loss on investment securities -
affiliate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7,184) -- (136,506) (143,690)
Less: Reclassification adjustment for write-
down of investment securities - affiliate . 18,892 -- 358,957 377,849
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Comprehensive income. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,585 -- 353,097 371,682
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Cash distributions declared . . . . . . . . . (47,100) -- (894,896) (941,996)
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Balance at December 31, 1998 . . . . . . . . . . (467,548) 883,829.31 10,603,589 10,136,041
Net income - 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82,464 -- 1,566,819 1,649,283
Unrealized gain on investment securities -
affiliate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,459 -- 65,725 ,506) 69,184
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Comprehensive income. . . . . . . . . . . . . 85,923 -- 1,632,544 1,718,467
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Cash distributions declared . . . . . . . . . (47,100) -- (894,896) (941,996)
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Balance at December 31, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . (428,725) 883,829.31 11,341,237 10,912,512
Net income - 2000 (restated). . . . . . . . . 35,514 -- 674,771 710,285
Unrealized loss on investment securities -
affiliate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4,124) -- (78,364) (82,488)
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Comprehensive income (restated) . . . . . . . 31,390 -- 596,407 627,797
---------- ---------------- ------------- ------------
Balance at December 31, 2000 (restated). . . . . $(397,335) 883,829.31 $ 11,937,644 $10,540,309
========== ================ ============= ============
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E,
A MASSACHUSETTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000, 1999 AND 1998
. 2000 1999 1998
------------- ------------ ------------
. Restated
. (See Note 1)
Cash flows provided by (used in) operating activities:
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 710,285 $ 1,649,283 $ 137,523
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income
To net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 698,894 948,344 1,438,667
Sales-type lease revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2,231) -- --
Gain on sale of equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (186,364) (908,298) (208,143)
Write-down of investment securities - affiliate. . . . . . . . . . . . -- -- 377,849
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Decrease (increase) in:
Rents receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (56,093) 129,981 (90)
Accounts receivable - affiliate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469,868 (442,428) 696,759
Interest receivable - loan receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . (587,020) -- --
Accounts receivable - other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (32,056) -- --
Collections on net investment in sales-type lease. . . . . . . . . . 52,770 -- --
Increase (decrease) in:
Accrued interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7,686) (10,741) 4,801
Accrued liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82,975 103,451 286,300
Accrued liabilities - affiliate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,139 (80) (33,178)
Deferred rental income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (16,752) (147) (57,787)
------------- ------------ ------------
Net cash provided by operating activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,130,729 1,469,365 2,642,701
------------- ------------ ------------
Cash flows (used in) provided by investing activities:
Proceeds from equipment sales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294,785 2,131,867 316,524
Issuance of loan receivable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4,790,000) -- --
------------- ------------ ------------
Net cash (used in) provided by
investing activities (4,495,215) 2,131,867 316,524
------------- ------------ ------------
Cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities:
Proceeds from notes payable 131,618 -- --
Principal payments - notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (533,688) (1,037,576) (1,080,035)
Distributions paid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (235,495) (941,996) (941,996)
------------- ------------ ------------
Net cash used in financing activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (637,565) (1,979,572) (2,022,031)
------------- ------------ ------------
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (4,002,051) 1,621,660 937,194
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 6,089,722 4,468,062 3,530,868
------------- ------------ ------------
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $ 2,087,671 $ 6,089,722 $ 4,468,062
============= ============ ============
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid during the year for interest $ 229,812 $ 245,098 $ 334,131
============= ============ ============
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities:
Equipment sold on sales-type lease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 265,754 $ -- $ --
============= ============ ============
See Note 6 to the financial statements regarding the carrying value of the
Partnership's investment securities - affiliate.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E,
A MASSACHUSETTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2000
NOTE 1 - RESTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
- --------------------------------------------------
After American Income Fund I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership ("the
Partnership") filed its Annual Report on Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1 to Form
10-K (the "2000 10-K") for the year ended December 31, 2000 with the United
States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), the Partnership determined
that the accounting treatment for the loan receivable from Echelon Residential
Holdings LLC ("Echelon Residential Holdings") required revision, as explained
below.
On March 8, 2000, the Partnership and 10 affiliated partnerships (the
''Exchange Partnerships'') collectively loaned $32 million to Echelon
Residential Holdings, a newly formed real estate company.
The Partnership's loan to Echelon Residential Holdings is $4,790,000.
Echelon Residential Holdings, through a wholly owned subsidiary (Echelon
Residential LLC), used the loan proceeds to acquire various real estate assets
from Echelon International Corporation, a Florida-based real estate company. The
loan has a term of 30 months, maturing on September 8, 2002 and an annual
interest rate of 14% for the first 24 months and 18% for the final six months.
Interest accrues and compounds monthly and is payable at maturity. In connection
with the transaction, Echelon Residential Holdings has pledged a security
interest in all of its right, title and interest in and to its membership
interests in Echelon Residential LLC to the Exchange Partnerships as collateral.
The loan receivable was previously accounted for and reported in accordance with
the guidance for Acquisition, Development and Construction Arrangements ("ADC
arrangements") in the Partnership's financial statements as of and for the year
December 31, 2000. The loan was presented as an investment in a real estate
venture and was presented net of the Partnership's share of losses in Echelon
Residential Holdings. The Partnership was allocated its proportionate share of
the unconsolidated real estate venture's net loss, excluding the interest
expense on the loan, based on the balance of its loan receivable in relation to
the real estate venture's total equity and notes payable, including the ADC
arrangements. For the period ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership's share
of losses in Echelon Residential Holdings was $363,578 and was reflected on the
Statement of Operations as ''Partnership's share of unconsolidated real estate
venture's loss''.
Subsequent to the issuance of the Partnership's financial statements for
the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership determined that the loan
receivable and related interest should be accounted for consistent with its
legal form and the Partnership should recognize the interest income, as
calculated per the contractual terms of the loan agreement to the extent such
interest income was evaluated as likely to be collected. The loan receivable
and related interest should be evaluated for impairment under Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 114 "Accounting by Creditors for Impairment
of a Loan".
Accordingly, the Partnership reversed the proportionate share of losses in
Echelon Residential Holdings of $363,578 previously recorded and recognized
interest income of $587,020, resulting in a decrease in the net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2000 of $950,598, or $1.02 per limited partnership unit.
As a result, the accompanying financial statements for the year ended December
31, 2000 have been restated from the amounts previously reported. In addition,
during the second quarter of 2001 the General Partner determined that
recoverability of the loan receivable had been impaired and at June 30, 2001
recorded an impairment of $419,125, reflecting the General Partner's current
assessment of the amount of loss that is likely to be incurred by the
Partnership. In addition to the write-down recorded at June 30, 2001, the
Partnership reserved all accrued interest of $777,417 recorded on the loan
receivable through March 31, 2001 and has ceased accruing interest on its loan
receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings, effective April 1, 2001.
NOTE 2 - ORGANIZATION AND PARTNERSHIP MATTERS
- ---------------------------------------------------
The Partnership was organized as a limited partnership under the
Massachusetts Uniform Limited Partnership Act (the "Uniform Act") on August 29,
1991, for the purpose of acquiring and leasing to third parties a diversified
portfolio of capital equipment. Partners' capital initially consisted of
contributions of $1,000 from the General Partner (AFG Leasing VI Incorporated)
and $100 from the Initial Limited Partner (AFG Assignor Corporation). On
December 4, 1991, the Partnership concluded an Interim Closing and issued
587,079.96 units of limited partnership interest (the "Units") to 654 investors
for a purchase price of $14,569,875. Included in the 587,079.96 units were
4,284.96 bonus units. On January 31, 1992, the Partnership concluded its Final
Closing. An additional 296,749.35 units (including 626.35 bonus units) were
purchased for an additional purchase price of $7,403,075 and an additional 735
investors became Limited Partners of the Partnership. As of January 31, 1992,
an aggregate total of 883,829.31 units (including 4,911.31 bonus units) had been
purchased for an aggregate total purchase price of $21,972,950 and an aggregate
of 1,089 investors had become Limited Partners of the Partnership. The
Partnership's General Partner, AFG Leasing VI Incorporated, is a Massachusetts
corporation formed in 1990 and an affiliate of Equis Financial Group Limited
Partnership (formerly known as American Finance Group), a Massachusetts limited
partnership ("EFG"). The common stock of the General Partner is owned by EFG.
The General Partner is not required to make any other capital contributions
except as may be required under the Uniform Act and Section 6.1(b) of the
Amended and Restated Agreement and Certificate of Limited Partnership (the
"Restated Agreement, as amended").
Significant operations commenced on December 4, 1991 when the Partnership
made its initial equipment acquisition. Pursuant to the Restated Agreement, as
amended, Distributable Cash From Operations and Distributable Cash From Sales or
Refinancings will be allocated 95% to the Limited Partners and 5% to the General
Partner.
Under the terms of a Management Agreement between the Partnership and EFG,
management services are provided by EFG to the Partnership at fees which the
General Partner believes to be competitive for similar services (see Note 8).
EFG is a Massachusetts limited partnership formerly known as American
Finance Group ("AFG"). AFG was established in 1988 as a Massachusetts general
partnership and succeeded American Finance Group, Inc., a Massachusetts
corporation organized in 1980. EFG and its subsidiaries (collectively, the
"Company") are engaged in various aspects of the equipment leasing business,
including EFG's role as Equipment Manager or Advisor to the Partnership and
several other direct-participation equipment leasing programs sponsored or
co-sponsored by EFG (the "Other Investment Programs"). The Company arranges to
broker or originate equipment leases, acts as remarketing agent and asset
manager, and provides leasing support services, such as billing, collecting, and
asset tracking.
The general partner of EFG, with a 1% controlling interest, is Equis
Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation owned and controlled entirely by Gary
D. Engle, its President, Chief Executive Officer and sole Director. Equis
Corporation also owns a controlling 1% general partner interest in EFG's 99%
limited partner, GDE Acquisition Limited Partnership ("GDE LP"). Equis
Corporation and GDE LP were established in December 1994 by Mr. Engle for the
sole purpose of acquiring the business of AFG.
In January 1996, the Company sold certain assets of AFG relating primarily
to the business of originating new leases, and the name "American Finance
Group," and its acronym to a third party. AFG changed its name to Equis
Financial Group Limited Partnership after the sale was concluded. Pursuant to
terms of the sale agreements, EFG specifically reserved the rights to continue
using the name American Finance Group and its acronym in connection with the
Partnership and the Other Investment Programs and to continue managing all
assets owned by the Partnership and the Other Investment Program.
NOTE 3 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
- ----------------------------------------------------------
Cash
- ----
The Partnership considers liquid investment instruments purchased with a
maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. From time to time, the
Partnership invests excess cash with large institutional banks in federal agency
discount notes and in repurchase agreements with overnight maturities. Under
the terms of the agreements, title to the underlying securities passes to the
Partnership. The securities underlying the agreements are book entry
securities. At December 31, 2000, the Partnership had $1,970,913 invested in
federal agency discount notes, repurchase agreements secured by U.S. Treasury
Bills or interests in U.S. Government securities, or other highly liquid
overnight investments.
Revenue Recognition
- --------------------
Effective January 1, 2000, the Partnership adopted the provisions of
Securities Exchange Commisssion Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, "Revenue
Recognition in Financial Statements" ("SAB No. 101"). SAB No. 101 provides
guidance for the recognition, presentation and disclosure of revenue in
financial statements. The adoption of SAB No. 101 had no impact on the
Partnership's financial statements.
Rents are payable to the Partnership monthly, quarterly or semi-annually
and no significant amounts are calculated on factors other than the passage of
time. The majority of the leases are accounted for as operating leases and are
noncancellable. Rents received prior to their due dates are deferred. In
certain instances, the Partnership may enter renewal or re-lease agreements
which expire beyond the Partnership's anticipated dissolution date. This
circumstance is not expected to prevent the orderly wind-up of the Partnership's
business activities as the General Partner and EFG would seek to sell the
then-remaining equipment assets either to the lessee or to a third party, taking
into consideration the amount of future noncancellable rental payments
associated with the attendant lease agreements. See also Note 11 regarding the
Class Action Lawsuit. Future minimum rents for operating leases of $2,307,117
are due as follows:
For the year ending December 31, 2001 $ 863,952
2002 807,482
2003 458,522
2004 177,161
----------
. Total $2,307,117
==========
Future minimum rents for operating leases does not include the operating
leases for which the lease payments are based on the usage of the equipment
leased.
Lease payments for the sales-type lease are due monthly and the related
revenue is recognized by a method which produces a constant periodic rate of
return on the outstanding investment in the lease. Future minimum lease
payments for the sales-type lease of $228,716 are due in the year ending
December 31, 2001. Unearned income is recognized as sales-type lease revenue
over the lease term using the interest method.
Revenue from major individual lessees which accounted for 10% or more of
lease revenue during the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 is as
follows:
2000 1999 1998
-------- -------- --------
Reno Air, Inc.. . . . . . . . . $314,580 $302,809 $306,806
Finnair OY. . . . . . . . . . . $226,908 $415,268 $418,516
General Motors Corporation. . . $210,609 $286,911 $363,440
Union Pacific Railroad Company. $195,745 $ -- $ --
Trans Ocean Container Corp. . . $142,258 $ -- $279,105
Southwest Airlines, Inc.. . . . $ -- $340,916 $338,112
Use of Estimates
- ------------------
The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles requires the use of estimates and assumptions
that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying
notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Equipment on Lease
- --------------------
All equipment was acquired from EFG, one of its Affiliates or from
third-party sellers. Equipment Cost means the actual cost paid by the
Partnership to acquire the equipment, including acquisition fees. Where
equipment was acquired from EFG or an Affiliate, Equipment Cost reflects the
actual price paid for the equipment by EFG or the Affiliate plus all actual
costs incurred by EFG or the Affiliate while carrying the equipment, including
all liens and encumbrances, less the amount of all primary term rents earned by
EFG or the Affiliate prior to selling the equipment. Where the seller of the
equipment was a third party, Equipment Cost reflects the seller's invoice price.
Depreciation
- ------------
The Partnership's depreciation policy is intended to allocate the cost of
equipment over the period during which it produces economic benefit. The
principal period of economic benefit is considered to correspond to each asset's
primary lease term, which term generally represents the period of greatest
revenue potential for each asset. Accordingly, to the extent that an asset is
held on primary lease term, the Partnership depreciates the difference between
(i) the cost of the asset and (ii) the estimated residual value of the asset on
a straight-line basis over such term. For purposes of this policy, estimated
residual values represent estimates of equipment values at the date of primary
lease expiration. To the extent that an asset is held beyond its primary lease
term, the Partnership continues to depreciate the remaining net book value of
the asset on a straight-line basis over the asset's remaining economic life.
Periodically, the General Partner evaluates the net carrying value of equipment
to determine whether it exceeds estimated net realizable value. Adjustments to
reduce the net carrying value of equipment are recorded in those instances where
estimated net realizable value is considered to be less than net carrying value.
The ultimate realization of residual value for any type of equipment is
dependent upon many factors, including EFG's ability to sell and re-lease
equipment. Changing market conditions, industry trends, technological advances,
and many other events can converge to enhance or detract from asset values at
any given time.
Remarketing and Maintenance Expenses
- ---------------------------------------
The Partnership expenses storage and remarketing costs associated with
aircraft and other equipment under lease as incurred.
Generally, the costs of scheduled inspections and repairs and routine
maintenance for aircraft and other equipment under lease are the responsibility
of the lessee. For aircraft under lease, scheduled airframe inspections and
repairs, such as "D checks", are generally the responsibility of the lessee. In
certain situations, the Partnership may be responsible for reimbursing the
lessee for a portion of such costs paid by the lessee prior to the redelivery
date (i.e., the expiration of the lease term) or may be entitled to receive
additional payments from the lessee based on the terms and conditions set forth
in the lease arrangement which considers, among other things, the amount of time
remaining until the next scheduled maintenance event. The Partnership records
the amount payable or receivable, with a corresponding charge or credit to
operations.
Investment Securities - Affiliate
- ------------------------------------
The Partnership's investment in Semele Group Inc. ("Semele") is considered
to be available-for-sale and as such is carried at fair value with unrealized
gains and losses reported as a separate component of partners' capital.
Other-than-temporary declines in market value are recorded as write-down of
investment in the Statement of Operations (see Note 7). Unrealized gains or
losses on the Partnership's available-for-sale securities are required to be
included in comprehensive (loss) income.
Allowance for Loan Losses
- ----------------------------
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 114,
"Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan" ("SFAS No. 114"), the
Partnership periodically evaluates the collectibility of its loans' contractual
principal and interest and the existence of loan impairment indicators,
including contemporaneous economic conditions, situations which could affect the
borrower's ability to repay its obligation, the estimated value of the
underlying collateral, and other relevant factors. Real estate values are
discounted using a present value methodology over the period between the
financial reporting date and the estimated disposition date of each property. A
loan is considered to be impaired when, based on current information and events,
it is probable that the Partnership will be unable to collect all amounts due
according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement, which includes both
principal and interest. A provision for loan losses is charged to earnings
based on the judgment of the Partnership's management of the amount necessary to
maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level adequate to absorb probable
losses.
Net Investment in Sales-Type Lease
- --------------------------------------
For leases that qualify as sales-type leases, the Partnership recognizes
profit or loss at lease inception to the extent the fair value of the property
leased differs from the carrying value. For balance sheet purposes, the
aggregate lease payments receivable are recorded on the balance sheet net of
unearned income, representing interest, as net investment in sales-type lease.
Unearned income is recognized as sales-type lease revenue over the lease term
using the interest method.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
- ----------------------------------
The carrying value of long-lived assets, including equipment and the real
estate loan, will be reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the recorded value cannot be recovered from
undiscounted future cash flows.
Accrued Liabilities - Affiliate
- ----------------------------------
Unpaid operating expenses paid by EFG on behalf of the Partnership and
accrued but unpaid administrative charges and management fees are reported as
Accrued Liabilities - Affiliate (see Note 8).
Contingencies
- -------------
It is the Partnership's policy to recognize a liability for goods and
services during the period when the goods or services are received. To the
extent that the Partnership has a contingent liability, meaning generally a
liability the payment of which is subject to the outcome of a future event, the
Partnership recognizes a liability in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 5 "Accounting for Contingencies" ("SFAS No. 5"). SFAS
No. 5 requires the recognition of contingent liabilities when the amount of
liability can be reasonably estimated and the liability is probable.
The Partnership is a Nominal Defendant in a Class Action Lawsuit. In 1998,
a settlement proposal to resolve that litigation was negotiated. After a status
conference, on June 4, 2001 the court set a trial date of March 4, 2002 and
referred the case to mediation and to a magistrate judge (See Note 11). The
Defendant's and Plaintiff's Counsel have continued to negotiate toward a
settlement and have reached agreement as to its principal business terms. As
part of the settlement, EFG has agreed to buy the loans made by the Exchange
Partnerships to Echelon Residential Holdings for an aggregate of $32 million
plus interest at 7.5% per annum, if they are not repaid prior to or at their
scheduled maturity date. Upon completion of a stipulation of settlement, the
parties will submit the settlement to the court for approval. The Partnership's
estimated exposure for costs anticipated to be incurred in pursuing the
settlement proposal is approximately $425,000 consisting principally of legal
fees and other professional service costs. These costs are expected to be
incurred regardless of whether the proposed settlement ultimately is effected
and, therefore, the Partnership expensed approximately $334,000 of these costs
in 1998 following the Court's approval of the settlement plan. The cost
estimate is subject to change and is monitored by the General Partner based upon
the progress of the litigation and other pertinent information. As a result,
the Partnership expensed additional amounts of approximately $41,000 and $50,000
for such costs during 2000 and 1999, respectively. See notes 10 and 12 for
additional discussions.
The Investment Company Act of 1940 (the "1940 Act") places restrictions on
the capital structure and business activities of companies registered
thereunder. The Partnership has active business operations in the financial
services industry, including equipment leasing, the loan to Echelon Residential
Holdings and its ownership of securities of Semele. The Partnership does not
intend to engage in investment activities in a manner or to an extent that would
require the Partnership to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act.
However, it is possible that the Partnership may unintentionally engage in an
activity or activities that may be construed to fall within the scope of the
1940 Act. The General Partner is engaged in discussions with the staff of the
Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") regarding whether or not the
Partnership may be an inadvertent investment company as a consequence of the
above-referenced loan. If the Partnership were determined to be an unregistered
investment company, its business would be adversely affected.The 1940 Act, among
other things, prohibits an unregistered investment company from offering
securities for sale or engaging in any business in interstate commerce and,
consequently, leases and contracts entered into by partnerships that are
unregistered investment companies may be voidable. The General Partner has
consulted counsel and believes that the Partnership is not an investment
company. The General Partner has determined to take action to resolve the
Partnership's status under the 1940 Act by means that may include disposing or
acquiring certain assets that it might not otherwise dispose or acquire.
Allocation of Profits and Losses
- ------------------------------------
For financial statement purposes, net income or loss is allocated to each
Partner according to their respective ownership percentages (95% to the Limited
Partners and 5% to the General Partner). See Note 10 for allocation of income
or loss for income tax purposes.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 130, "Reporting Comprehensive
Income," effective in 1998, requires the disclosure of comprehensive income
(loss) to reflect changes in partners' capital that result from transactions and
economic events from nonowner sources. Accumulated other comprehensive income
(loss) for the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 primarily represents
the Partnership's unrealized gains (losses) on the investment in Semele:
2000 1999 1998
--------- ------- ----------
Beginning balance $ 69,184 $ -- $(235,159)
Adjustments primarily related to the Partnership's
investment in Semele (82,488) 69,184 235,159
--------- ------- ----------
Ending balance $(13,304) $69,184 $ --
========= ======= ==========
Net Income (Loss) and Cash Distributions Per Unit
- --------------------------------------------------------
Net income (loss) and cash distributions per Unit are based on 883,829.31
Units outstanding during each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 2000 and are computed after allocation of the General Partner's 5% share of
net income (loss) and cash distributions.
Provision for Income Taxes
- -----------------------------
No provision or benefit from income taxes is included in the accompanying
financial statements. The Partners are responsible for reporting their
proportionate shares of the Partnership's taxable income or loss and other tax
attributes on their separate tax returns.
NOTE 4 - EQUIPMENT
- ---------------------
The following is a summary of equipment owned by the Partnership at
December 31, 2000. Remaining Lease Term (Months), as used below, represents the
number of months remaining from December 31, 2000 under contracted lease terms
and is presented as a range when more than one lease agreement is contained in
the stated equipment category. A Remaining Lease Term equal to zero reflects
equipment either held for sale or re-lease or being leased on a month-to-month
basis. In the opinion of EFG, the acquisition cost of the equipment did not
exceed its fair market value.
. Remaining
. Lease Term Equipment
Equipment Type (Months) at Cost Location
- --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------------
Aircraft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44 $ 5,659,663 NV/Foreign
Trailers/intermodal containers. . . . . . . . 30 1,756,524 CA
Railroad. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 1,522,810 NE
Materials handling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0-12 1,093,020 CT/IL/MI/PA/SC/TX
Photocopying. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 8,149 CA
-----------
Total equipment cost . . . . . . . . . . . - 10,040,166
Accumulated depreciation . - 4,823,912
-----------
Equipment, net of accumulated depreciation - $ 5,216,254
===========
In certain cases, the cost of the Partnership's equipment represents a
proportionate ownership interest. The remaining interests are owned by EFG or
an affiliated equipment leasing program sponsored by EFG. The Partnership and
each affiliate individually report, in proportion to their respective ownership
interests, their respective shares of assets, liabilities, revenues, and
expenses associated with the equipment. Proportionate equipment ownership
enabled the Partnership to further diversify its equipment portfolio at
inception by participating in the ownership of selected assets, thereby reducing
the general levels of risk which could have resulted from a concentration in any
single equipment type, industry or lessee. At December 31, 2000, the
Partnership's equipment portfolio included equipment having a proportionate
original cost of $8,940,072, representing approximately 89% of total equipment
cost.
Certain of the equipment and related lease payment streams were used to
secure term loans with third-party lenders. The preceding summary of equipment
includes leveraged equipment having an original cost of approximately $6,610,000
and a net book value of approximately $4,506,000 at December 31, 2000 (see Note
9).
Generally, the costs associated with maintaining, insuring and operating
the Partnership's equipment are incurred by the respective lessees pursuant to
terms specified in their individual lease agreements with the Partnership.
As equipment is sold to third parties, or otherwise disposed of, the
Partnership recognizes a gain or loss equal to the difference between the net
book value of the equipment at the time of sale or disposition and the proceeds
realized upon sale or disposition. The ultimate realization of estimated
residual value in the equipment is dependent upon, among other things, EFG's
ability to maximize proceeds from selling or re-leasing the equipment upon the
expiration of the primary lease terms. At December 31, 2000, all of the
Partnership's equipment was subject to contracted leases or being leased on a
month-to-month basis.
NOTE 5 - LOAN RECEIVABLE
- ----------------------------
On March 8, 2000, the Partnership and 10 affiliated partnerships (the
''Exchange Partnerships'') collectively loaned $32 million to Echelon
Residential Holdings, a newly formed real estate company. Echelon Residential
Holdings is owned by several investors, including James A. Coyne, Executive Vice
President of EFG. In addition, certain affiliates of the General Partner made
loans to Echelon Residential Holdings in their individual capacities. Echelon
Residential Holdings, through its wholly-owned subsidiary (Echelon Residential
LLC), used the loan proceeds, along with the loan proceeds from the other
Exchange Partnerships, to acquire various real estate assets from Echelon
International Corporation, an unrelated Florida-based real estate company.
In the Class Action Lawsuit, there is a risk that the court may object to the
General Partner's action in structuring the loan in this way since the EFG
officer may be deemed an affiliate and the loans in violation of the prohibition
against loans to affiliates and the court's statement in its order permitting
New Investments that all other provisions of the Partnership Agreements
governing the investment objectives and policies of the Partnership shall remain
in full force and effect. The court may require the partnerships to restructure
or divest the loan.
The Partnership's participation in the loan is $4,790,000. Echelon Residential
Holdings, through a wholly-owned subsidiary (Echelon Residential LLC), used the
loan proceeds to acquire various real estate assets from Echelon International
Corporation, a Florida-based real estate company. The loan has a term of 30
months, maturing on September 8, 2002, and an annual interest rate of 14% for
the first 24 months and 18% for the final six months. Interest accrues and
compounds monthly and is payable at maturity. During the year ended December
31, 2000, the Partnership recognized $587,020 of interest income related to this
loan. In connection with the transaction, Echelon Residential Holdings has
pledged a security interest in all of its right, title and interest in and to
its membership interests in Echelon Residential LLC to the Exchange Partnerships
as collateral. Echelon Residential Holdings has no material business interests
other than those connected with the real estate properties owned by Echelon
Residential LLC.
The summarized financial information for Echelon Residential Holdings as of
December 31, 2000 and for the period March 8, 2000 (commencement of operations)
through December 31, 2000 is as follows:
Total assets .. . . . . . . . . . . . $68,580,891
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . $70,183,162
Minority interest . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,257,367
Total deficit .. . . . . . . . . . . $(3,859,638)
Total revenues .. . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,230,212
Total expenses, minority interest
and equity in loss of unconsolidated
joint venture. . . . . . . . . . . . $11,936,238
Net loss .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $(6,706,026)
See Note 13, Subsequent Events, for discussion of an impairment recorded by
the Partnership of the loan receivable and related interest receivable during
the second quarter of 2001.
NOTE 6 - NET INVESTMENT IN SALES-TYPE LEASE
- --------------------------------------------------
The Partnership's net investment in a sales-type lease is the result of the
conditional sale of the Partnership's proportionate interest in a Boeing 737
aircraft executed in October 2000. The title to the aircraft transfers to Royal
Aviation Inc., at the expiration of the lease term. The sale of the aircraft
has been recorded by the Partnership as a sales-type lease, with a lease term
expiring in January 2002. For the year ended December 31, 2000, the Partnership
recorded a net gain on sale of equipment, for financial statement purposes, of
$81,911 for the Partnership's proportional interest in the aircraft and
recognized sales-type lease revenue of $2,231. The net book value of equipment
sold on a sales-type lease totaled $265,754, which was a non-cash transaction.
The components of the net investment in the sales-type lease are as follows:
Total minimum lease payments to be received $228,716
Less: Unearned income. . . . . . . . . . . 13,501
--------
Total. . . . . . . $215,215
========
Unearned income is being amortized to revenue over the lease term, expiring
in January 2002.
NOTE 7 - INVESTMENT SECURITIES - AFFILIATE - AT FAIR MARKET VALUE AND NOTE
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECEIVABLE - AFFILIATE
- ------------------------
As a result of an exchange transaction in 1997, the Partnership is the
beneficial owner of 42,574 shares of Semele common stock. The Partnership also
received a beneficial interest in a note receivable from Semele ("the Semele
Note") of $938,718 in connection with the exchange.
The exchange in 1997 involved the sale by five partnerships and certain
other affiliates of their beneficial interests in three cargo vessels to Semele
in exchange for cash, Semele common stock and the Semele Note. At the time of
the transaction, Semele was a public company unaffiliated with the general
partners and the partnerships. Subsequently, as part of the exchange
transaction, Semele solicited the consent of its shareholders to, among other
things, engage EFG to provide administrative services and to elect certain
affiliates of EFG and the general partners as members of the board of directors.
At that point, Semele became affiliated with EFG and the general partners. The
maturity date of the Semele Note has been extended. Since the Semele Note was
received as consideration for the sale of the cargo vessels to an unaffiliated
party and the extension of the maturity of the Semele Note is documented in an
amendment to the existing Semele Note and not as a new loan, the general
partners of the owner partnerships do not consider the Semele Note to be within
the prohibition in the Partnership Agreements against loans to or from the
General Partner and its affiliates. Nonetheless, the extension of the maturity
date might be construed to be the making of a loan to an affiliate of the
General Partner in violation of the Partnership Agreements of the owner
partnerships and to be a violation of the court's order with respect to New
Investments that all other provisions of the Partnership Agreements shall remain
in full force and effect.
In accordance with the Financial Accounting Standard Board's Statement No.
115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,
marketable equity securities classified as available-for-sale are required to be
carried at fair value. During the year ended December 31, 1998, the Partnership
decreased the carrying value of its investment in Semele common stock to $4.125
per share (the quoted price of the Semele stock on NASDAQ at December 31, 1998)
resulting in an unrealized loss in 1998 of $143,690. This loss was reported as
a component of comprehensive income, included in the Statement of Changes in
Partners' Capital. At December 31, 1998, the General Partner determined that
the decline in market value of the Semele common stock was other-than-temporary.
As a result, the Partnership wrote down the cost of the Semele common stock to
$4.125 per share for a total realized loss of $377,849 in 1998.
During the year ended December 31, 1999, the Partnership increased the
carrying value of its investment in Semele common stock to $5.75 per share (the
quoted price of the Semele stock on NASDAQ Small Cap market at December 31,
1999), resulting in an unrealized gain of $69,184. During the year ended
December 31, 2000, the Partnership decreased the carrying value of its
investment in Semele common stock to $3.8125 per share (the quoted price of the
Semele stock on NASDAQ Small Cap market at the date the stock traded closest to
December 31, 2000), resulting in an unrealized loss of $82,488. The unrealized
gain in 1999 and the unrealized loss in 2000 were reported as a component of
comprehensive income and loss, respectively, included in the Statement of
Changes in Partners' Capital.
The Semele Note bears an annual interest rate of 10% and is scheduled to
mature in April 2003.The note requires mandatory principal reductions, if and to
the extent that net proceeds are received by Semele from the sale or refinancing
of its principal real estate asset consisting of an undeveloped 274-acre parcel
of land near Malibu, California. The Partnership recognized interest income
related to the Semele Note of $93,872 in each of the years ended December 31,
2000, 1999 and 1998.
NOTE 8 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
- ----------------------------------------
All operating expenses incurred by the Partnership are paid by EFG on
behalf of the Partnership and EFG is reimbursed at its actual cost for such
expenditures. Fees and other costs incurred during the years ended December 31,
2000, 1999 and 1998, which were paid or accrued by the Partnership to EFG or its
Affiliates, are as follows:
2000 1999 1998
-------- -------- --------
Equipment management fees . . . $ 60,456 $ 99,353 $110,415
Administrative charges. . . . . 118,142 115,923 66,924
Reimbursable operating expenses
due to third parties . . . . . 481,665 362,549 474,818
-------- -------- --------
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . $660,263 $577,825 $652,157
======== ======== ========
As provided under the terms of the Management Agreement, EFG is compensated
for its services to the Partnership. Such services include acquisition and
management of equipment. For acquisition services, EFG was compensated by an
amount equal to 2.23% of Equipment Base Price paid by the Partnership. For
management services, EFG is compensated by an amount equal to 5% of gross
operating lease rental revenues and 2% of gross full payout lease rental revenue
received by the Partnership. Both acquisition and management fees are subject
to certain limitations defined in the Management Agreement.
Administrative charges represent amounts owed to EFG, pursuant to Section
9.4(c) of the Restated Agreement, as amended, for persons employed by EFG who
are engaged in providing administrative services to the Partnership.
Reimbursable operating expenses due to third parties represent costs paid by EFG
on behalf of the Partnership which are reimbursed to EFG at actual cost.
All equipment was acquired from EFG, one of its Affiliates or from
third-party sellers. The Partnership's acquisition cost was determined by the
method described in Note 3, "Equipment on Lease".
All rents and proceeds from the sale of equipment are paid directly to
either EFG or to a lender. EFG temporarily deposits collected funds in a
separate interest-bearing escrow account prior to remittance to the Partnership.
At December 31, 2000, the Partnership was owed $85,244 by EFG for such funds and
the interest thereon. These funds were remitted to the Partnership in January
2001.
Certain affiliates of the General Partner own Units in the Partnership as
follows:
Number of Percent of Total
Affiliate Units Owned Outstanding Units
Atlantic Acquisition Limited Partnership 23,472 2.66%
- ---------------------------------------- ----------- ------------------
Old North Capital Limited Partnership 87,118.15 9.86%
- ---------------------------------------- ----------- ------------------
Atlantic Acquisition Limited Partnership ("AALP") and Old North Capital
Limited Partnership ("ONC") are both Massachusetts Limited Partnerships formed
in 1995. The general partners of AALP and ONC are controlled by Gary Engle.
EFG owns limited partnership interests, representing substantially all of the
economic benefit, in AALP and the limited partnership interests of ONC are owned
by Semele. Gary D. Engle is Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of Semele and
President and Chief Executive Officer of EFG and sole shareholder and Director
of EFG's general partner. James A. Coyne, Executive Vice President of EFG, is
Semele's President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Engle and Mr. Coyne are
both members of the Board of Directors of, and own significant stock in, Semele.
NOTE 9 - NOTES PAYABLE
- --------------------------
Notes payable at December 31, 2000 consisted of installment notes of
$2,249,301 payable to banks and institutional lenders. The installment notes
bear an interest rate of either 8.22% or a fluctuating interest rate based on
LIBOR (approximately 6.7% at December 31, 2000) plus a margin. All of the
installment notes are non-recourse and are collateralized by the equipment and
assignment of the related lease payments. The Partnership has a $555,597 balloon
payment obligation to be paid at the expiration of the lease term related to
aircraft leased by Reno Air, Inc. in January 2003. The Partnership also had a
balloon payment obligation of due at the expiration of the lease term related to
an aircraft leased to Finnair OY. The Finnair indebtedness was due to mature in
2001. In addition, the Partnership had a balloon obligation of $458,501, which
matured in August 2000. The Partnership paid interest-only on this debt through
2000 and in February 2001, the Partnership and certain affiliated investment
programs refinanced this indebtedness and repaid the outstanding indebtedness
related to the Finnair OY aircraft. See Note 13 - Subsequent Event, regarding
this refinancing.
Management believes that the carrying amount of notes payable approximates
fair value at December 31, 2000 based on its experience and understanding of the
market for instruments with similar terms.
The annual maturities of the installment notes payable at December 31,
2000, reflecting the maturity of the notes in consideration of the February 2001
refinancing discussed above, are as follows:
For the year ending December 31, 2001 $ 470,927
2002 558,317
2003 837,160
2004 382,897
----------
. Total $2,249,301
==========
NOTE 10 - INCOME TAXES
- --------------------------
The Partnership is not a taxable entity for federal income tax purposes.
Accordingly, no provision for income taxes has been recorded in the accounts of
the Partnership. For financial statement purposes, the Partnership allocates
net income to each class of partner according to their respective ownership
percentages (95% to the Limited Partners and 5% to the General Partner). This
convention differs from the income or loss allocation requirements for income
tax and Dissolution Event purposes as delineated in the Restated Agreement, as
amended. For income tax purposes, the Partnership allocates net income or loss
in accordance with the provisions of such agreement. The Restated Agreement, as
amended, requires that upon dissolution of the Partnership, the General Partner
will be required to contribute to the Partnership an amount equal to any
negative balance which may exist in the General Partner's tax capital account.
At December 31, 2000, the General Partner had a positive tax capital account
balance.
The following is a reconciliation between net income or loss reported for
financial statement and federal income tax reporting purposes for the years
ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998:
2000 1999 1998
---------- ----------- ----------
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 710,285 $1,649,283 $ 137,523
Financial statement depreciation
less than tax depreciation . . . . . (409,157) (722,770) (586,707)
Deferred rental income. . . . . . . . . (16,752) (147) (57,787)
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76,515 1,244,412 448,330
---------- ----------- ----------
Net income (loss) for federal income tax
reporting purposes. . . . . . . . . . . $ 360,891 $2,170,778 $ (58,641)
========== =========== ==========
The principal component of "Other" consists of the difference between the
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tax and financial statement gain or loss on equipment disposals.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a reconciliation between partners' capital reported for
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
financial statement and federal income tax reporting purposes for the years
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ended December 31, 2000 and 1999:
- --------------------------------------
2000 1999
------------ ------------
Partners' capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11,540,309 $10,912,512
Add back selling commissions and organization and offering costs. 2,466,957 2,466,957
Unrealized loss/(gain) on investment securities - affiliate . . . 13,304 (69,184)
Cumulative difference between federal income tax
and financial statement income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2,532,081) (2,182,687)
------------ ------------
Partners' capital for federal income tax reporting purposes. . . . $11,488,489 $11,127,598
============ ============
Unrealized loss/(gain) on investment securities and cumulative difference
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
between federal income tax and financial statement income (loss) represent
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
timing differences.
- --------------------
NOTE 11 - LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
- -------------------------------
In January 1998, certain plaintiffs (the "Plaintiffs") filed a class and
derivative action, captioned Leonard Rosenblum, et al. v. Equis Financial Group
--------------------------------------------------
Limited Partnership, et al., in the United States District Court for the
- -----------------------------
Southern District of Florida (the "Court") on behalf of a proposed class of
- -------
investors in 28 equipment leasing programs sponsored by EFG, including the
- ----
Partnership (collectively, the "Nominal Defendants"), against EFG and a number
- ----
of its affiliates, including the General Partner, as defendants (collectively,
the "Defendants"). Certain of the Plaintiffs, on or about June 24, 1997, had
filed an earlier derivative action, captioned Leonard Rosenblum, et al. v. Equis
- - ----------------------------------
Financial Group Limited Partnership, et al., in the Superior Court of the
- -----------------------------------------------
Commonwealth of Massachusetts on behalf of the Nominal Defendants against the
- ------
Defendants. Both actions are referred to herein collectively as the "Class
- --
Action Lawsuit".
- --
The Plaintiffs have asserted, among other things, claims against the
Defendants on behalf of the Nominal Defendants for violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, common law fraud, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary
duty, and violations of the partnership or trust agreements that govern each of
the Nominal Defendants. The Defendants have denied, and continue to deny, that
any of them have committed or threatened to commit any violations of law or
breached any fiduciary duties to the Plaintiffs or the Nominal Defendants.
On July 16, 1998, counsel for the Defendants and the Plaintiffs executed a
Stipulation of Settlement setting forth terms pursuant to which a settlement of
the Class Action Lawsuit was intended to be achieved and which, among other
things, was at the time expected to reduce the burdens and expenses attendant to
continuing litigation. The Stipulation of Settlement was preliminarily approved
by the Court on August 20, 1998 when the Court issued its "Order Preliminarily
Approving Settlement, Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing
for Notice of, and Hearing on, the Proposed Settlement" (the "August 20 Order").
On March 12, 1999, counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Defendants entered
into an amended stipulation of settlement (the "Amended Stipulation") which was
filed with the Court on March 12, 1999. The Amended Stipulation was
preliminarily approved by the Court by its "Modified Order Preliminarily
Approving Settlement, Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing
For Notice of, and Hearing On, the Proposed Settlement" dated March 22, 1999
(the "March 22 Order"). The Amended Stipulation, among other things, divided
the Class Action Lawsuit into two separate sub-classes that could be settled
individually. On May 26, 1999, the Court issued an Order and Final Judgment
approving settlement of one of the sub-classes. Settlement of the second
sub-class, involving the Partnership and 10 affiliated partnerships
(collectively referred to as the "Exchange Partnerships"), remained pending due,
in part, to the complexity of the proposed settlement pertaining to this class.
In February 2000, counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Defendants entered
into a second amended stipulation of settlement (the "Second Amended
Stipulation") which modified certain of the settlement terms contained in the
Amended Stipulation. The Second Amended Stipulation was preliminarily approved
by the Court by its "Second Modified Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement,
Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing For Notice of, and
Hearing On, the Proposed Settlement" dated March 6, 2000 (the "March 2000
Order"). Prior to issuing a final order approving the settlement of the second
sub-class involving the Partnership, the Court will hold a fairness hearing that
will be open to all interested parties and permit any party to object to the
settlement. The investors of the Partnership and all other plaintiff sub-class
members will receive a Notice of Settlement and other information pertinent to
the settlement of their claims that will be mailed to them in advance of the
fairness hearing.
The settlement of the second sub-class was premised on the consolidation of
the Exchange Partnerships' net assets (the "Consolidation"), subject to certain
conditions, into a single successor company ("Newco"). Under the proposed
Consolidation, the partners of the Exchange Partnerships would receive both
common stock in Newco and a cash distribution; and thereupon the Exchange
Partnerships would be dissolved. In addition, EFG would contribute certain
management contracts, operations personnel, and business opportunities to Newco
and cancel its current management contracts with all of the Exchange
Partnerships. Newco would operate principally as a finance company and would
use its best efforts to list its shares on the NASDAQ National Market or another
national exchange or market as soon after the Consolidation as Newco deems that
market conditions and its business operations are suitable for listing its
shares and Newco has satisfied all necessary regulatory and listing
requirements. The potential benefits and risks of the Consolidation were to be
presented in a Solicitation Statement that would be mailed to all of the
partners of the Exchange Partnerships as soon as the associated regulatory
review process was completed and at least 60 days prior to the fairness hearing.
A preliminary Solicitation Statement was filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on August 24, 1998.
One of the principal objectives of the Consolidation was to create a
company that would have the potential to generate more value for the benefit of
existing limited partners than other alternatives, including continuing the
Partnership's customary business operations until all of its assets are disposed
in the ordinary course of business. To facilitate the realization of this
objective, the Amended Stipulation provided, among other things, that commencing
March 22, 1999, the Exchange Partnerships could collectively invest up to 40% of
the total aggregate net asset values of all of the Exchange Partnerships in any
investment, including additional equipment and other business activities that
the general partners of the Exchange Partnerships and EFG reasonably believed to
be consistent with the anticipated business interests and objectives of Newco,
subject to certain limitations. The Second Amended Stipulation, among other
things, quantified the 40% limitation using a whole dollar amount of $32 million
in the aggregate.
On March 8, 2000, the Exchange Partnerships collectively made a $32 million
loan as permitted by the Second Amended Stipulation approved by the Court. The
Partnership's portion of the aggregate loan is $4,790,000. The loan consists of
a term loan to Echelon Residential Holdings, a newly-formed real estate company
that is owned by several independent investors and, in his individual capacity,
James A. Coyne, Executive Vice President of EFG. In addition, certain affiliates
of the General Partner made loans to Echelon Residential Holdings in their
individual capacities. Echelon Residential Holdings, through a wholly owned
subsidiary (Echelon Residential LLC), used the loan proceeds, along with the
loan proceeds from similar loans by ten affiliated partnerships representing $32
million in the aggregate, to acquire various real estate assets from Echelon
International Corporation, an unrelated Florida-based real estate company. The
loan has a term of 30 months maturing on September 8, 2002 and bears interest at
the annual rate of 14% for the first 24 months and 18% for the final six months
of the term. Interest accrues and compounds monthly but is not payable until
maturity. Echelon Residential Holdings has pledged its membership interests in
Echelon Residential LLC to the Exchange Partnerships as collateral for the loan.
In the absence of the Court's authorization to enter into new investment
activities, the Partnership's Restated Agreement, as amended, would not permit
such activities without the approval of limited partners owning a majority of
the Partnership's outstanding Units. Consistent with the Amended Stipulation,
the Second Amended Stipulation provides terms for unwinding any new investment
transactions in the event that the Consolidation is not effected or the
Partnership objects to its participation in the Consolidation.
The Second Amended Stipulation, as well as the Amended Stipulation and the
original Stipulation of Settlement, prescribe certain conditions necessary to
effect a final settlement, including providing the partners of the Exchange
Partnerships with the opportunity to object to the participation of their
partnership in the Consolidation. Assuming the proposed settlement were
effected according to its terms, the Partnership's share of legal fees and
expenses related to the Class Action Lawsuit and the Consolidation was estimated
to be approximately $425,000, of which approximately $334,000 was expensed by
the Partnership in 1998 and additional amounts of approximately $41,000 and
$50,000 were expensed in 2000 and 1999, respectively.
While the Court's August 20 Order enjoined certain class members, including
all of the partners of the Partnership, from transferring, selling, assigning,
giving, pledging, hypothecating, or otherwise disposing of any Units pending the
Court's final determination of whether the settlement should be approved, the
March 22 Order permitted the partners to transfer Units to family members or as
a result of the divorce, disability or death of the partner. No other transfers
are permitted pending the Court's final determination of whether the settlement
should be approved. The provision of the August 20 Order which enjoined the
General Partners of the Exchange Partnerships from, among other things,
recording any transfers not in accordance with the Court's order remains
effective.
On March 12, 2001, after a status conference and hearing, the Court issued
an order that required the parties, no later than May 15, 2001, to advise the
Court on (a) whether the SEC has completed its review of the solicitation
statement and related materials submitted to the SEC in connection with the
proposed settlement, and (b) whether parties request the Court to schedule a
hearing for final approval of the proposed settlement or are withdrawing the
proposed settlement from judicial consideration and resuming the litigation of
the Plaintiffs' claims. The Court also directed the parties to use their best
efforts to assist the SEC so that its regulatory review may be completed on or
before May 15, 2001. The Court continued the Final Approval Settlement Hearing
until a date to be scheduled in July 2001 after receipt from the parties of a
request to schedule a hearing. Subsequently, after the parties had responded to
the court's order and had participated in a status conference on May 31, 2001,
the court issued an order on June 4, 2001 setting a trial date of March 4, 2002,
referring the case to mediation and referring discovery to a magistrate judge.
The Defendant's and Plaintiff's Counsel have continued to negotiate toward a
settlement and have reached agreement as to its principal business terms. As
part of the settlement, EFG has agreed to buy the loans made by the Exchange
Partnerships to Echelon Residential Holdings for an aggregate of $32 million
plus interest at 7.5% per annum, if they are not repaid prior to or at their
scheduled maturity date. Upon completion of a stipulation of settlement, the
parties will submit the settlement to the court for approval. See Note 13,
Subsequent Events, for an update of the status of proceedings.
NOTE 12 - QUARTERLY RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited)
- ------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a summary of the quarterly results of operations for the years
ended December 31, 2000 and 1999:
Three Months Ended
March 31, June 30, September 30, December 31, Total
---------- --------- --------------- -------------- -----------
2000
----------
(As Restated)
Total operating and sales-type lease revenue. $ 324,453 $ 294,311 $ 289,953 $ 348,457 $1,257,174
Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146,498 242,049 35,375 286,363 710,285
Net income (loss) per
limited partnership unit . 0.15 0.26 0.04 0.31 0.76
2000
----------
(As Previously Reported)
Total operating and sales-type lease revenue. $ 324,453 $ 294,311 $ 289,953 $ 348,457 $1,257,174
Net income (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97,104 42,906 (223,596) (156,727) (240,313)
Net income (loss) per
limited partnership unit . 0.10 0.05 (0.24) (0.17) (0.26)
1999
----------
Total lease revenue $ 519,367 $ 599,836 $ 507,181 $ 479,815 $2,106,199
Net income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201,588 741,730 228,275 477,690 1,649,283
Net income per
limited partnership unit. . . . . . . . . . 0.22 0.80 0.25 0.50 1.77
- ------
NOTE 13 - SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
- -------------------------------
Debt Refinancing
- -----------------
In February 2001, the Partnership and certain affiliated investment
programs (collectively "the Programs") refinanced the outstanding indebtedness
and accrued interest related to an aircraft on lease to Aerovias de Mexico, S.A.
de C.V. In addition to refinancing the Programs' total existing indebtedness
and accrued interest of $4,758,845, the Programs received additional debt
proceeds of $3,400,177. The Partnership's aggregate share of the refinanced and
new indebtedness was $792,567, including $462,274 used to repay the existing
indebtedness on the refinanced aircraft. The Partnership used a portion of its
share of the additional proceeds of $330,293 to repay the outstanding balance of
the indebtedness and accrued interest related to the aircraft on lease to
Finnair OY of $85,579 and certain aircraft reconfiguration costs that the
Partnership had accrued at December 31, 2000. The new indebtedness bears a
fixed interest rate of 7.65%, principal is amortized monthly and the Partnership
has a balloon payment obligation at the expiration of the lease term of $264,310
in September 2004.
Legal Proceedings
- ------------------
On May 11, 2001, the general partners of the Partnerships that are nominal
defendants in the Class Action Lawsuit received a letter dated May 10, 2001 from
the Associate Director and Chief Counsel of the Division of Investment
Management of the SEC informing the general partners that the staff of the
Division believes that American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership,
American Income Partners V-B Limited Partnership, American Income Partners V-C
Limited Partnership, American Income Partners V-D Limited Partnership, American
Income Fund I-A, American Income Fund I-B, American Income Fund I-E and AIRFUND
II International Limited Partnership (the "Designated Partnerships") are
investment companies as defined in Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act. The SEC
staff noted that Section 7 of the Act makes it unlawful for an unregistered
investment company, among other things, to offer, sell, purchase, or acquire any
security or engage in any business in interstate commerce. Accordingly, Section
7 would prohibit any partnership that is an unregistered investment company from
engaging in any business in interstate commerce, except transactions that are
merely incidental to its dissolution. The SEC staff asked that the general
partners advise them within the next 30 days as to what steps the Designated
Partnerships will take to address their status under the 1940 Act. The SEC
staff asserts that the notes evidencing the loans to Echelon Residential
Holdings are investment securities and the ownership of the notes by said
partnerships cause them to be investment companies and that, in the case of
American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership and V-B Limited Partnership,
they may have become investment companies when they received the Semele
securities as part of the compensation for the sale of a vessel to Semele in
1997. The general partners have consulted with counsel who specializes in the
1940 Act and, based on counsel's advice, do not believe that the Designated
Partnerships are investment companies.
The letter also stated that the Division is considering whether to commence
enforcement action with respect to this matter. Noting that the parties to the
Class Action Lawsuit were scheduled to appear before the court in the near
future to consider a proposed settlement, and that the SEC staff believed that
its views, as expressed in the letter, would be relevant to the specific matters
that will be considered by the court at the hearing, the SEC staff submitted the
letter to the court for its consideration.
On May 15, 2001, Defendants' Counsel filed with the court Defendants'
Status Report pursuant to the court's March 12, 2001 Order. Defendants reported
that, notwithstanding the parties' best efforts, the staff of the SEC has not
completed its review of the solicitation statement in connection with the
proposed settlement of the Class Action Lawsuit. Nonetheless, the Defendants
stated their belief that the parties should continue to pursue the court's final
approval of the proposed settlement. In this regard, the Defendants also have
maintained, on the advice of special 1940 Act counsel that, even if the 1940 Act
applies to the Designated Partnerships, the 1940 Act does not prohibit going
forward with the proposed settlement, as that transaction is merely incidental
to a dissolution of the Partnerships and therefore is not subject to the
prohibitions of Section 7 of the 1940 Act.
The Defendants also referred to the SEC staff's letter of May 10, 2001
asserting that certain of the partnerships are investment companies and to
special 1940 Act counsel's submissions to the SEC staff setting forth the
reasons why the 1940 Act does not apply to the Designated Partnerships, noting
that counsel had informed the staff of the Division of Investment Management
that, based upon counsel's understanding of the surrounding circumstances and
after an in-depth analysis of the applicable law, if asked, counsel would be
willing to issue an opinion of the firm that none of the partnerships is an
investment company under the 1940 Act. The Defendants stated their belief that
the proposed settlement is still viable and in the best interests of the parties
and that final approval should be pursued. The Defendants advised the court
that they believe that if the court were to address the issue of whether or not
the 1940 Act applies to the partnerships and the proposed consolidation, it
could remove the major obstacle to the settlement being finally consummated.
The Defendants also requested that the court schedule a hearing to address on a
preliminary basis the objection to the proposed settlement raised in the staff's
May 10, 2001 letter.
Plaintiffs' Counsel also submitted a Plaintiffs' Status Report to the court
on May 15, 2001 in which they reported that the SEC review has not been
concluded and that they notified the Defendants that they would not agree to
continue to stay the further prosecution of the litigation in favor of the
settlement and that they intend to seek court approval to immediately resume
active prosecution of the claims of the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' Counsel stated
in the Report that the "[p]laintiffs continue to believe that the settlement is
in the best interests of the Operating Partnership Sub-class. However, since
the SEC has yet to complete its review of the proxy, the Plaintiffs do not
believe that the litigation should continue to be stayed so that the SEC may
continue its regulatory review for an indefinite period of time." Plaintiffs
requested a pre-trial conference to schedule filing of Plaintiffs' motion for
class certification on or before May 29, 2001 and resumption of merits discovery
and discovery related to the class certification motion. Subsequently, after a
status conference on May 31, 2001, the court issued an order on June 4, 2001
setting a trial date of March 4, 2002, referred the case to mediation and
referred discovery to a magistrate judge. The Defendant's and Plaintiff's
Counsel have continued to negotiate toward a settlement and have reached
agreement as to its principal business terms. As part of the settlement, EFG
has agreed to buy the loans made by the Exchange Partnerships to Echelon
Residential Holdings for an aggregate of $32 million plus interest at 7.5% per
annum, if they are not repaid prior to or at their scheduled maturity date.
Upon completion of a stipulation of settlement, the parties will submit the
settlement to the court for approval.
There can be no assurance that a settlement of the sub-class involving the
Exchange Partnerships will receive final Court approval and be effected.
However, in the absence of a final settlement approved by the Court, the
Defendants intend to defend vigorously against the claims asserted in the Class
Action Lawsuit. Neither the General Partner nor its affiliates can predict with
any degree of certainty the cost of continuing litigation to the Partnership or
the ultimate outcome.
Impairment of Loan Receivable
- --------------------------------
The General Partner has determined that recoverability of the Partnership's
loan receivable from Echelon Residential Holdings, including accrued interest,
became impaired during the second quarter of 2001. As a result, the Partnership
recorded an impairment of $419,125 at June 30, 2001, reflecting the General
Partner's assessment of the amount of loss that is likely to be incurred by the
Partnership. In addition to the write-down recorded at June 30, 2001, the
Partnership reserved all accrued interest recorded on the loan through March 31,
2001, or $777,417, and has ceased the accrual of future interest, effective
April 1, 2001. The write-down was precipitated principally by a slowing U.S.
economy and its effects on the real estate development industry. The economic
outlook for the properties that existed when the loan was funded has
deteriorated and inhibited the ability of Echelon Residential Holdings'
management to secure low-cost sources of development capital, including but not
limited to joint-venture or equity partners. In response to these developments
and lower risk tolerances in the credit markets, the management of Echelon
Residential Holdings decided in the second quarter of 2001 to concentrate its
prospective development activities within the southeastern United States and,
therefore, to dispose of development sites located elsewhere. In May 2001,
Echelon Residential Holdings closed its Texas-based development office; and
since the beginning of 2001, the company has sold three of nine properties (two
in July 2001 and one in October 2001). As of November 2001, one additional
property is under contract to be sold, subject to due diligence that remains
pending. As a result of these developments, the General Partner does not believe
that Echelon Residential Holdings will realize the profit levels originally
believed to be achievable from either selling these properties as a group or
developing all of them as multi-family residential communities.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial Disclosure.
- ----------------------
None.
PART III
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Partnership.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
(a-b) Identification of Directors and Executive Officers
The Partnership has no Directors or Officers. As indicated in Item 1 of
this report, AFG Leasing VI Incorporated is the sole General Partner of the
Partnership. Under the Restated Agreement, as amended, the General Partner is
solely responsible for the operation of the Partnership's properties. The
Limited Partners have no right to participate in the control of the
Partnership's general operations, but they do have certain voting rights, as
described in Item 12 herein. The names, titles and ages of the Directors and
Executive Officers of the General Partner as of March 15, 2001 are as follows:
DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE GENERAL PARTNER (See Item 13)
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Title Age Term
- ---------------------- --------------------------------------- --- ---------
Geoffrey A. MacDonald Chairman of EFG . Until a
. and President and a Director . successor
. of the General Partner 52 is duly
. . . elected
Gary D. Engle President and Chief Executive . and
. Officer of EFG 52 qualified
Michael J. Butterfield Executive Vice President and Chief
. Operating Officer of EFG and Treasurer
. of the General Partner 41
Gail D. Ofgant Senior Vice President, Lease Operations
. of EFG and Senior Vice President
. of the General Partner 35
(c) Identification of Certain Significant Persons
- -----------------------------------------------------------
None.
- ----------
(d) Family Relationship
- ------------------------------
No family relationship exists among any of the foregoing Partners,
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Directors or Executive Officers.
- -----------------------------------
(e) Business Experience
Mr. MacDonald, age 52, is Chairman of EFG and has been President of the
General Partner since 1990 and a Director of the General Partner since 1990.
Mr. McDonald was a co-founder of EFG's predecessor, American Finance Group,
which was established in 1980. Mr. MacDonald is a member of the Board of
Managers of Echelon Development Holdings LLC and President of American Finance
Group Securities Corporation. Prior to co-founding American Finance Group, Mr.
MacDonald held various positions in the equipment leasing industry and the
ethical pharmaceutical industry with Eli Lilly & Company. Mr. MacDonald holds
an M.B.A. from Boston College and a B.A. degree from the University of
Massachusetts (Amherst).
Mr. Engle, age 52, is President and Chief Executive Officer of EFG, sole
shareholder and Director of its general partner, Equis Corporation, and a Vice
President and Director of several of EFG's subsidiaries and affiliates. Mr.
Engle is President of AFG Realty Corporation. Mr. Engle is also Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer of Semele Group Inc. ("Semele") and a member of the
Board of Managers of Echelon Development Holdings LLC. Mr. Engle controls the
general partners of Atlantic Acquisition Limited Partnership ("AALP") and Old
North Capital Limited Partnership ("ONC"). Mr. Engle joined EFG in 1990 as an
Executive Vice President and acquired control of EFG and its subsidiaries in
December 1994. Mr. Engle co-founded Cobb Partners Development, Inc., a real
estate and mortgage banking company, where he was a principal from 1987 to 1989.
From 1980 to 1987, Mr. Engle was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of Arvida Disney Company, a large-scale community development
organization owned by Walt Disney Company. Prior to 1980, Mr. Engle served in
various management consulting and institutional brokerage capacities. Mr. Engle
has an M.B.A. degree from Harvard University and a B.S. degree from the
University of Massachusetts (Amherst).
Mr. Butterfield, age 41, is Executive Vice President and Chief Operating
Officer of EFG and has served as Vice President and Treasurer of the General
Partner since 1996. Mr. Butterfield also serves as Vice President and Treasurer
of subsidiaries and affiliates of EFG. Mr. Butterfield is also Chief Financial
Officer of Semele and Vice President, Finance and Clerk of Equis/Echelon
Management Corporation, the manager of Echelon Residential LLC. Mr. Butterfield
joined EFG in June 1992 and became a Vice President in 1996 and Executive Vice
President and Chief Operating Officer in 2000. Prior to joining EFG, Mr.
Butterfield was an audit manager with Ernst & Young LLP, which he joined in
1987. Mr. Butterfield was also employed in public accounting and industry
positions in New Zealand and London (UK) prior to coming to the United States in
1987. Mr. Butterfield attained his Associate Chartered Accountant (A.C.A.)
professional qualification in New Zealand and has completed his C.P.A.
requirements in the United States. Mr. Butterfield holds a Bachelor of Commerce
degree from the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Ms. Ofgant, age 35, is Senior Vice President, Lease Operations of EFG and
has served as Senior Vice President of the General Partner since 1998. Ms.
Ofgant also serves as Senior Vice President for certain EFG's affiliates,
including the General Partner. Ms. Ofgant is Senior Vice President and Assistant
Clerk of Equis/Echelon Management Corporation, the manager of Echelon
Residential LLC. Ms. Ofgant joined EFG in July 1989 and held various positions
with the company before becoming Senior Vice President in 1998. From 1987 to
1989, Ms. Ofgant was employed by Security Pacific National Trust Company. Ms.
Ofgant holds a B.S. degree from Providence College.
(f) Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings
- ------------------------------------------------------
None.
- ----------
(g) Promoters and Control Persons
- ------------------------------------------
Not applicable.
- ---------------------
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
- -----------------------------------
(a) Cash Compensation
Currently, the Partnership has no employees. However, under the terms of
the Restated Agreement, as amended, the Partnership is obligated to pay all
costs of personnel employed full or part-time by the Partnership, including
officers or employees of the General Partner or its Affiliates. There is no
plan at the present time to make any officers or employees of the General
Partner or its Affiliates employees of the Partnership. The Partnership has not
paid and does not propose to pay any options, warrants or rights to the officers
or employees of the General Partner or its Affiliates.
(b) Compensation Pursuant to Plans
None.
(c) Other Compensation
Although the Partnership has no employees, as discussed in Item 11(a),
pursuant to Section 9.4(c) of the Restated Agreement, as amended, the
Partnership incurs a monthly charge for personnel costs of the Manager for
persons engaged in providing administrative services to the Partnership. A
description of the remuneration paid by the Partnership to the Manager for such
services is included in Item 13 herein and in Note 8 of the financial statements
included in Item 8, herein.
(d) Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights.
Not applicable.
(e) Long-Term Incentive Plan Awards Table.
Not applicable.
(f) Defined Benefit or Actuarial Plan Disclosure.
Not applicable.
(g) Compensation of Directors
None.
(h) Termination of Employment and Change of Control Arrangement
There exists no remuneration plan or arrangement with the General Partner
or its Affiliates which results or may result from their resignation, retirement
or any other termination.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By virtue of its organization as a limited partnership, the Partnership has
outstanding no securities possessing traditional voting rights. However, as
provided in Section 10.2(a) of the Restated Agreement, as amended (subject to
Sections 10.2(b) and 10.3), a majority interest of the Limited Partners has
voting rights with respect to:
1. Amendment of the Restated Agreement;
2. Termination of the Partnership;
3. Removal of the General Partner; and
4. Approval or disapproval of the sale of all, or substantially all, of the
assets of the Partnership (except in the orderly liquidation of the Partnership
upon its termination and dissolution).
As of March 15, 2001, the following person or group owns beneficially more
than 5% of the Partnership's 883,829.31 outstanding Units:
. Name and Amount Percent
. Title Address of of Beneficial of
of Class Beneficial Owner Ownership Class
- ----------------------- ------------------------------------- --------------- --------
Units Representing Old North Capital Limited Partnership
Limited Partnership 88 Broad Street 87,118.15 Units 9.86%
Interests Boston, MA 02110
The general partner of Old North Capital Limited Partnership ("ONC") is
controlled by Gary D. Engle and the limited partnership interests of ONC are
owned by Semele. Gary D. Engle is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
Semele. James A. Coyne, Executive Vice President of EFG, is Semele's President
and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Engle and Mr. Coyne are both members of the
Board of Directors of, and own significant stock in, Semele.
The ownership and organization of EFG is described in Item 1 of this
report.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.
- --------------------------------------------------------------
The General Partner of the Partnership is AFG Leasing VI Incorporated, an
affiliate of EFG.
(a) Transactions with Management and Others
All operating expenses incurred by the Partnership are paid by EFG on
behalf of the Partnership and EFG is reimbursed at its actual cost for such
expenditures. Fees and other costs incurred during the years ended December 31,
2000, 1999 and 1998, which were paid or accrued by the Partnership to EFG or its
Affiliates, are as follows:
2000 1999 1998
-------- -------- --------
Equipment management fees . . . . . . . . . . . $ 60,456 $ 99,353 $110,415
Administrative charges. . . . . . . . . . . . . 118,142 115,923 66,924
Reimbursable operating expenses
due to third parties . . . . . . . . . . . . 481,665 362,549 474,818
-------- -------- --------
Total . $660,263 $577,825 $652,157
======== ======== ========
As provided under the terms of the Management Agreement, EFG is compensated
for its services to the Partnership. Such services include acquisition and
management of equipment. For acquisition services, EFG was compensated by an
amount equal to 2.23% of Equipment Base Price paid by the Partnership. For
management services, EFG is compensated by an amount equal to 5% of gross
operating lease rental revenues and 2% of gross full payout lease rental revenue
received by the Partnership. Both acquisition and management fees are subject
to certain limitations defined in the Management Agreement.
Administrative charges represent amounts owed to EFG, pursuant to Section
9.4(c) of the Restated Agreement, as amended, for persons employed by EFG who
are engaged in providing administrative services to the Partnership.
Reimbursable operating expenses due to third parties represent costs paid by EFG
on behalf of the Partnership which are reimbursed to EFG at actual cost.
All equipment was purchased from EFG, one of its affiliates or from
third-party sellers. The Partnership's acquisition cost was determined by the
method described in Note 3 to the financial statements included in Item 8,
herein.
As a result of an exchange in 1997, the Partnership is the beneficial owner
of 42,574 shares of Semele common stock and holds a beneficial interest in a
note from Semele (the "Semele Note") of $938,718. The Semele Note matures in
April 2003 and bears an annual interest rate of 10% with mandatory principal
reductions prior to maturity, if and to the extent that net proceeds are
received by Semele from the sale or refinancing of its principal real estate
asset consisting of an undeveloped 274-acre parcel of land near Malibu,
California. For further discussion, see Note 7, "Investment Securities -
Affiliate and Note Receivable - Affiliate to the financial statements included
in Item 8 herein and Item 10.
The exchange in 1997 involved the sale by five partnerships and certain
other affiliates of their beneficial interests in three cargo vessels to Semele
in exchange for cash, Semele common stock and the Semele Note. At the time of
the transaction, Semele was a public company unaffiliated with the general
partners and the partnerships. Subsequently, as part of the exchange
transaction, Semele solicited the consent of its shareholders to, among other
things, engage EFG to provide administrative services and to elect certain
affiliates of EFG and the general partners as members of the board of directors.
At that point, Semele became affiliated with EFG and the general partners. The
maturity date of the Semele Note has been extended. Since the Semele Note was
received as consideration for the sale of the cargo vessels to an unaffiliated
party and the extension of the maturity of the Semele Note is documented in an
amendment to the existing Semele Note and not as a new loan, the general
partners of the owner partnerships do not consider the Semele Note to be within
the prohibition in the Partnership Agreements against loans to or from the
General Partner and its affiliates. Nonetheless, the extension of the maturity
date might be construed to be the making of a loan to an affiliate of the
General Partner in violation of the Partnership Agreements of the owner
partnerships and to be a violation of the court's order with respect to New
Investments that all other provisions of the Partnership Agreements shall remain
in full force and effect.
All rents and proceeds from the sale of equipment are paid directly to
either EFG or to a lender. EFG temporarily deposits collected funds in a
separate interest-bearing escrow account prior to remittance to the Partnership.
At December 31, 2000, the Partnership was owed $85,244 by EFG for such funds and
the interest thereon. These funds were remitted to the Partnership in January
2001.
Certain affiliates of the General Partner own Units in the Partnership as
follows:
Number of Percent of Total
Affiliate Units Owned Outstanding Units
Atlantic Acquisition Limited Partnership 23,472 2.66%
- ---------------------------------------- ----------- ------------------
Old North Capital Limited Partnership 87,118.15 9.86%
- ---------------------------------------- ----------- ------------------
Atlantic Acquisition Limited Partnership ("AALP") and Old North Capital
Limited Partnership ("ONC") are both Massachusetts limited partnerships formed
in 1995. The general partners of AALP and ONC are controlled by Gary D. Engle.
EFG owns limited partnership interests, representing substantially all of the
economic benefit, of AALP and the limited partnership interests in ONC are owned
by Semele. Gary D. Engle is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Semele and
President and Chief Executive Officer of EFG and sole shareholder and Director
of EFG's general partner. James A. Coyne, Executive Vice President of EFG, is
Semele's President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Engle and Mr. Coyne are
both members of the Board of Directors of, and own significant stock in, Semele.
The discussions of the loan to Echelon Residential Holdings in Items 1(b)
and 1(c) above are incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Certain Business Relationships
None.
(c) Indebtedness of Management to the Partnership
None.
(d) Transactions with Promoters
Not applicable.
PART IV
Item 14. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules and Reports on Form 8-K.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Documents filed as part of this report:
(2) Financial Statement Schedules:
None required.
(3) Exhibits:
Except as set forth below, all Exhibits to Form 10-K, as set forth in
Item 601 of Regulation S-K, are not applicable.
A list of exhibits filed or incorporated by reference is as follows:
Exhibit
Number
------
2.1 Plaintiffs' and Defendants' Joint Motion to Modify Order
Preliminarily Approving Settlement, Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class
and Providing for Notice of, and Hearing on, the Proposed Settlement was filed
in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31,
1998 as Exhibit 2.1 and is incorporated herein by reference.
2.2 Plaintiffs' and Defendants' Joint Memorandum in Support
of Joint Motion to Modify Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement,
Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing for Notice of, and
Hearing on, the Proposed Settlement was filed in the Registrant's Annual Report
on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 1998 as Exhibit 2.2 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
2.3 Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement, Conditionally
Certifying Settlement Class and Providing for Notice of, and Hearing on, the
Proposed Settlement (August 20, 1998) was filed in the Registrant's Annual
Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 1998 as Exhibit 2.3 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
2.4 Modified Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement,
Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing for Notice of, and
Hearing on, the Proposed Settlement (March 22, 1999) was filed in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 1998
as Exhibit 2.4 and is incorporated herein by reference.
2.5 Plaintiffs' and Defendants' Joint Memorandum in Support of
Joint Motion to Further Modify Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement,
Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing for Notice of, and
Hearing on, the Proposed Settlement was filed in the Registrant's Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 as Exhibit 2.5 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
2.6 Second Modified Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement,
Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class and Providing for Notice of, and
Hearing on, the Proposed Settlement (March 5, 2000) was filed in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 as
Exhibit 2.6 and is incorporated herein by reference.
2.7 Proposed Order Granting Joint Motion to Continue Final
Approval Settlement Hearing (March 13, 2001) was filed in the Registrant's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000 and is
incorporated herein by reference.
2.8 Order Setting Trial Date and Discovery Deadlines, Referring
Case to Mediation and Referring Discovery to United States Magistrate Judge
(June 4, 2001).
Exhibit
Number
------
4 Amended and Restated Agreement and Certificate of Limited
Partnership included as Exhibit A to the Prospectus, which was included in
Registration Statement on Form S-1 (No. 33-35148) and is incorporated herein by
reference.
10.1 Promissory Note in the principal amount of $4,790,000 dated
March 8, 2000 between the Registrant, as lender, and Echelon Residential
Holdings LLC, as borrower, was filed in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 as Exhibit 10.1 and is incorporated
herein by reference.
10.2 Pledge Agreement dated March 8, 2000 between Echelon
Residential Holdings LLC (Pledgor) and American Income Partners V-A Limited
Partnership, as Agent for itself and the Registrant, was filed in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 as
Exhibit 10.2 and is incorporated herein by reference.
10.3 Promissory Note from Semele Group Inc. (formerly known
as Banyan Strategic Land Fund II), dated May 31, 1997 was filed as in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000 and
is incorporated herein by reference.
10.4 The First Allonge to Promissory Note from Semele Group Inc.
(formerly known as Banyan Strategic Land Fund II), dated March 21, 2000 was
filed as in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2000 and is incorporated herein by reference.
10.5 The Second Allonge to Promissory Note from Semele Group Inc. (formerly
known as Banyan Strategic Land Fund II), dated March 12, 2001 was filed as in
the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000
and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(a) Lease agreement with General Motors Corporation was
filed in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 1991 as Exhibit 28 (b) and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(b) Lease agreement with Reno Air Inc. was filed in
the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1998 as Exhibit 99 (d) and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(c) Lease agreement with Finnair OY was filed in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 as
Exhibit 99 (e) and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(d) Lease agreement with Finnair OY was filed in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 as
Exhibit 99 (f) and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(e) Lease agreement with Southwest Airlines was filed in the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 as
Exhibit 99 (g) and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(f) Lease agreement with Southwest Airlines was filed
in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1998 as Exhibit 99 (h) and is incorporated herein by reference.
Exhibit
Number
------
99(g) Lease agreement with Southwest Airlines was filed
in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1998 as Exhibit 99 (i) and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(h) Lease agreement with Trans Ocean Container
Corporation, Inc. was filed in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1998 as Exhibit 99 (j) and is incorporated herein by
reference.
99(i) Lease agreement with Union Pacific Railroad
Company was filed in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2000 and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(j) Lease agreement with Air Slovakia BWJ, Ltd. was filed
in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000 and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(k) Lease agreement with Aerovias de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. was filed
in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000 and is incorporated herein by reference.
99(l) Aircraft Conditional Sale agreement with Royal Aviation Inc.
was filed in the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2000 and is incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Reports on Form 8-K
None.
(c) Other Exhibits
None.
(d) Financial Statement Schedules:
Consolidated Financial Statements for Echelon Residential Holdings LLC as of
December 31, 2000 and
for the Period March 8, 2000 (Date of Inception) through December 31, 2000 and
Independent Auditors' Report.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this
report has been signed below, by the following persons, on behalf of the
registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
AMERICAN INCOME FUND I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership
By: AFG Leasing VI Incorporated,
a Massachusetts corporation and the
General Partner of the Registrant.
By: /s/ Geoffrey A. MacDonald By: /s/ Gary D. Engle
- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------
Geoffrey A. MacDonald Gary D. Engle
Chairman of EFG and President and Chief Executive
President and Director Officer of EFG, the sole stockholder
of the General Partner of the General Partner
. (Principal Executive Officer)
Date: November 13, 2001 Date: November 13, 2001
- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------
By: /s/ Michael J. Butterfield
- --------------------------------------------
Michael J. Butterfield
Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer of EFG and Treasurer
of the General Partner
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Date: November 13, 2001
- --------------------------------------------
SCHEDULE 14(D)
ECHELON RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS LLC
Consolidated Financial Statements
as of December 31, 2000
and for the Period March 8, 2000 (Date of Inception)
through December 31, 2000
and Independent Auditors' Report
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
To the Members of
Echelon Residential Holdings LLC:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Echelon
Residential Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("the Company")
as of December 31, 2000 and the related consolidated statement of operations,
members' equity (deficiency) and cash flows for the period March 8, 2000 (date
of inception) through December 31, 2000. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31,
2000, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the period March
8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000 in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Tampa, Florida
March 23, 2001
ECHELON RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS LLC
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
DECEMBER 31, 2000
ASSETS
REAL ESTATE - Net (Notes 1 and 2) $61,092,202
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS (Note 1) 3,789,198
RESTRICTED CASH (Note 1) 8,703
RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS (Note 2) 2,155,160
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - Affiliates (Note 7) 115,521
PREPAID EXPENSES AND OTHER LONG-TERM ASSETS 69,417
CORPORATE EQUIPMENT - Net of accumulated depreciation of $57,733 286,784
INVESTMENT IN UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURE (Note 3) 1,063,906
------------
TOTAL ASSETS $68,580,891
============
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS' EQUITY
LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable $ 10,984
Contractor payable 1,752,830
Accounts payable - Affiliates (Note 7) 114,180
Accrued expenses 797,832
Retainage payable 1,125,865
Security deposits 8,625
Interest payable 4,385,805
Construction loans (Note 4) 26,837,740
Other long-term liabilities 109,411
Notes payable (Note 5) 35,039,890
------------
Total liabilities 70,183,162
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Notes 4 and 9)
MINORITY INTEREST (Note 6) 2,257,367
MEMBERS' EQUITY (DEFICIENCY) (Note 1) (3,859,638)
------------
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS' EQUITY $68,580,891
============
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
ECHELON RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS LLC
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
PERIOD MARCH 8, 2000 (DATE OF INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2000
SALES AND REVENUES:
Real estate operations:
Rental revenues $ 230,834
Management fees 695,162
Developer fees 985,141
Sale of development property 3,104,532
Investment income 191,543
Other Income 23,000
------------
Total sales and revenues 5,230,212
------------
EXPENSES:
Rental and other operations 558,561
Cost of development property sold 3,317,880
Write-down of land held for development or sale 635,437
Depreciation expense 148,861
Interest expense on long-term debt - net of amounts
capitalized of $606,990 4,460,345
General and administrative expenses 2,937,514
------------
Total expenses 12,058,598
------------
EQUITY IN LOSS OF UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURE (148,023)
MINORITY INTEREST 270,383
------------
NET LOSS $(6,706,026)
============
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- ------
ECHELON RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS LLC
- -----------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS' EQUITY (DEFICIENCY)
- ------------------------------------------------------------
PERIOD MARCH 8, 2000 (DATE OF INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2000
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
INITIAL PARTICIPATING
MEMBERS MEMBERS TOTAL
BALANCE AT MARCH 8, 2000 $ 195,226 $ - $ 195,226
Members' capital contributions - 2,651,162 2,651,162
Net loss (5,600,020) (1,106,006) (6,706,026)
------------ --------------- ------------
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2000 $(5,404,794) $ 1,545,156 $(3,859,638)
============ =============== ============
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- ------
ECHELON RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS LLC
- -----------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
- ----------------------------------------
PERIOD MARCH 8, 2000 (DATE OF INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2000
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASH FLOW PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net loss $ (6,706,026)
Adjustment to reconcile net loss to cash provided by
(used in) operating activities:
Depreciation 148,861
Loss on sale of development property 213,348
Minority interest (270,383)
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint venture 148,023
Write-down of land held for development or sale 635,437
Changes in working capital:
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities (4,343,190)
Interest payable 4,385,805
Other working capital changes 311,588
-------------
Net cash used in operating activities (5,476,537)
-------------
CASH FLOW PROVIDED BY (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Increase in restricted cash and restricted investments (2,163,863)
Net proceeds from sale of development property 3,104,532
Payments related to construction in progress (29,601,108)
-------------
Net cash used in investing activities (28,660,439)
-------------
CASH FLOW PROVIDED BY (USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Issuance of notes payable 6,244,000
Repayment of notes payable (5,474,000)
Proceeds from construction loans 26,585,765
Members' capital contributions 2,651,162
-------------
Net cash provided by financing activities 30,006,927
-------------
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS (4,130,049)
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD 7,919,247
-------------
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD $ 3,789,198
=============
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
Cash paid during the period for:
Interest $ 681,530
=============
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- ------
ECHELON RESIDENTIAL HOLDINGS LLC
- -----------------------------------
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
- ----------------------------------------------
PERIOD MARCH 8, 2000 (DATE OF INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2000
1. SUMMARY OF BUSINESS AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
BACKGROUND - On March 7, 2000, EIN Acquisition Corporation ("EIN Acquisition")
closed on a Tender Offer ("Tender Offer") for all of the outstanding shares of
Echelon International Corporation ("Echelon") for a cash price of $34.00 per
share. Immediately after the close of the Tender Offer, EIN Acquisition merged
into Echelon (the "Merger"), with Echelon being the surviving entity.
In conjunction with the Tender Offer, Echelon had entered into various contracts
to sell or convey various real estate assets and investments in two real estate
joint ventures to third parties. Subsequent to the Merger on March 8, 2000,
Echelon closed on existing contracts to sell or convey its real estate assets
and investments in two real estate joint ventures. Specific real estate assets
and investments in two real estate joint ventures were sold to Echelon
Residential LLC ("Echelon Residential"), a wholly owned limited liability
subsidiary of Echelon Residential Holdings LLC ("Echelon Residential Holdings"
or the "Company"). Echelon Residential will own, manage, and develop or sell
these purchased multi-family residential properties.
The acquisition of the assets by Echelon Residential was accounted for as an
asset purchase under Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 16 ("APB No. 16").
In accordance with APB No. 16, Echelon Residential allocated the total purchase
price to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on the estimated fair
market values at the date of acquisition. Since the purchase price of the
business was less than the fair market value of the net assets acquired, the
credit excess was allocated on a pro-rata basis to the real estate, corporate
equipment and the investment in an unconsolidated joint venture. There are no
contingencies or other matters that could materially affect the allocation of
the purchase cost. The results of operations of the acquired real estate assets
and investments in two real estate joint ventures are included in the
consolidated results of Echelon Residential Holdings from the acquisition date.
The Company's summarized consolidated balance sheet, reflecting the above
acquisition of assets, as of March 8, 2000 is as follows:
Assets:
Real estate $34,164,672
Cash and cash equivalents 7,919,247
Investment in unconsolidated joint venture 1,211,929
Other assets 832,417
-----------
Total assets $44,128,265
===========
Liabilities and Members' Equity:
Accounts payable and other liabilities $ 6,883,424
Construction loans 251,975
Notes payable 34,269,890
-----------
Total liabilities 41,405,289
Minority interest 2,527,750
Members' equity 195,226
-----------
Total liabilities and members' equity $44,128,265
===========
The Company's fiscal year end is December 31.
DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS - Echelon Residential Holdings was formed on February
29, 2000, under the laws of the state of Delaware and operates in one industry
segment: owning, leasing, developing, and managing real estate. There were no
activities of Echelon Residential Holdings from February 29, 2000 through March
8, 2000. The Company is governed by its Amended and Restated Limited Liability
Company Agreement ("the Agreement") dated June 23, 2000. At March 8, 2000,
members' equity included capital contributions from the initial members of the
Company, James A. Coyne and Charles E. Cobb, Jr. ("Initial Members"), who made
collective capital contributions of $195,226. On June 23, 2000, the
participating members, Darryl A. LeClair and Susan G. Johnson ("Participating
Members") made capital contributions totaling $2,651,162. The collective
Participating Members' capital contributions are comprised of Participating A
Capital of $2,591,093, Participating B Capital of $45,052 and additional capital
contributions of $15,017.
Subsequent to the initial capital contributions above, the Agreement was
executed and includes a provision whereby the members have no further obligation
to contribute additional amounts of capital to the Company. If the Company
requires additional funds, the Board of Managers is to notify the members. Each
member has the right to contribute a pro rata share of such additional funds,
based on the relative equity contributions made by each member. In addition,
the liability of the members of the Company is limited to the members' total
capital contributions.
In accordance with the Agreement, the Participating Members earn a cumulative
compounding annual return on their unreturned capital (as defined), at a per
annum rate equal to 14% for Participating A capital and 15% for Participating B
capital, commencing on June 23, 2000. Preferred returns will be paid to the
Participating Members in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Payout of
preferred returns (if any) is contingent upon the cumulative performance of the
Company. See Note 9 - Commitments and Contingencies.
Per the Agreement, the Company is to distribute its cash flow (if any)
periodically, but not less frequently than quarterly. The losses and profits of
the Company are generally allocated to the members as follows:
a) losses are generally allocable 77.9% to members other than Participating
Members and 22.1% to Participating Members, and
b) profits are generally allocated the same way except for a priority income
allocation to the Participating Members to cover priority cash distributions
made on their Participating Capital.
PRINCIPLES OF CONSOLIDATION - The accompanying consolidated financial statements
include the accounts of Echelon Residential Holdings, its wholly owned
subsidiary and a 60% interest in a joint venture. All intercompany balances
have been eliminated. Investments for which the Company has a 20% to 50%
ownership interest are accounted for using the equity method.
The Company has recorded a minority interest in the Company's consolidated
financial statements to reflect the ownership of its partner in the joint
venture.
ESTIMATES - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amount of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at
the date of the financial statements and the amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reported period. Actual
results could differ from those estimates. Significant estimates include the
recoverability of real estate held for sale.
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS - Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand,
demand deposits, and short-term investments with original maturities of three
months or less.
RESTRICTED CASH - Restricted cash represents security deposits at multi-family
residential communities held in separate noninterest-bearing depository
accounts.
RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS - Restricted investments represents certificates of
deposit with maturities greater than three months. These investments are held
by financial institutions that require such deposits in support of standby
letters of credit.
REAL ESTATE - Real estate additions are recorded at cost. Interest and real
estate taxes incurred during construction periods are capitalized and
depreciated on the same basis as the related assets. Costs directly related to
the acquisition, development or improvement of real estate, and certain indirect
development costs have also been capitalized. Depreciation is calculated on a
straight-line basis over the estimated lives of the assets as follows:
ESTIMATED
USEFUL LIVES
Buildings 35 years
Furniture, fixtures, and equipment 3-10 years
IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS - The carrying value of long-lived assets,
including property and equipment, will be reviewed for impairment whenever
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recorded value cannot be
recovered from undiscounted future cash flows.
REVENUE RECOGNITION - The Company recognizes revenue on the sale of real estate
properties when title has passed to the buyer and all contingencies have been
removed. Rental revenues, management fees, and developer fees are recognized
when earned.
INCOME TAXES - Under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and applicable
state laws, the Company is not directly subject to income taxes; the results of
its operations are included in the tax returns of its members.
NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS - SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, is effective for all fiscal years beginning
after June 15, 2000. SFAS No. 133, as amended, establishes accounting and
reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities. Under
SFAS No. 133, certain contracts that were not formerly considered derivatives
may now meet the definition of a derivative. The Company adopted SFAS No. 133
effective January 1, 2001. There was no impact on the Company's financial
position, results of operations or liquidity resulting from the adoption of SFAS
No. 133.
Effective March 8, 2000 (date of inception), the Company adopted the provisions
of Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin 101, Revenue
Recognition in Financial Statements ("SAB No. 101"). SAB No. 101 provides
guidance for the recognition, presentation, and disclosure of revenue in
financial statements. The adoption of SAB No. 101 had no impact on the
Company's financial statements.
RECLASSIFICATIONS - Certain amounts previously reported in the March 8, 2000
consolidated balance sheet have been reclassified to conform to the December 31,
2000 presentation.
2. REAL ESTATE - NET
As of December 31, 2000, real estate consists of the following:
Land and land improvements held for development or sale $15,676,581
------------
Real estate under development:
Land and land improvements 8,302,770
Construction in progress 14,694,874
------------
22,997,644
------------
Income producing real estate:
Land and land improvements 2,303,890
Buildings and improvements 19,720,463
Equipment and other 484,752
Accumulated depreciation (91,128)
------------
22,417,977
------------
$61,092,202
============
For the period March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000, the
Company recorded a write-down of land held for development or sale of $635,437
in the consolidated statement of operations. Land held for development or sale
was determined to have been impaired because the estimated cash flows are less
than the carrying value of the two parcels of land. The estimated fair value of
these two parcels of land was based on letters of intent from third-party
purchasers, dated October 2000 and December 2000, to purchase the two parcels of
land.
As of December 31, 2000, the Company's land and land improvements held for
development or sale includes five parcels of improved and unimproved land for
the development of multi-family residential communities. The land is located in
urban areas in Memphis, Tennessee; Dallas, Texas; Denver, Colorado; and Colorado
Springs, Colorado.
As of December 31, 2000, real estate under development includes the following
three multi-family residential communities:
. . . CONSTRUCTION ACTUAL/ESTIMATED
. RENTABLE LAND COMMENCEMENT DATE FIRST UNITS
PROJECT NAME LOCATION UNITS ACREAGE DATE AVAILABLE
- ----------------------- ----------- -------- ------- ------------ ----------------
ECHELON AT THE BALLPARK Memphis, TN 385 5 Q1 2000 Q1 2001
ECHELON AT LAKESIDE Plano, TX 181 12 Q3 1999 Q3 2000
ECHELON AT UPTOWN Orlando, FL 244 3 Q2 2001 Q2 2002
As discussed in Note 6, Investment in Consolidated Joint Venture Partnership,
ECHELON AT LAKESIDE commenced operations during the period March 8, 2000 (date
of inception) through December 1, 2000 and portions of the project remained
under construction as of December 31, 2000.
As of December 31, 2000, real estate includes $606,990 of interest capitalized
during the period March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000.
3. INVESTMENT IN UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURE
In July 1999, Fannie Mae's American Communities Fund agreed to invest with a
wholly owned subsidiary of Echelon in the development of ECHELON AT CHENEY
PLACE, a 303-unit multi-family residential community currently under
construction in downtown Orlando, Florida. Echelon's 20% interest in the joint
venture was purchased by Echelon Residential, in conjunction with the real
estate assets purchased as discussed in Note 1, Summary of Business and
Significant Accounting Policies. The Company accounts for its investment in the
joint venture under the equity method. Concurrent with the execution of the
joint venture agreement with Fannie Mae's American Communities Fund, the joint
venture executed an agreement with Wachovia Bank, N.A. for a $21,500,000 loan to
fund the construction of ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE. The loan is guaranteed by
Echelon Residential.
Construction of ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE began in late July 1999 and construction
continued on portions of the project through December 31, 2000. For the period
March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000, the Company
recorded its share of losses for ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE, from the initial
operations of the project, as a reduction of the investment in unconsolidated
joint venture. As of December 31, 2000, total capital expenditures and
construction loan draws for the project were $24,834,193 and $18,408,921,
respectively. Through December 31, 2000, the Company's capital contributions to
the joint venture totaled $1,386,000. The total of net losses and purchase
price adjustment allocated to the investment in unconsolidated joint venture is
$322,094.
4. CONSTRUCTION LOANS
As of December 31, 2000, the Company's construction loans outstanding are as
follows:
Bank of America $17,614,845
First Union National Bank of Florida 9,222,895
-----------
. $26,837,740
===========
The Company has a $20,000,000 construction loan with Bank of America to fund the
construction of ECHELON AT LAKESIDE. The loan is guaranteed by Echelon
Residential. The interest rate is LIBOR plus 1.85% (8.4875% as of December 31,
2000), and the loan matures in September 2002. As of December 31, 2000, the
Company has made $17,614,845 of construction draws on this loan. See further
discussion of the development of ECHELON AT LAKESIDE included in Note 6,
Investment in Consolidated Joint Venture Partnership. Accrued interest on the
Bank of America construction loan is $125,685 as of December 31, 2000.
The Company has a $26,075,000 construction loan with First Union National Bank
of Florida to fund the construction of ECHELON AT THE BALLPARK, a 385-unit
multi-family residential community currently under construction in downtown
Memphis, Tennessee. The loan is guaranteed by Echelon Residential. The
interest rate is LIBOR plus 1.65% (8.2125% as of December 31, 2000) with monthly
interest payments required through the term of the loan, which expires on June
2002. As of December 31, 2000, the Company has made construction draws of
$9,222,895. Accrued interest on the First Union National Bank construction loan
is $8,258 as of December 31, 2000.
The Company's significant financial covenants include minimum net worth and
liquidity requirements. As of December 31, 2000, the Company was in compliance
with all financial covenants contained in its debt agreements.
In the opinion of management, the carrying value of the Company's construction
loans approximate their fair value based on management's estimates for similar
issues, giving consideration to quality, interest rates, maturity and other
significant characteristics. Although management is not aware of any factors
that would significantly affect the estimated fair value of the construction
loans, the amounts have not been comprehensively revalued for purposes of these
consolidated financial statements since December 31, 2000 and current estimates
of fair value may differ significantly.
See Note 10, Subsequent Event, for discussion of a construction loan executed
for the construction of ECHELON AT UPTOWN, in February 2001.
5. NOTES PAYABLE
As of December 31, 2000, notes payable outstanding are as follows:
American Income Partners V-A Limited Partnership $ 2,160,000
American Income Partners V-B Limited Partnership 5,700,000
American Income Partners V-C Limited Partnership 2,390,000
American Income Partners V-D Limited Partnership 2,730,000
American Income Fund I-A, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership 1,650,000
American Income Fund I-B, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership 1,310,000
American Income Fund I-C, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership 2,780,000
American Income Fund I-D, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership 3,050,000
American Income Fund I-E, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership 4,790,000
AIRFUND International Limited Partnership 1,800,000
AIRFUND II International Limited Partnership 3,640,000
-----------
Subtotal 32,000,000
Series A Note 1,684,211
Series B Notes 585,679
Note payable - Echelon Development Holdings LLC 770,000
-----------
$35,039,890
===========
On March 8, 2000, the Company executed $32,000,000 in notes payable with 11
partnerships. The Company contributed the proceeds from the notes payable to
Echelon Residential to acquire various real estate assets from Echelon, as
discussed in Note 1, Summary of Business and Significant Accounting Policies.
These partnerships are managed by their general partners who have engaged Equis
Financial Group ("EFG") as the partnerships' manager. Mr. James A. Coyne is
Executive Vice President of EFG and is an equity investor in the Company. Mr.
Coyne, in his individual capacity, is the only equity investor in the Company
related to EFG. These notes payable have a term of 30 months, maturing on
September 8, 2002, and an annual interest rate of 14% for the first 24 months
and 18% for the final sixmonths. No principal payments are required prior to the
scheduled maturity. Interest accrues and compounds monthly and is payable at
maturity. Accrued interest on these notes is $3,907,798 as of December 31, 2000.
The Company has assigned and pledged a security interest in all of its rights,
title, and interest in its membership interests in Echelon Residential to the 11
partnerships as collateral.
On March 8, 2000, the Company executed a Series A Note with Cobb Partners
Limited. The Series A Note has a term of 30 months, maturing on September 8,
2002, and an annual interest rate of 14% for the first 24 months and 18% for the
final six months. No principal payments are required prior to the scheduled
maturity. Accrued interest on the Series A Note is $205,674 as of December 31,
2000. Interest accrues and compounds monthly and is payable at maturity. The
Company also executed Series B Notes with several individuals, who are employees
or investors of EFG. The Series B Notes have an annual interest rate of 15% and
mature on June 30, 2004. No principal payments are required prior to the
scheduled maturity. Interest accrues and compounds monthly and is payable at
maturity. The Series B Notes are subordinated to the $32,000,000 notes payable
and the Series A Note. Accrued interest on the Series B Notes is $76,920 as of
December 31, 2000.
On December 29, 2000, the Company executed a $770,000 note payable to Echelon
Development Holdings LLC ("Echelon Development Holdings"). The note payable has
a term of 24 months, maturing on December 29, 2002, and an annual interest rate
of 10%. Interest accrues and compounds daily and is payable on December 31st of
each year the note payable is outstanding. The Company repaid the note, plus
interest of $6,751, on January 30, 2001.
In the opinion of management, the carrying value of the Company's notes payable
approximates the fair value based on management's estimates for similar issues,
giving consideration to quality, interest rates, maturity and other significant
characteristics.
6. INVESTMENT IN CONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURE PARTNERSHIP
In September 1999, Echelon entered into a joint venture agreement with Turner
Heritage Investments, Ltd. ("Turner") for the development of ECHELON AT
LAKESIDE, a 181-unit multi-family residential community currently under
construction in Plano, Texas, which is near Dallas. Echelon's 60% interest in
the joint venture was purchased by Echelon Residential, in conjunction with the
transaction discussed in Note 1, Summary of Business and Significant Accounting
Policies. Construction of ECHELON AT LAKESIDE began in October 1999 and
continued on portions of the project through December 31, 2000. As of December
31, 2000, total capital expenditures for the project were $23,927,413.
Through December 31, 2000, the Company has made capital contributions of
$2,592,000 and Turner has contributed land valued at $2,592,000 to the joint
venture. The Company's interest represents a controlling interest, and
accordingly, for financial reporting purposes, the assets, liabilities, retained
deficit, and current period results of operations of the joint venture for the
period March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000, are included
in the Company's consolidated financial statements and Turner's partnership
interest in the joint venture has been recorded as a minority interest. See
further discussion of debt financing for ECHELON AT LAKESIDE included in Note 4,
Construction Loans.
7. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
In conjunction with the purchase of Echelon's interest in the joint venture
formed for the development of ECHELON AT LAKESIDE, Echelon Residential also
assumed the development agreement, an asset management agreement and a property
management and leasing agreement with Lakeside Baywater Enterprises Limited
Partnership, the joint venture partnership. In accordance with the development
agreement, Echelon Residential has been engaged as the developer for ECHELON AT
LAKESIDE and receives a development fee, payable in arrears, in monthly
installments of $44,371. In accordance with the asset management agreement,
Echelon Residential receives a monthly asset management fee, computed in
arrears, equal to 1% of the ECHELON AT LAKESIDE monthly gross income. Under the
terms of the property management and leasing agreement, Echelon Residential also
receives a monthly management fee, computed in arrears, equal to 4% of the
ECHELON AT LAKESIDE monthly gross income.
For the period March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000,
Echelon Residential recognized $388,212 in development, asset management, and
property management revenues from ECHELON AT LAKESIDE.
In conjunction with the purchase of Echelon's interest in the joint venture
formed for the development of ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE, Echelon Residential also
assumed agreements which include the payment of a development fee, a property
management and leasing agreement and an incentive management fee with Cheney
Place LLC, the joint venture partnership. In accordance with these agreements,
Echelon Residential has been engaged as the developer for ECHELON AT CHENEY
PLACE and receives a monthly development fee equal to 5% of the hard
construction costs incurred during the month. Echelon Residential is also the
property manager and leasing agent for the property and will receive a monthly
management fee, computed in arrears, equal to $7,500 per month for two months
prior to the opening of the clubhouse. For the next nine months thereafter,
Echelon Residential will receive the greater of a) 3% of the effective monthly
gross income or b) 3% of the effective monthly gross income that would be
collected if 75% of ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE were occupied at rents equaling the
average pro forma base rent. Thereafter, the monthly management fee will be
calculated as 3% of the effective monthly gross income of ECHELON AT CHENEY
PLACE. The incentive management fee is equal to 2% of ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE'S
effective gross income, as defined. For the period March 8, 2000 (date of
inception) through December 31, 2000, Echelon Residential recognized $392,695 in
development, property management and incentive management fee revenues from
ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE.
Echelon Property Management LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Echelon
Residential, has contracted to manage several operating multi-family residential
communities currently leased by Echelon Commercial LLC ("Echelon Commercial"), a
wholly owned limited liability subsidiary of Echelon Development Holdings.
Several of the equity investors in Echelon Residential Holdings are also equity
investors in Echelon Development Holdings. For the period March 8, 2000 (date
of inception) through December 31, 2000, Echelon Residential recognized $587,908
in property management revenues from the management of multi-family properties
leased by Echelon Commercial.
As of December 31, 2000, the Company had accounts receivable balances of $51,880
due from Echelon Commercial LLC, $19,455 due from ECHELON AT CHENEY PLACE and
$44,186 from other related parties. These amounts were repaid by the end of
February 2001.
8. RETIREMENT PLAN
Echelon Residential is the sponsor of the Echelon 401(k) Savings Plan ("Savings
Plan") under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Service Code (the "Code"),
to which participants may contribute a percentage of their discretionary
contributions to the Savings Plan. The Company did not contribute to the
Savings Plan during the period March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through
December 31, 2000. As of January 1, 2001, the Company initiated an option in
the Savings Plan to include a mandatory matching contribution from the Company.
9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
As of December 31, 2000, two multi-family residential communities were under
construction and had remaining commitments of $12,985,656 with construction
contractors.
On December 29, 2000, the Company executed a $5,000,000 revolving promissory
note with Echelon Development Holdings. The revolving promissory note has a term
of 24 months, maturing on December 29, 2002, and an annual interest rate of 10%.
Interest accrues and compounds daily and is payable on December 31st of each
year the note is outstanding. As of December 31, 2000, there were no amounts
outstanding on the revolving promissory note.
As discussed in Note 1, Summary of Business and Significant Accounting Policies,
the Company maintains preferred return accounts for the Participating Members.
As of December 31, 2000, the preferred return balances for Participating A and B
Capital were $198,597 and $3,709, respectively.
These amounts have not been paid and therefore, have not been reflected as a
reduction of Participating A and B Capital in the December 31, 2000 consolidated
financial statements.
The joint venture formed for the development of ECHELON AT LAKESIDE maintains
preferred return accounts for the limited partners, Echelon LP, a wholly owned
limited liability subsidiary of Echelon Residential, and Turner. The payment of
any preferred returns to Echelon LP would be eliminated upon consolidation. As
of December 31, 2000, the preferred return balance for Turner was $312,069.
This amount has not been paid and, therefore, has not been reflected as a
reduction of member's equity in the December 31, 2000 consolidated financial
statements.
10. SUBSEQUENT EVENT
In February 2001, the Company closed on a $18,600,000 loan from SouthTrust Bank
for the construction financing of ECHELON AT UPTOWN, a 244-unit multi-family
residential community to be developed in downtown Orlando, Florida. The
interest rate is LIBOR plus 1.75% with monthly interest payments required over
the 36-month initial term of the loan. The loan is guaranteed by Echelon
Residential and construction is expected to commence in the second quarter of
2001.
11. QUARTERLY RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
The following is a summary of the quarterly results of operations for the period
March 8, 2000 (date of inception) through December 31, 2000:
PERIOD THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 8 - . . .
--------------------
MARCH 31 JUNE 30 SEPTEMBER 30 DECEMBER 31 TOTAL
Total revenues $ 147,078 $ 758,673 $ 659,867 $ 3,664,594 $ 5,230,212
Net loss $ (328,623) $ (1,359,326) $ (1,855,757) $ (3,162,320) $(6,706,026)
12. MANAGEMENT'S BUSINESS PLAN (UNAUDITED)
As of the fourth quarter of 2001, the Company's management is pursuing three
principal business strategies to maximize the value of the Company's real estate
assets, including the continued development of the Company's real estate
portfolio, retaining other joint venture equity partners for real estate
projects and selling of certain real estate assets.
In addition, as part of a litigation settlement unrelated to the Company that
must be approved by the court, EFG has agreed in principle to buy the notes
payable from the 11 partnerships for an aggregate of $32,000,000 plus interest
at 7.5% per annum, if they are not repaid prior to or at the scheduled maturity
date. If the litigation settlement is approved, the interest rate on the notes
payable would be retroactively adjusted to 7.5% simple interest as of March 8,
2000. EFG has also agreed in principle to forbear any foreclosure action
against the Company and will evaluate the characterization of the notes payable,
which may include converting the notes payable to long-term debt or equity. See
Note 5, Notes Payable.
******