UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended MARCH 31, 2001
-------------------------------------------------
OR
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to
---------------------- ----------------------
Commission File No. 0-19135
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
MASSACHUSETTS 04-3090151
- --------------------------------------------- ---------------------
(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
-----------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year,
if changed since last report.)
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 [ ]
APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY
PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and
reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13, or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan
confirmed by a court.
Yes [ ] No [ ]
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
FORM 10-Q
INDEX
PAGE
----
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
Item 1. Financial Statements
Statement of Financial Position
at March 31, 2001 and December 31, 2000 3
Statement of Operations
for the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000 4
Statement of Cash Flows
for the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000 5
Notes to the Financial Statements 6-10
Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations 11-16
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk 16
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION:
Items 1 - 6 17
2
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
MARCH 31, 2001 AND DECEMBER 31, 2000
(UNAUDITED)
MARCH 31, DECEMBER 31,
2001 2000
----------- -----------
ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents $ 1,184,074 $ 1,226,359
Rents receivable 298 10,731
Accounts receivable - affiliate 17,010 12,809
Prepaid expenses 9,375 --
Investment in real estate venture 2,466,756 2,522,783
Equipment at cost, net of accumulated depreciation
of $1,018,305 and $1,003,736 at March 31, 2001
and December 31, 2000, respectively 56,440 71,009
----------- -----------
Total assets $ 3,733,953 $ 3,843,691
=========== ===========
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' CAPITAL
Accrued liabilities $ 199,070 $ 216,360
Accrued liabilities - affiliate 25,439 14,985
----------- -----------
Total liabilities 224,509 231,345
----------- -----------
Partner's capital (deficit):
General Partner
(356,581) (351,436)
Limited Partnership Interests
(480,227 Units; initial purchase price of $25 each) 3,866,025 3,963,782
----------- -----------
Total partners' capital 3,509,444 3,612,346
----------- -----------
Total liabilities and partners' capital $ 3,733,953 $ 3,843,691
=========== ===========
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
3
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001 AND 2000
(UNAUDITED)
2001 2000
--------- ---------
INCOME
Lease revenue $ 34,863 $ 51,065
Interest income 12,263 44,660
--------- ---------
Total income 47,126 95,725
--------- ---------
EXPENSES
Depreciation 14,569 16,141
Equipment management fees - affiliate 1,168 1,917
Operating expenses - affiliate 78,264 36,187
Partnership's share of unconsolidated
real estate venture's loss 56,027 2,671
--------- ---------
Total expenses 150,028 56,916
--------- ---------
Net income (loss) $(102,902) $ 38,809
========= =========
Net income (loss) per limited partnership unit $ (0.20) $ 0.07
========= =========
Cash distributions declared
per limited partnership unit $ -- $ --
========= =========
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
4
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001 AND 2000
(UNAUDITED)
2001 2000
----------- -----------
CASH FLOWS PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net income (loss) $ (102,902) $ 38,809
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation 14,569 16,141
Partnership's share of unconsolidated
real estate venture's loss 56,027 2,671
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Rents receivable 10,433 (23)
Accounts receivable - affiliate (4,201) 25,737
Prepaid expenses (9,375) --
Accrued liabilities (17,290) (23,936)
Accrued liabilities - affiliate 10,454 (2,346)
----------- -----------
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (42,285) 57,053
----------- -----------
CASH FLOWS PROVIDED BY (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Investment in real estate venture -- (2,730,000)
----------- -----------
Net cash used in investing activities -- (2,730,000)
----------- -----------
CASH FLOWS PROVIDED BY (USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Distributions paid -- (56,869)
----------- -----------
Net cash used in financing activities -- (56,869)
----------- -----------
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents (42,285) (2,729,816)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 1,226,359 3,878,824
----------- -----------
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 1,184,074 $ 1,149,008
=========== ===========
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
5
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
Notes to the Financial Statements
March 31, 2000
(Unaudited)
NOTE 1 - BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The financial statements presented herein are prepared in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles and the instructions for preparing Form
10-Q under Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X of the Securities and Exchange
Commission and are unaudited. As such, these financial statements do not include
all information and footnote disclosures required under generally accepted
accounting principles for complete financial statements and, accordingly, the
accompanying financial statements should be read in conjunction with the
footnotes presented in the 2000 Annual Report. Except as disclosed herein, there
has been no material change to the information presented in the footnotes to the
2000 Annual Report.
In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal and
recurring adjustments) considered necessary to present fairly the financial
position at March 31, 2001 and December 31, 2000 and results of operations for
the three month periods ended March 31, 2001 and 2000 have been made and are
reflected.
NOTE 2 - CASH
At March 31, 2001, American Income Partners V-D Limited Partnership (the
"Partnership") had $891,926 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.
NOTE 3 - REVENUE RECOGNITION
Rents are payable to the Partnership monthly or quarterly and no significant
amounts are calculated on factors other than the passage of time. 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
Equis Financial Group Limited Partnership ("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 7 to the financial
statements regarding the Class Action Lawsuit. Future minimum rents of $60,076
are due as follows:
For the year ending March 31, 2002 $ 41,036
2003 14,280
2004 4,760
--------
Total $ 60,076
========
NOTE 4 - EQUIPMENT
The following is a summary of equipment owned by the Partnership at March 31,
2001. Remaining Lease Term (Months), as used below, represents the number of
months remaining from March 31, 2001 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.
6
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (CONTINUED)
MARCH 31, 2001
(UNAUDITED)
REMAINING
LEASE TERM EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT TYPE (MONTHS) AT COST
- -------------------------------------- ----------- ---------------
Materials handling 0-9 326,159
Trailers/intermodal containers 3-4 323,542
Research and test 0 105,805
Manufacturing 28 95,460
Communications 0 80,063
Motor vehicles 28 64,367
Tractors and heavy duty trucks 28 46,921
Construction and mining 1 31,282
Computers and peripherals 0 1,146
---------------
Total equipment cost 1,074,745
Accumulated depreciation (1,018,305)
---------------
Equipment, net of accumulated depreciation $ 56,440
===============
At March 31, 2001, the Partnership's equipment portfolio included equipment
having a proportionate original cost of $106,000, representing approximately 10%
of total equipment cost.
The summary above includes fully depreciated equipment held for re-lease or sale
with an original cost of approximately $106,000. The General Partner is actively
seeking the sale or re-lease of all equipment not on lease.
NOTE 5 - INVESTMENT IN REAL ESTATE VENTURE
On March 8, 2000, the Partnership and 10 affiliated partnerships (the "Exchange
Partnerships") collectively loaned $32 million to Echelon Residential Holdings
LLC ("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.
The Partnership's original loan was $2,730,000. 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 is presented, in accordance with the guidance set forth in the Third
Notice to Practitioners by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants in February 1986 entitled "ADC Arrangements", as an investment in
real estate venture and is presented net of the Partnership's share of losses in
Echelon Residential Holdings. The Partnership is allocated its proportionate
share of the unconsolidated real estate venture's net income or loss, adjusted
for interest on the ADC arrangements, based on the balance of its ADC
arrangement in relation to the real estate venture's total equity and notes
payable, including the ADC arrangements. For the periods ended March 31, 2001
and 2000, the Partnership's share of losses in Echelon Residential Holdings was
$56,027 and $2,671, respectively, and are reflected on the Statement of
Operations as "Partnership's share of unconsolidated real estate venture's
loss."
7
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (CONTINUED)
MARCH 31, 2001
(UNAUDITED)
The Partnership took into consideration the following characteristics of the
loan in determining that the loan should be accounted for as an investment in a
real estate venture: (i) the Exchange Partnerships who made the loans
collectively have provided substantially all of the necessary funds to acquire
the underlying properties without taking title to such properties, (ii) by
virtue of a pledged security interest in the wholly owned subsidiary of Echelon
Residential Holdings that holds title to the properties, the Partnership's loan
is secured only by the underlying properties, (iii) Echelon Residential Holdings
will only repay the Partnership at maturity, including all interest accrued on
the loan through maturity, (iv) it is expected that Echelon Residential Holdings
can only repay the loan through sales of undeveloped and developed property; and
(v) the structure of the loan (i.e. no payments due until maturity) makes it
unlikely that the properties will be taken in foreclosure as a result of
delinquency.
The summarized financial information for Echelon Residential Holdings as of
March 31, 2001 and for the quarter ended March 31, 2001 is as follows:
(Unaudited)
Total assets $ 72,861,183
Total liabilities $ 76,780,082
Minority interest $ 1,906,448
Total deficit $ (5,825,347)
Total revenues $ 1,063,439
Total expenses, minority interest
and equity in loss of unconsolidated
joint venture $ 3,096,648
Net loss $ (2,033,209)
NOTE 6 - 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 three month periods ended March 31,
2001 and 2000, which were paid or accrued by the Partnership to EFG or its
Affiliates, are as follows:
2001 2000
------- -------
Equipment management fees $ 1,168 $ 1,917
Administrative charges 19,215 15,312
Reimbursable operating expenses
due to third parties 59,049 20,875
------- -------
Total $79,432 $38,104
======= =======
8
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (CONTINUED)
MARCH 31, 2001
(UNAUDITED)
All rents and proceeds from the sale of equipment are paid directly to EFG. EFG
temporarily deposits collected funds in a separate interest-bearing escrow
account prior to remittance to the Partnership. At March 31, 2001, the
Partnership was owed $17,010 by EFG for such funds and the interest thereon.
These funds were remitted to the Partnership in April 2001.
NOTE 7 - LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
As described more fully in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2000, 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.
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 Securities and Exchange Commission ("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. There are a number of issues to
be resolved with the staff of the SEC before the staff's review of the
solicitation materials is completed.
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 Investment Company
Act of 1940, as amended (the "1940 Act"). The SEC staff noted that Section 7 of
the 1940 Act makes it unlawful for an unregistered investment company to offer
or sell or purchase 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 American Income
Partners V-B Limited Partnership, they may have become investment companies when
they received the Semele Group Inc. ("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 advise, do not believe that the Designated Partnerships are investment
companies.
The letter also stated that the Division is considering enforcement action with
respect to this matter. Noting that the parties to the Class Action Lawsuit are
scheduled to appear before the court in the near future to consider a proposed
settlement, and that the SEC staff's views, as expressed in the letter, are
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.
9
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (CONTINUED)
MARCH 31, 2001
(UNAUDITED)
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.
The Defendants also referred to the SEC staff's letter of May 10, 2001 asserting
that certain of the partnerships are investment companies and 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, counsel is 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.
Apart from the language of the order, the Court has not stated what action it
might order if the SEC's review were not completed by May 15, 2001. If the Court
were to decline to continue the date for the Final Approval Settlement Hearing
and there is no settlement alternative offered by the parties that meets the
Court's approval, the Court may direct that the parties resume the litigation
and abandon the proposed settlement and consolidation.
10
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
FORM 10-Q
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS.
Certain statements in this quarterly report of American Income Partners V-D
Limited Partnership (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 7 to the accompanying financial statements, the
remarketing of the Partnership's equipment and the performance of the
Partnership's non-equipment assets.
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 and the loan to Echelon Residential
Holdings LLC ("Echelon Residential Holdings"). 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. The General Partner has consulted counsel and believes
that the Partnership is not an investment company. 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. If
necessary, the Partnership intends to avoid being deemed an investment company
by 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 to offer or sell or purchase 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 American V-B Limited Partnership, they may have become
investment companies when they received the Semele Group Inc. ("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 enforcement action with
respect to this matter. Noting that the parties to the Class Action Lawsuit are
scheduled to appear before the court in the near future to consider a proposed
settlement, and that the SEC staff's views, as expressed in the letter, are
relevant to the specific matters
11
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.
The Defendants also referred to the SEC staff's letter of May 10, 2001 asserting
that certain of the partnerships are investment companies and 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, counsel is 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. See Note 7 to the financial
statements for additional discussion.
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001 COMPARED TO THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
2000:
The Partnership was organized in 1990 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 7 to the financial statements.) Pursuant to the Amended
and Restated Agreement and Certificate of Limited Partnership ("the Restated
Agreement, as amended"), the Partnership is scheduled to be dissolved by
December 31, 2001. 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.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
For the three months ended March 31, 2001, the Partnership recognized lease
revenue of $34,863 compared to $51,065 for the same period in 2000. The decrease
in lease revenue from 2000 to 2001 resulted primarily from lease term
expirations. In the future, lease revenue will continue to decline due to lease
term expirations and the sale of equipment.
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
12
respective ownership interests, their respective shares of assets, liabilities,
revenues, and expenses associated with the equipment.
Interest income for the three months ended March 31, 2001 was $12,263 compared
to $44,660 for the same period in 2000. Interest income is typically generated
from temporary investment of rental receipts and equipment sale proceeds in
short-term instruments. The amount of future interest income is expected to
fluctuate as a result of changing interest rates and the amount of cash
available for investment, among other factors.
There were no equipment sales during either of the three month's ended March
31,2001 and 2000. 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 upon final disposition of 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 any
future gain or loss reported in the financial statements will not necessarily be
indicative of the total residual value the Partnership achieved from leasing the
equipment.
Depreciation expense was $14,569 and $16,141, respectively for the three months
ended March 31, 2001 and 2000. 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 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.
Management fees were $1,168 and $1,917, respectively, for the three months ended
March 31, 2001 and 2000. 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.
Operating expense were $78,264 for the three months ended March 31, 2001
compared to $36,187 for the same period in 2000. In 2001, operating expenses
included approximately $27,000 related to the Class Action Lawsuit discussed in
Note 7 to the financial statements herein. Operating expenses consist
principally of administrative charges, professional service costs, such as audit
and other legal fees, as well as printing, distribution and remarketing
expenses. In certain cases, equipment storage or repairs and maintenance costs
may be incurred in connection with equipment being remarketed.
For the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, the Partnership's share of
losses in Echelon Residential Holding were $56,027 and $2,671, respectively. The
losses are reflected on the Statement of Operations as "Partnership's share of
unconsolidated real estate venture's loss." See further discussion below.
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
generally provided by the collection of periodic rents. These cash inflows are
used to pay management fees and operating costs. Operating activities generated
net cash outflows of $42,285 during the three months ended March 31, 2001 and
net cash inflows of $57,053 during the three months ended March 31, 2000. Future
renewal, re-lease and
13
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 decline as the Partnership experiences a
higher frequency of remarketing events.
There were no equipment sales during either of the three month periods ended
March 31, 2001 or 2000. 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 March 31, 2001, the Partnership had aggregate future minimum lease payments
of $60,076 from contractual lease agreements (see Note 3 to the financial
statements). At the expiration of the individual 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 the Class Action
Lawsuit described in Note 7 to the accompanying financial statements, 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 $2,730,000 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 independent
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 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.
As discussed in Note 5 to the Partnership's financial statements, the loan is
considered to be an investment in a real estate venture for accounting purposes.
In accordance with the provisions of Statement of Position No. 78-9, "Accounting
for Investments in Real Estate Ventures", the Partnership reports its share of
income or loss of Echelon Residential Holdings under the equity method of
accounting.
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
14
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.
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.
Cash distributions to the General Partner and Recognized Owners had been
declared and generally paid within fifteen days following the end of each
calendar quarter. The payment of such distributions is reported under financing
activities on the accompanying Statement of Cash Flows. No cash distributions
were declared for either of the quarters ended March 31, 2001 or 2000. In any
given year, it is possible that Recognized Owners 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 Recognized Owners adequate to cover
any tax obligation.
Cash distributions when paid to the Recognized Owners generally 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 6 to the financial statements presented in the Partnership's 2000
Annual Report). 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.
The principal components of the cumulative difference between financial
statement income or loss and tax income or loss result from different
depreciation policies for book and tax purposes.
For financial reporting purposes, the General Partner has accumulated a capital
deficit at March 31, 2001. 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 and different
treatment for book and tax purposes related to the real estate venture.
The outcome of the Class Action Lawsuit described in Note 7 to the accompanying
financial statements will be the principal factor in determining the future of
the Partnership's operations. The proposed settlement to that lawsuit, if
effected, will materially change the future organizational structure and
business interests of the Partnership, as well as its cash distribution
policies. In addition, 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.
15
Accordingly, future cash distributions are not expected to be paid until the
Class Action Lawsuit is settled or adjudicated.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
The Partnership's financial statements include financial instruments that are
exposed to interest rate risks.
The Partnership's acquisition, development and construction 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. 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 the quarter ended
March 31, 2001 was not material.
16
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
FORM 10-Q
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Response:
Refer to Note 7 to the financial statements herein.
Item 2. Changes in Securities
Response: None
Item 3. Defaults upon Senior Securities
Response: None
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
Response: None
Item 5. Other Information
Response: None
Item 6(a). Exhibits
Response: None
Item 6(b). Reports on Form 8-K
Response: None
17
SIGNATURE PAGE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
AMERICAN INCOME PARTNERS V-D LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
By: AFG Leasing IV Incorporated, a Massachusetts
corporation and the General Partner of the
Registrant.
By: /s/ MICHAEL J. BUTTERFIELD
-----------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Butterfield
Treasurer of AFG Leasing IV Incorporated
(Duly Authorized Officer and
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Date: MAY 21, 2001
-----------------------------------------------------
18