Business context and reporting period
This is the Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, filed March 8, 2013. The filing identifies the registrant as America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P.; the request metadata names Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP, so the entity-name relationship should be verified. The partnership invests primarily in federally tax-exempt multifamily housing bonds, alongside public-housing certificates, mortgage-backed securities and selected apartment properties.
At year-end, it held 22 tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds with approximately $198.6 million of principal, financing 20 apartment properties with 3,880 units. It also held PHC Certificates with $65.3 million principal and MBS with $31.6 million principal.
Key financial metrics
| Metric | FY 2012 / Dec. 31, 2012 | Prior comparable period |
|---|---|---|
| Total revenue | $25.1 million | $21.7 million in 2011 |
| Income from continuing operations | $2.8 million | Loss of $2.4 million in 2011 |
| Net income attributable to partnership | $4.4 million; $0.14 per BUC | Loss of $2.2 million; loss of $0.04 per BUC in 2011 |
| Operating cash flow | $7.5 million | $10.2 million in 2011 |
| Investing / financing cash flow | $(97.3) million / $99.9 million | $(31.8) million / $28.5 million in 2011 |
| Cash and restricted cash | $30.2 million / $5.5 million | $20.1 million / $12.9 million |
| Total assets | $413.2 million | $298.0 million in 2011 |
| Debt financing and mortgages | $177.9 million and $39.1 million; $217.1 million combined | $112.7 million and $35.5 million in 2011 |
| Cash available for distribution (CAD) | $12.3 million; $0.33 per BUC | Approximately $10.6 million; $0.35 per BUC in 2011 |
| Distribution | $0.50 per BUC | $0.50 per BUC in 2011 |
Debt was approximately 51% of total assets. The filing reports distributions of $0.50 per BUC despite CAD of $0.33 per BUC; management says unrestricted cash supplemented the shortfall by approximately $5.8 million in 2012. Reported net income included $2.2 million from discontinued operations, including gains on property sales. The filing does not provide a single comparable operating-margin measure.
Material changes versus 2011
- Revenue increased about 16%, and income attributable to the partnership recovered from a loss to a profit. Results benefited from higher investment income, bond-sale gains and the absence of the 2011 $4.2 million taxable-loan impairment; 2012 also included a $453,000 provision against Woodland Park accrued interest.
- Assets expanded substantially, supported in part by a May 2012 offering of 12.65 million BUCs that generated approximately $60.0 million net proceeds. The partnership also added PHC Certificates, MBS, bonds and apartment-property investments. Debt financing rose from $112.7 million to $177.9 million.
- Operating cash flow declined approximately $2.7 million, while investing outflows rose with acquisitions. Bond-property economic occupancy improved to approximately 86% from 85%; MF Property occupancy remained about 76%.
- Unrealized gains on securities contributed $7.1 million to comprehensive income. Bond and PHC fair values rely substantially on management estimates; the filing estimates a hypothetical $10.3 million additional bond loss under an adverse yield assumption.
Outlook, risks and unusual items
- Management expected apartment operations, rental rates and occupancy to improve in 2013 and 2014, and identified a pipeline of bond investments. It expected these investments, financed partly with leverage, to support the current $0.50 annual distribution without drawing on unrestricted cash. This is an expectation, not a guarantee; management warns distributions may be reduced if cash generation falls short.
- Approximately $85.0 million of debt financing and $13.3 million of mortgage payments were scheduled within one year. Management planned to refinance maturing mortgage and TOB debt during the first half of 2013; TOB facilities were expected to be renewed. The filing notes that refinancing access and cost are uncertain.
- Woodland Park was in payment default, with foreclosure proceedings underway. The bond had a reported fair value of $11.4 million against approximately $15.7 million principal outstanding; the related taxable loan was fully reserved. A court ruling in February 2013 supported foreclosure but was subject to appeal.
- The Vantage at Judson property was under construction, with completion anticipated in spring 2014. The partnership had a conditional forward purchase commitment for senior bonds of at least $20.6 million, potentially up to $26.7 million, subject to construction, occupancy and other conversion conditions; it could terminate if conditions were unmet by January 1, 2015.
- Other material exposures include variable-rate securitization debt, reliance on annual federal appropriations for PHC Certificates, illiquid investments and valuation uncertainty, apartment-property credit and occupancy risks, tax-exempt status risks, and related-party fees and services. A contingent guarantee tied to the Greens LIHTC transaction had maximum stated exposure of approximately $721,000; management had accrued no amount, assessing a triggering event as remote.
- Subsequent to year-end, the partnership reported the transfer of Maples on 97th to its ownership, new bond acquisitions and financing, and recognition of the deferred Ohio-property gain after capital contributions. Deloitte issued an unqualified opinion on the financial statements and internal controls.
Most important facts for investors to verify
- Whether recurring cash generation can cover the $0.50 annual distribution, given CAD of $0.33 per BUC and use of unrestricted cash to meet the 2012 shortfall.
- How the scheduled 2013 debt maturities were refinanced or renewed, and the resulting interest costs, collateral requirements and covenant headroom.
- Progress and recoveries from Woodland Park foreclosure, including the bond’s carrying value, accrued-interest reserve and loan-loss reserve.
- Whether Vantage at Judson meets its construction and occupancy conditions and the final size and funding of the forward bond purchase.
- Support for management’s estimated fair values of illiquid bonds and PHC Certificates, and the effect of adverse yield or property-performance changes.
- Whether apartment operations and the expected investment pipeline improve CAD, and whether HUD appropriations and tax-exempt qualification remain intact.