Sullivan
Microsoft has discontinued support for Internet Explorer. To access the Sullivan website, please install a modern browser like Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome.

Biography

Ameek Ashok Ponda is a tax partner at Sullivan & Worcester in Boston and was formerly a member of the firm’s Management Committee and director of the firm's Tax Department.

Ameek's practice includes domestic and international taxation, with an emphasis on mergers and acquisitions and real estate investment trusts (REITs). Nationally recognized for his work in REIT conversions and REIT cross-border matters, Ameek has represented public and private REITs in an array of real property sectors, both domestically and abroad, including: business storage facilities; cold storage facilities; communications towers; data centers; dark and lit fiber; digital billboards; distributed antenna systems; hotels and travel centers; industrial properties; mortgage loans; single-family and multi-family residential; office buildings; parking facilities; retail properties; senior living facilities; solar, wind, and other power infrastructure; timberlands; transmission and distribution lines; as well as vineyards, greenhouses and other agricultural properties.

Ameek is also an adjunct professor with the Boston University School of Law Graduate Tax Program, where for nearly thirty years he has taught tax courses on topics such as business planning, corporate reorganizations, international taxation, regulated investment companies and REITs, and financial products. He currently serves as a lecturer on law with the Harvard Law School, where he teaches partnership taxation, and has previously served as a lecturer on law with the Boston College Law School.

Ameek currently serves as President of the American College of Tax Counsel (ACTC) and is a Past Chair of the Board of Tax Analysts, publisher of the Tax Notes series of daily and weekly journals. He also serves on the boards of the Commonwealth Shakespeare Company, which produces the free summer production “Shakespeare on the Boston Common,” and of the Harvard Club of Boston, as well as on the advisory boards of GBH, Boston’s PBS affiliate, and of the South Asian Bar Association of Greater Boston. In 2007, the Boston Business Journal named Ameek one of its Boston “40 under 40.” Born in Bombay and fluent in Hindi and Urdu, Ameek is a charter member and former secretary of The Indus Entrepreneurs–Boston. He is also a member of the American Law Institute, the International Fiscal Association, the National Tax Association, the Real Estate Roundtable and Nareit.

Ameek Ponda Tax Forum Presentation on REITs (PDF)

Education
  • Boston University School of Law (LL.M., valedictorian)
    • Taxation
  • Harvard Law School (J.D., magna cum laude)
  • Harvard College (B.A., summa cum laude)
Bar & Court Admissions
  • Massachusetts
Professional Qualifications
  • President, American College of Tax Counsel
  • Past Chair of the Board, Tax Analysts
  • Member, American Law Institute
  • Member, National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (Nareit)
  • Member, International Fiscal Association
  • Member, National Tax Association
  • Charter Member and former Secretary, The Indus Entrepreneurs – Boston
  • American, Massachusetts and Boston Bar Associations
  • Member, Board of Advisors, South Asian Bar Association of Greater Boston
  • Adjunct Professor, Boston University School of Law Graduate Tax Program
  • Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School
  • Former Lecturer on Law, Boston College Law School
  • Former Board of Regents, American College of Tax Counsel
  • Former Member, Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council (IRSAC)
Awards & Honors
  • Forbes, America’s Best-In-State Lawyers, Tax Law (2025)
  • Highly Regarded, general corporate tax, International Tax Review’s World Tax Guide (2026)
  • Real Estate Attorney of the Year, Boston Real Estate Times (2024)
  • Best Lawyers' Boston Tax Law Lawyer of the Year (2012, 2017, 2025)
  • Best Lawyers in America® (2008-2027)
  • Chambers USA, Recognized Practitioner in Tax (2006-2026), REITs: Tax (2013-2026)
  • Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyer (2025-2026)
  • Boston Magazine Top Lawyers, Tax Law (2024-2025)
  • National Law Journal, Tax Law Trailblazer (2023)
  • Top 10 Influential REIT Tax Lawyers Steering USA’s Financial Landscape Nationwide, Business Today (2023)
  • Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, Go To Lawyer, Taxation (2022)
  • Recognized as a Leading Partner by The Legal 500 U.S. (2025-2026)
  • Recognized as a Leading Lawyer by The Legal 500 U.S. (2017-2024)
  • Recommended by The Legal 500 U.S. (2007-2026)
  • The Tax Lawyers, Massachusetts Recommended Attorney (2021-2022)
  • Massachusetts Super Lawyers (2004-2026)
  • Boston Business Journal's 40-under-40 (2007)
Community Engagement
  • Board of Advisors, GBH
  • Board Member, Harvard Club of Boston
  • Board Member, Commonwealth Shakespeare Company
Languages
  • Hindi
  • Urdu
Client Highlights
All Client Highlights
Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
Impact of 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act on Institutional Investor Ownership of Single-Family Rental Homes
The U.S. Congress passed the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (the “Housing Act”) and presented it to President Trump on June 29, 2026. At midnight on July 10, 2026, the Housing Act became law because the President did not return it to Congress within ten days (Sundays excepted). The Housing Act includes a wide range of housing reforms designed with the goal of making housing more available and affordable.  This alert focuses on the impact of the Housing Act on institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes.  The Housing Act does not prohibit institutional investor ownership of manufactured homes. The section of the Housing Act impacting institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes is Section 1001 (the Section is titled “Homes Are for People, Not Corporations”).  The primary impacts under Section 1001 are (i) a prohibition on purchases of single-family homes (with important exceptions) and (ii) the creation of a “Renter Outreach Resource” managed by the federal government.  Section 1001 uses a number of defined terms, which are summarized in Appendix A to this alert.  The defined terms are indicated in this alert in italics.  The most important – and most extensive – defined term is excepted purchase, which includes, among other programs, purchases of single-family homes pursuant to build-to-rent programs and purchases of single-family homes from other large institutional investors. No Requirement to Dispose When the U.S. Senate passed a version of the Housing Act in March 2026, the legislation included a controversial, perhaps even unconstitutional, provision requiring institutional investors to dispose of certain single-family homes not later than seven years after the date of purchase.  A relief to such institutional investors, the Housing Act, as enacted, does not include that requirement to dispose. Prohibition on Purchases (with Several Exceptions) The Housing Act prohibits the purchase of single-family homes by large institutional investors, excluding any excepted purchase or any purchase of a single-family home in connection with a restructuring or other reorganization of ownership of single-family homes that were owned or purchased on or before the date of enactment of the Housing Act.  The prohibition on purchases takes effect on January 7, 2027 (180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act) (the “Effective Date”) and is repealed on January 7, 2042 (15 years after the Effective Date). Excepted purchases (i.e., those not prohibited) are described in detail in Appendix A under the defined term “Excepted Purchase”, but generally include many of the common methods by which institutional investors in single-family rental homes acquire such homes, including but not limited to: (i) build‑to‑rent programs, (ii) renovate‑to‑rent programs, (iii) repossessions, (iv) foreclosures, (v) purchases from another large institutional investor, or (vi) combinations of (i) through (v). Enforcement of Prohibition on Purchases The Secretary of the Treasury, or the Attorney General at the request of the Secretary of the Treasury, may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates the prohibition on purchases for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or three times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater. Renter Outreach Resource As described in detail below, the Renter Outreach Resource is a comprehensive program that includes direct reporting of rental disputes by renters to Federal agencies, with investigation and reporting requirements imposed on applicable Federal agencies, and (at a minimum) provision of applicable state agency contact information to renters to facilitate state-level investigation.  In addition, large institutional investors must respond to information requests in connection with any investigation and are required to regularly provide certain information regarding the Renter Outreach Resource to their renters. Establishment of Renter Outreach Resource The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (the “HUD Secretary”) is required, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, to establish the Renter Outreach Resource that consists of a toll-free telephone number and a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in –  notifying Federal agencies about disputes relating to the rental of such properties, including disputes about potential violations of Federal law; sharing information about such disputes with other Federal agencies, including other Federal agencies that manage similar disputes; monitoring such disputes; and resolving such disputes, to the extent practicable.   Response to Outreach The HUD Secretary is required to establish reasonable procedures to promptly respond, in writing where appropriate, to a renter who provides information to the HUD Secretary about a dispute using the Renter Outreach Resource and document such responses.  Such responses are required to include, where appropriate, information about –  steps that have been taken by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency in response to the information about the dispute provided by the renter, including determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved as described in the bullet below “Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law;” any responses received by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency from the large institutional investor related to such dispute; and any outcome of the dispute, to the extent practicable.   Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law The HUD Secretary is required to promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource about a potential violation of Federal law that is received from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, including –  requesting information from a large institutional investor; determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved in the dispute; and sharing information about such potential violation of Federal law with any relevant Federal agencies, as the HUD Secretary may determine appropriate.   Upon request for information made pursuant to the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required to provide a large institutional investor the opportunity to respond, including regarding whether such large institutional investor currently owns the property described in such request for information.   Information for Appropriate State Authority When the HUD Secretary receives information about a potential violation of State law or about a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource, from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required, at a minimum, to provide the renter with contact information for the appropriate, State-specific, State authority authorized to process and investigate such information.   Notice About Renter Outreach Resource Each large institutional investor is required to –  provide to each renter of a residential property owned by such investor at the time such renter first occupies such home and annually thereafter –  written notice about the Renter Outreach Resource; and the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes prior to the subsequent time at which such notice is required to be provided; and   prominently feature information about the Renter Outreach Resource on a public website of such investor that is accessible by such renter.   Annual Notification Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, and not later than December 31st of each year thereafter, each person or entity that satisfies the definition of a large institutional investor is required to –  notify the HUD Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor; and in such notification, identify how many single-family homes such large institutional investor has direct or indirect investment control of as of the date of the submission of such notice, and the city and State where each such single-family home is located, unless such large institutional investor owns ten or fewer single-family homes in such city. Studies on Large Institutional Investors Not later than two years after the Effective Date, and again not later than ten years after the Effective Date, a GAO report and a HUD report are required to be submitted to the House Banking Committee and the Senate Committee on Financial Services. *     *     * Contacts Tax Cameron N. Cosby Carson Durdel Connie Lee Ameek Ashok Ponda Sarah D. Wellings Private Funds William C. Hanson Real Estate Karen J. Kepler Louis A. Monti John M. Steiner Appendix A Defined Terms in Section 1001 of the Housing Act Consumer Reporting Agency:  The term “consumer reporting agency” has the meaning given the term in section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)). Excepted Purchase:  The term “excepted purchase” means any purchase of a single-family home that is –  Newly Constructed, For Sale Home Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion for sale by a large institutional investor and not as a residence rented pending sale;   Build-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as rental properties, whether as communities exclusively of renter-occupied single-family homes or as communities of single-family homes that are both owner- and renter-occupied;   Renovate-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a renovate-to-rent program that –  substantially rehabilitates single-family homes that do not meet structural or core system elements of local building codes; and makes improvements in an aggregate dollar amount of not less than 15% of the purchase price of the single-family home;   Homeownership Program Pursuant to a homeownership program that –  requires rental payments and any other fees that are not greater than those collected by the large institutional investor on other similarly situated single-family homes not covered by the eligible homeownership program; is subject to a contract between the large institutional investor and renter that shall be considered a consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property; provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter, who shall be informed of and opts into such reporting; and requires contribution of meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of the single-family home by the renter;   Program to Boost Homeownership Pursuant to a program to boost homeownership that –  provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter who is informed of and opts into such reporting; provides for the right of first refusal and a 30-day ‘‘first look’’ period; and may entail the meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of a single-family home by the renter (whether it is the home the renter occupies or another home);   Repossession In connection with the satisfaction of debts previously contracted in good faith and where the large institutional investor has the right to repossess the single-family home under such contract;   Foreclosure Undertaken by a mortgage servicer, lender, or other entity that has a legal right to a single-family home, for the purpose of loss mitigation or compliance with servicing or investor obligations, and not as a long-term investment strategy, and is solely as a result of –  a foreclosure; a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure; enforcement of a mortgage, deed of trust, or other security interest; or operation of law following borrower default;   Purchase from Another Large Institutional Investor Purchased from another large institutional investor that either owned the single-family home on the date of enactment of the Housing Act or purchased the single-family home in compliance with Section 1001;   Purchase from Investor Not a Large Institutional Investor Purchased from an investor not covered under Section 1001, so long as the purchase occurred not more than two years after the Effective Date;   Newly Constructed Single-Family Home in Senior Community Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion that is intended and operated for occupancy as part of a community for households with one or more members aged 55 years or older, and satisfies visitability standards established by the HUD Secretary; or   Combination of Foregoing Purchases Purchased through a single purchase or combination or series of purchases described in the foregoing bullet points.   Large Institutional Investor:  The term “large institutional investor” means an investment fund, corporation, general or limited partnership, limited liability company, joint venture, association, or other for-profit entity that is a legal entity structured in a manner that is not aforementioned that –  is engaged, in whole or in part, in the business of investing in, owning, renting, managing, or holding single-family homes; and alone or in concert with one or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate, not including any single-family home purchased in an excepted purchase made after the date of enactment of the Housing Act.   A large institutional investor does not include any local, State, Tribal, or Federal government entity or instrumentality thereof. For purposes of the definition of “large institutional investor”, an entity has direct or indirect investment control over a single-family home if the entity –  owns, or has primary authority or fiduciary responsibility to make material investment or management decisions relating to, the single-family home; is, or directly or indirectly controls, the general partner or managing member of the entity that owns the single-family home; is or controls the investment manager, management company, or investment advisor of the entity that owns the single-family home; owns or controls more than 25% of any class of equity interests of the entity that owns the single-family home, unless such entity is a passive investor; or otherwise controls the entity that owns the single-family home.   Purchase:  The term “purchase” includes any purchase, transfer, or other acquisition of a single-family home, including through mergers, acquisitions, construction, foreclosures, or bulk purchases, whether or not for cash consideration.   Single-Family Home:  The term “single-family home” means a structure that contains two or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household.  The term “single-family home” does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).
Selected REIT Tax Issues in Constructing a Data Center
Update In its May 29, 2026 letter to the IRS in response to Notice 2026-23, Nareit offered suggestions regarding regulatory guidance to be placed on the 2026-27 IRS Priority Guidance Plan (2026-27 PGP). Nareit urged the IRS and Treasury Department to provide guidance that certain data center construction-related assets — such as advance deposits for materials, prepayments, and construction-in-progress accounts — qualify as acceptable assets under REIT asset tests. In arguing that this guidance is critical, Nareit cited Sullivan & Worcester LLP's memorandum as offering a detailed technical explanation on the topic.  Ameek Ashok Ponda, Cameron Cosby, Sarah Wellings and Paul Decker co-authored a new memorandum titled "Selected REIT Tax Issues in Constructing a Data Center" on May 26, 2026 (revised August 13, 2026). As investment in digital infrastructure accelerates, developers and investors are facing increasingly complex REIT Tax considerations tied to data center construction. This memorandum provides an analysis for treating deposits and soon-to-be-affixed materials and components as, respectively, “cash items” and “real property” under the REIT rules and calls on the Treasury and IRS to issue confirmatory guidance.
44 Sullivan & Worcester Lawyers Selected as “Best Lawyers” Award Recipients
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester today announced that 44 lawyers were recognized in the 2027 edition of Best Lawyers in America®. 40 of the firm’s lawyers in Boston, New York and Washington, D.C. were selected as “Best Lawyers in America®,” and four Sullivan lawyers were recognized as “Ones to Watch” in the U.S. Best Lawyers in America® The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Boston include Victor Baltera (Environmental Law, Real Estate Law); Howard Berkenblit (Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Harvey Bines (Corporate Compliance Law, Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Ashley Brooks (Real Estate Law); Joel Carpenter (Tax Law); Henry Comstock, Jr. (Trusts and Estates); Christopher Curtis (Tax Law); Patrick Dinardo (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy); John Graham (Nonprofit / Charities Law, Tax Law); David Guadagnoli (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Warren Heilbronner (Real Estate Law); Zachary Hyde (Patent Law); Richard Jones (Tax Law); Karen Kepler (Real Estate Law); Caroline Kupiec (Tax Law); Thomas Meyers (Patent Law); Lisa Mingolla (Trusts and Estates); Louis Monti (Real Estate Law); Cornelius Murray III (Trusts and Estates); David Nagle (Litigation and Controversy - Tax, Tax Law); Ameek Ashok Ponda (Tax Law); Gregory Sampson (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law); Lewis Segall (Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law); Amy Sheridan (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Laura Steinberg (Commercial Litigation); John Steiner (Real Estate Law); Douglas Stransky (Tax Law); Sarah Wellings (Tax Law); and Amy Zuccarello (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy). Sullivan’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Washington, D.C. include John Chilton (Mutual Funds Law); Cameron Cosby (Tax Law); Nicole Crum (Mutual Funds Law); David Leahy (Mutual Funds Law); David Mahaffey (Mutual Funds Law, Securities Regulation); and Stephanie Monaco (Corporate Law, Mutual Funds Law, Private Funds / Hedge Funds Law, Securities Regulation). The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in New York include Carole Bass (Trusts and Estates); J. Truman Bidwell, Jr. (Corporate Law); Domenick Pugliese (Mutual Funds Law); Constantine Ralli (Trusts and Estates); and Marc Stern (Trusts and Estates). Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch Awardees Best Lawyers awards this recognition to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. Sullivan’s lawyers earning this award include Alexander Gansebom (Corporate Governance and Compliance Law, Corporate Law, Health Care Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, Real Estate Law); Emily Goldschmidt (Corporate Law); Ryan Rosenblatt (Commercial Litigation); and Ashley Tan (Real Estate Law). Best Lawyers Selection Methodology Recognition by Best Lawyers in America® is based on a peer review process designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical and legal practice areas. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.
Sullivan & Worcester Attorneys Named to the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyers Guide
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester announced that David Nagle, Ameek Ashok Ponda and Richard Jones were selected for inclusion in the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyers guide. The guide recognizes attorneys for exceptional work in handling tax aspects of transactional matters, complex tax disputes and litigation, and advising private wealth clients and family offices.  Dave is managing partner of Sullivan. He represents companies in tax disputes before the Massachusetts Department of Revenue and the Internal Revenue Service. He also advises companies and individuals in tax audits, administrative appeals, and litigation and state tax issues related to transactions. His recent professional honors include Best Lawyers’ Boston Litigation and Controversy - Tax Law Lawyer of the Year, Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax and International Tax Review’s World Tax Guide. Ameek advises clients on domestic and international taxation matters, with a focus on mergers and acquisitions and real estate investment trusts (REITs). He is nationally recognized for his work in REIT conversions and cross-border matters across a broad range of property sectors. He has received numerous industry honors, including Forbes America's Best-In-State Tax Lawyers, Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax Law and was ranked by Chambers USA as a Recognized Practitioner in Tax (2006-2026) and REITs: Tax (2013-2026). Rich handles state and local tax litigation for companies in a wide range of industries and transactional planning related to corporate, personal income and sales tax matters. A skilled litigator, he has a successful track record of recent landmark victories in tax cases before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. He has received numerous professional awards, including Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Go To Tax Lawyer in 2026 and Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax Law, and was ranked by Chambers USA in Tax. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.

Ameek Ashok Ponda

Ameek Ashok Ponda is a tax partner at Sullivan & Worcester in Boston and was formerly a member of the firm’s Management Committee and director of the firm's Tax Department.

Ameek's practice includes domestic and international taxation, with an emphasis on mergers and acquisitions and real estate investment trusts (REITs). Nationally recognized for his work in REIT conversions and REIT cross-border matters, Ameek has represented public and private REITs in an array of real property sectors, both domestically and abroad, including: business storage facilities; cold storage facilities; communications towers; data centers; dark and lit fiber; digital billboards; distributed antenna systems; hotels and travel centers; industrial properties; mortgage loans; single-family and multi-family residential; office buildings; parking facilities; retail properties; senior living facilities; solar, wind, and other power infrastructure; timberlands; transmission and distribution lines; as well as vineyards, greenhouses and other agricultural properties.

Ameek is also an adjunct professor with the Boston University School of Law Graduate Tax Program, where for nearly thirty years he has taught tax courses on topics such as business planning, corporate reorganizations, international taxation, regulated investment companies and REITs, and financial products. He currently serves as a lecturer on law with the Harvard Law School, where he teaches partnership taxation, and has previously served as a lecturer on law with the Boston College Law School.

Ameek currently serves as President of the American College of Tax Counsel (ACTC) and is a Past Chair of the Board of Tax Analysts, publisher of the Tax Notes series of daily and weekly journals. He also serves on the boards of the Commonwealth Shakespeare Company, which produces the free summer production “Shakespeare on the Boston Common,” and of the Harvard Club of Boston, as well as on the advisory boards of GBH, Boston’s PBS affiliate, and of the South Asian Bar Association of Greater Boston. In 2007, the Boston Business Journal named Ameek one of its Boston “40 under 40.” Born in Bombay and fluent in Hindi and Urdu, Ameek is a charter member and former secretary of The Indus Entrepreneurs–Boston. He is also a member of the American Law Institute, the International Fiscal Association, the National Tax Association, the Real Estate Roundtable and Nareit.

Ameek Ponda Tax Forum Presentation on REITs (PDF)

Client Highlights
All Client Highlights
Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
Impact of 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act on Institutional Investor Ownership of Single-Family Rental Homes
The U.S. Congress passed the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (the “Housing Act”) and presented it to President Trump on June 29, 2026. At midnight on July 10, 2026, the Housing Act became law because the President did not return it to Congress within ten days (Sundays excepted). The Housing Act includes a wide range of housing reforms designed with the goal of making housing more available and affordable.  This alert focuses on the impact of the Housing Act on institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes.  The Housing Act does not prohibit institutional investor ownership of manufactured homes. The section of the Housing Act impacting institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes is Section 1001 (the Section is titled “Homes Are for People, Not Corporations”).  The primary impacts under Section 1001 are (i) a prohibition on purchases of single-family homes (with important exceptions) and (ii) the creation of a “Renter Outreach Resource” managed by the federal government.  Section 1001 uses a number of defined terms, which are summarized in Appendix A to this alert.  The defined terms are indicated in this alert in italics.  The most important – and most extensive – defined term is excepted purchase, which includes, among other programs, purchases of single-family homes pursuant to build-to-rent programs and purchases of single-family homes from other large institutional investors. No Requirement to Dispose When the U.S. Senate passed a version of the Housing Act in March 2026, the legislation included a controversial, perhaps even unconstitutional, provision requiring institutional investors to dispose of certain single-family homes not later than seven years after the date of purchase.  A relief to such institutional investors, the Housing Act, as enacted, does not include that requirement to dispose. Prohibition on Purchases (with Several Exceptions) The Housing Act prohibits the purchase of single-family homes by large institutional investors, excluding any excepted purchase or any purchase of a single-family home in connection with a restructuring or other reorganization of ownership of single-family homes that were owned or purchased on or before the date of enactment of the Housing Act.  The prohibition on purchases takes effect on January 7, 2027 (180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act) (the “Effective Date”) and is repealed on January 7, 2042 (15 years after the Effective Date). Excepted purchases (i.e., those not prohibited) are described in detail in Appendix A under the defined term “Excepted Purchase”, but generally include many of the common methods by which institutional investors in single-family rental homes acquire such homes, including but not limited to: (i) build‑to‑rent programs, (ii) renovate‑to‑rent programs, (iii) repossessions, (iv) foreclosures, (v) purchases from another large institutional investor, or (vi) combinations of (i) through (v). Enforcement of Prohibition on Purchases The Secretary of the Treasury, or the Attorney General at the request of the Secretary of the Treasury, may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates the prohibition on purchases for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or three times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater. Renter Outreach Resource As described in detail below, the Renter Outreach Resource is a comprehensive program that includes direct reporting of rental disputes by renters to Federal agencies, with investigation and reporting requirements imposed on applicable Federal agencies, and (at a minimum) provision of applicable state agency contact information to renters to facilitate state-level investigation.  In addition, large institutional investors must respond to information requests in connection with any investigation and are required to regularly provide certain information regarding the Renter Outreach Resource to their renters. Establishment of Renter Outreach Resource The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (the “HUD Secretary”) is required, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, to establish the Renter Outreach Resource that consists of a toll-free telephone number and a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in –  notifying Federal agencies about disputes relating to the rental of such properties, including disputes about potential violations of Federal law; sharing information about such disputes with other Federal agencies, including other Federal agencies that manage similar disputes; monitoring such disputes; and resolving such disputes, to the extent practicable.   Response to Outreach The HUD Secretary is required to establish reasonable procedures to promptly respond, in writing where appropriate, to a renter who provides information to the HUD Secretary about a dispute using the Renter Outreach Resource and document such responses.  Such responses are required to include, where appropriate, information about –  steps that have been taken by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency in response to the information about the dispute provided by the renter, including determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved as described in the bullet below “Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law;” any responses received by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency from the large institutional investor related to such dispute; and any outcome of the dispute, to the extent practicable.   Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law The HUD Secretary is required to promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource about a potential violation of Federal law that is received from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, including –  requesting information from a large institutional investor; determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved in the dispute; and sharing information about such potential violation of Federal law with any relevant Federal agencies, as the HUD Secretary may determine appropriate.   Upon request for information made pursuant to the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required to provide a large institutional investor the opportunity to respond, including regarding whether such large institutional investor currently owns the property described in such request for information.   Information for Appropriate State Authority When the HUD Secretary receives information about a potential violation of State law or about a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource, from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required, at a minimum, to provide the renter with contact information for the appropriate, State-specific, State authority authorized to process and investigate such information.   Notice About Renter Outreach Resource Each large institutional investor is required to –  provide to each renter of a residential property owned by such investor at the time such renter first occupies such home and annually thereafter –  written notice about the Renter Outreach Resource; and the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes prior to the subsequent time at which such notice is required to be provided; and   prominently feature information about the Renter Outreach Resource on a public website of such investor that is accessible by such renter.   Annual Notification Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, and not later than December 31st of each year thereafter, each person or entity that satisfies the definition of a large institutional investor is required to –  notify the HUD Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor; and in such notification, identify how many single-family homes such large institutional investor has direct or indirect investment control of as of the date of the submission of such notice, and the city and State where each such single-family home is located, unless such large institutional investor owns ten or fewer single-family homes in such city. Studies on Large Institutional Investors Not later than two years after the Effective Date, and again not later than ten years after the Effective Date, a GAO report and a HUD report are required to be submitted to the House Banking Committee and the Senate Committee on Financial Services. *     *     * Contacts Tax Cameron N. Cosby Carson Durdel Connie Lee Ameek Ashok Ponda Sarah D. Wellings Private Funds William C. Hanson Real Estate Karen J. Kepler Louis A. Monti John M. Steiner Appendix A Defined Terms in Section 1001 of the Housing Act Consumer Reporting Agency:  The term “consumer reporting agency” has the meaning given the term in section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)). Excepted Purchase:  The term “excepted purchase” means any purchase of a single-family home that is –  Newly Constructed, For Sale Home Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion for sale by a large institutional investor and not as a residence rented pending sale;   Build-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as rental properties, whether as communities exclusively of renter-occupied single-family homes or as communities of single-family homes that are both owner- and renter-occupied;   Renovate-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a renovate-to-rent program that –  substantially rehabilitates single-family homes that do not meet structural or core system elements of local building codes; and makes improvements in an aggregate dollar amount of not less than 15% of the purchase price of the single-family home;   Homeownership Program Pursuant to a homeownership program that –  requires rental payments and any other fees that are not greater than those collected by the large institutional investor on other similarly situated single-family homes not covered by the eligible homeownership program; is subject to a contract between the large institutional investor and renter that shall be considered a consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property; provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter, who shall be informed of and opts into such reporting; and requires contribution of meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of the single-family home by the renter;   Program to Boost Homeownership Pursuant to a program to boost homeownership that –  provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter who is informed of and opts into such reporting; provides for the right of first refusal and a 30-day ‘‘first look’’ period; and may entail the meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of a single-family home by the renter (whether it is the home the renter occupies or another home);   Repossession In connection with the satisfaction of debts previously contracted in good faith and where the large institutional investor has the right to repossess the single-family home under such contract;   Foreclosure Undertaken by a mortgage servicer, lender, or other entity that has a legal right to a single-family home, for the purpose of loss mitigation or compliance with servicing or investor obligations, and not as a long-term investment strategy, and is solely as a result of –  a foreclosure; a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure; enforcement of a mortgage, deed of trust, or other security interest; or operation of law following borrower default;   Purchase from Another Large Institutional Investor Purchased from another large institutional investor that either owned the single-family home on the date of enactment of the Housing Act or purchased the single-family home in compliance with Section 1001;   Purchase from Investor Not a Large Institutional Investor Purchased from an investor not covered under Section 1001, so long as the purchase occurred not more than two years after the Effective Date;   Newly Constructed Single-Family Home in Senior Community Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion that is intended and operated for occupancy as part of a community for households with one or more members aged 55 years or older, and satisfies visitability standards established by the HUD Secretary; or   Combination of Foregoing Purchases Purchased through a single purchase or combination or series of purchases described in the foregoing bullet points.   Large Institutional Investor:  The term “large institutional investor” means an investment fund, corporation, general or limited partnership, limited liability company, joint venture, association, or other for-profit entity that is a legal entity structured in a manner that is not aforementioned that –  is engaged, in whole or in part, in the business of investing in, owning, renting, managing, or holding single-family homes; and alone or in concert with one or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate, not including any single-family home purchased in an excepted purchase made after the date of enactment of the Housing Act.   A large institutional investor does not include any local, State, Tribal, or Federal government entity or instrumentality thereof. For purposes of the definition of “large institutional investor”, an entity has direct or indirect investment control over a single-family home if the entity –  owns, or has primary authority or fiduciary responsibility to make material investment or management decisions relating to, the single-family home; is, or directly or indirectly controls, the general partner or managing member of the entity that owns the single-family home; is or controls the investment manager, management company, or investment advisor of the entity that owns the single-family home; owns or controls more than 25% of any class of equity interests of the entity that owns the single-family home, unless such entity is a passive investor; or otherwise controls the entity that owns the single-family home.   Purchase:  The term “purchase” includes any purchase, transfer, or other acquisition of a single-family home, including through mergers, acquisitions, construction, foreclosures, or bulk purchases, whether or not for cash consideration.   Single-Family Home:  The term “single-family home” means a structure that contains two or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household.  The term “single-family home” does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).
Selected REIT Tax Issues in Constructing a Data Center
Update In its May 29, 2026 letter to the IRS in response to Notice 2026-23, Nareit offered suggestions regarding regulatory guidance to be placed on the 2026-27 IRS Priority Guidance Plan (2026-27 PGP). Nareit urged the IRS and Treasury Department to provide guidance that certain data center construction-related assets — such as advance deposits for materials, prepayments, and construction-in-progress accounts — qualify as acceptable assets under REIT asset tests. In arguing that this guidance is critical, Nareit cited Sullivan & Worcester LLP's memorandum as offering a detailed technical explanation on the topic.  Ameek Ashok Ponda, Cameron Cosby, Sarah Wellings and Paul Decker co-authored a new memorandum titled "Selected REIT Tax Issues in Constructing a Data Center" on May 26, 2026 (revised August 13, 2026). As investment in digital infrastructure accelerates, developers and investors are facing increasingly complex REIT Tax considerations tied to data center construction. This memorandum provides an analysis for treating deposits and soon-to-be-affixed materials and components as, respectively, “cash items” and “real property” under the REIT rules and calls on the Treasury and IRS to issue confirmatory guidance.
44 Sullivan & Worcester Lawyers Selected as “Best Lawyers” Award Recipients
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester today announced that 44 lawyers were recognized in the 2027 edition of Best Lawyers in America®. 40 of the firm’s lawyers in Boston, New York and Washington, D.C. were selected as “Best Lawyers in America®,” and four Sullivan lawyers were recognized as “Ones to Watch” in the U.S. Best Lawyers in America® The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Boston include Victor Baltera (Environmental Law, Real Estate Law); Howard Berkenblit (Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Harvey Bines (Corporate Compliance Law, Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Ashley Brooks (Real Estate Law); Joel Carpenter (Tax Law); Henry Comstock, Jr. (Trusts and Estates); Christopher Curtis (Tax Law); Patrick Dinardo (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy); John Graham (Nonprofit / Charities Law, Tax Law); David Guadagnoli (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Warren Heilbronner (Real Estate Law); Zachary Hyde (Patent Law); Richard Jones (Tax Law); Karen Kepler (Real Estate Law); Caroline Kupiec (Tax Law); Thomas Meyers (Patent Law); Lisa Mingolla (Trusts and Estates); Louis Monti (Real Estate Law); Cornelius Murray III (Trusts and Estates); David Nagle (Litigation and Controversy - Tax, Tax Law); Ameek Ashok Ponda (Tax Law); Gregory Sampson (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law); Lewis Segall (Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law); Amy Sheridan (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Laura Steinberg (Commercial Litigation); John Steiner (Real Estate Law); Douglas Stransky (Tax Law); Sarah Wellings (Tax Law); and Amy Zuccarello (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy). Sullivan’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Washington, D.C. include John Chilton (Mutual Funds Law); Cameron Cosby (Tax Law); Nicole Crum (Mutual Funds Law); David Leahy (Mutual Funds Law); David Mahaffey (Mutual Funds Law, Securities Regulation); and Stephanie Monaco (Corporate Law, Mutual Funds Law, Private Funds / Hedge Funds Law, Securities Regulation). The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in New York include Carole Bass (Trusts and Estates); J. Truman Bidwell, Jr. (Corporate Law); Domenick Pugliese (Mutual Funds Law); Constantine Ralli (Trusts and Estates); and Marc Stern (Trusts and Estates). Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch Awardees Best Lawyers awards this recognition to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. Sullivan’s lawyers earning this award include Alexander Gansebom (Corporate Governance and Compliance Law, Corporate Law, Health Care Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, Real Estate Law); Emily Goldschmidt (Corporate Law); Ryan Rosenblatt (Commercial Litigation); and Ashley Tan (Real Estate Law). Best Lawyers Selection Methodology Recognition by Best Lawyers in America® is based on a peer review process designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical and legal practice areas. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.
Sullivan & Worcester Attorneys Named to the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyers Guide
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester announced that David Nagle, Ameek Ashok Ponda and Richard Jones were selected for inclusion in the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyers guide. The guide recognizes attorneys for exceptional work in handling tax aspects of transactional matters, complex tax disputes and litigation, and advising private wealth clients and family offices.  Dave is managing partner of Sullivan. He represents companies in tax disputes before the Massachusetts Department of Revenue and the Internal Revenue Service. He also advises companies and individuals in tax audits, administrative appeals, and litigation and state tax issues related to transactions. His recent professional honors include Best Lawyers’ Boston Litigation and Controversy - Tax Law Lawyer of the Year, Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax and International Tax Review’s World Tax Guide. Ameek advises clients on domestic and international taxation matters, with a focus on mergers and acquisitions and real estate investment trusts (REITs). He is nationally recognized for his work in REIT conversions and cross-border matters across a broad range of property sectors. He has received numerous industry honors, including Forbes America's Best-In-State Tax Lawyers, Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax Law and was ranked by Chambers USA as a Recognized Practitioner in Tax (2006-2026) and REITs: Tax (2013-2026). Rich handles state and local tax litigation for companies in a wide range of industries and transactional planning related to corporate, personal income and sales tax matters. A skilled litigator, he has a successful track record of recent landmark victories in tax cases before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. He has received numerous professional awards, including Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Go To Tax Lawyer in 2026 and Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax Law, and was ranked by Chambers USA in Tax. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.

Ameek Ashok Ponda

Ameek Ashok Ponda

Ameek Ashok Ponda

Ameek Ashok Ponda is a tax partner at Sullivan & Worcester in Boston and was formerly a member of the firm’s Management Committee and director of the firm's Tax Department.

Ameek's practice includes domestic and international taxation, with an emphasis on mergers and acquisitions and real estate investment trusts (REITs). Nationally recognized for his work in REIT conversions and REIT cross-border matters, Ameek has represented public and private REITs in an array of real property sectors, both domestically and abroad, including: business storage facilities; cold storage facilities; communications towers; data centers; dark and lit fiber; digital billboards; distributed antenna systems; hotels and travel centers; industrial properties; mortgage loans; single-family and multi-family residential; office buildings; parking facilities; retail properties; senior living facilities; solar, wind, and other power infrastructure; timberlands; transmission and distribution lines; as well as vineyards, greenhouses and other agricultural properties.

Ameek is also an adjunct professor with the Boston University School of Law Graduate Tax Program, where for nearly thirty years he has taught tax courses on topics such as business planning, corporate reorganizations, international taxation, regulated investment companies and REITs, and financial products. He currently serves as a lecturer on law with the Harvard Law School, where he teaches partnership taxation, and has previously served as a lecturer on law with the Boston College Law School.

Ameek currently serves as President of the American College of Tax Counsel (ACTC) and is a Past Chair of the Board of Tax Analysts, publisher of the Tax Notes series of daily and weekly journals. He also serves on the boards of the Commonwealth Shakespeare Company, which produces the free summer production “Shakespeare on the Boston Common,” and of the Harvard Club of Boston, as well as on the advisory boards of GBH, Boston’s PBS affiliate, and of the South Asian Bar Association of Greater Boston. In 2007, the Boston Business Journal named Ameek one of its Boston “40 under 40.” Born in Bombay and fluent in Hindi and Urdu, Ameek is a charter member and former secretary of The Indus Entrepreneurs–Boston. He is also a member of the American Law Institute, the International Fiscal Association, the National Tax Association, the Real Estate Roundtable and Nareit.

Ameek Ponda Tax Forum Presentation on REITs (PDF)

Client Highlights
All Client Highlights
Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
Impact of 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act on Institutional Investor Ownership of Single-Family Rental Homes
The U.S. Congress passed the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (the “Housing Act”) and presented it to President Trump on June 29, 2026. At midnight on July 10, 2026, the Housing Act became law because the President did not return it to Congress within ten days (Sundays excepted). The Housing Act includes a wide range of housing reforms designed with the goal of making housing more available and affordable.  This alert focuses on the impact of the Housing Act on institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes.  The Housing Act does not prohibit institutional investor ownership of manufactured homes. The section of the Housing Act impacting institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes is Section 1001 (the Section is titled “Homes Are for People, Not Corporations”).  The primary impacts under Section 1001 are (i) a prohibition on purchases of single-family homes (with important exceptions) and (ii) the creation of a “Renter Outreach Resource” managed by the federal government.  Section 1001 uses a number of defined terms, which are summarized in Appendix A to this alert.  The defined terms are indicated in this alert in italics.  The most important – and most extensive – defined term is excepted purchase, which includes, among other programs, purchases of single-family homes pursuant to build-to-rent programs and purchases of single-family homes from other large institutional investors. No Requirement to Dispose When the U.S. Senate passed a version of the Housing Act in March 2026, the legislation included a controversial, perhaps even unconstitutional, provision requiring institutional investors to dispose of certain single-family homes not later than seven years after the date of purchase.  A relief to such institutional investors, the Housing Act, as enacted, does not include that requirement to dispose. Prohibition on Purchases (with Several Exceptions) The Housing Act prohibits the purchase of single-family homes by large institutional investors, excluding any excepted purchase or any purchase of a single-family home in connection with a restructuring or other reorganization of ownership of single-family homes that were owned or purchased on or before the date of enactment of the Housing Act.  The prohibition on purchases takes effect on January 7, 2027 (180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act) (the “Effective Date”) and is repealed on January 7, 2042 (15 years after the Effective Date). Excepted purchases (i.e., those not prohibited) are described in detail in Appendix A under the defined term “Excepted Purchase”, but generally include many of the common methods by which institutional investors in single-family rental homes acquire such homes, including but not limited to: (i) build‑to‑rent programs, (ii) renovate‑to‑rent programs, (iii) repossessions, (iv) foreclosures, (v) purchases from another large institutional investor, or (vi) combinations of (i) through (v). Enforcement of Prohibition on Purchases The Secretary of the Treasury, or the Attorney General at the request of the Secretary of the Treasury, may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates the prohibition on purchases for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or three times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater. Renter Outreach Resource As described in detail below, the Renter Outreach Resource is a comprehensive program that includes direct reporting of rental disputes by renters to Federal agencies, with investigation and reporting requirements imposed on applicable Federal agencies, and (at a minimum) provision of applicable state agency contact information to renters to facilitate state-level investigation.  In addition, large institutional investors must respond to information requests in connection with any investigation and are required to regularly provide certain information regarding the Renter Outreach Resource to their renters. Establishment of Renter Outreach Resource The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (the “HUD Secretary”) is required, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, to establish the Renter Outreach Resource that consists of a toll-free telephone number and a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in –  notifying Federal agencies about disputes relating to the rental of such properties, including disputes about potential violations of Federal law; sharing information about such disputes with other Federal agencies, including other Federal agencies that manage similar disputes; monitoring such disputes; and resolving such disputes, to the extent practicable.   Response to Outreach The HUD Secretary is required to establish reasonable procedures to promptly respond, in writing where appropriate, to a renter who provides information to the HUD Secretary about a dispute using the Renter Outreach Resource and document such responses.  Such responses are required to include, where appropriate, information about –  steps that have been taken by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency in response to the information about the dispute provided by the renter, including determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved as described in the bullet below “Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law;” any responses received by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency from the large institutional investor related to such dispute; and any outcome of the dispute, to the extent practicable.   Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law The HUD Secretary is required to promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource about a potential violation of Federal law that is received from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, including –  requesting information from a large institutional investor; determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved in the dispute; and sharing information about such potential violation of Federal law with any relevant Federal agencies, as the HUD Secretary may determine appropriate.   Upon request for information made pursuant to the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required to provide a large institutional investor the opportunity to respond, including regarding whether such large institutional investor currently owns the property described in such request for information.   Information for Appropriate State Authority When the HUD Secretary receives information about a potential violation of State law or about a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource, from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required, at a minimum, to provide the renter with contact information for the appropriate, State-specific, State authority authorized to process and investigate such information.   Notice About Renter Outreach Resource Each large institutional investor is required to –  provide to each renter of a residential property owned by such investor at the time such renter first occupies such home and annually thereafter –  written notice about the Renter Outreach Resource; and the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes prior to the subsequent time at which such notice is required to be provided; and   prominently feature information about the Renter Outreach Resource on a public website of such investor that is accessible by such renter.   Annual Notification Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, and not later than December 31st of each year thereafter, each person or entity that satisfies the definition of a large institutional investor is required to –  notify the HUD Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor; and in such notification, identify how many single-family homes such large institutional investor has direct or indirect investment control of as of the date of the submission of such notice, and the city and State where each such single-family home is located, unless such large institutional investor owns ten or fewer single-family homes in such city. Studies on Large Institutional Investors Not later than two years after the Effective Date, and again not later than ten years after the Effective Date, a GAO report and a HUD report are required to be submitted to the House Banking Committee and the Senate Committee on Financial Services. *     *     * Contacts Tax Cameron N. Cosby Carson Durdel Connie Lee Ameek Ashok Ponda Sarah D. Wellings Private Funds William C. Hanson Real Estate Karen J. Kepler Louis A. Monti John M. Steiner Appendix A Defined Terms in Section 1001 of the Housing Act Consumer Reporting Agency:  The term “consumer reporting agency” has the meaning given the term in section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)). Excepted Purchase:  The term “excepted purchase” means any purchase of a single-family home that is –  Newly Constructed, For Sale Home Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion for sale by a large institutional investor and not as a residence rented pending sale;   Build-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as rental properties, whether as communities exclusively of renter-occupied single-family homes or as communities of single-family homes that are both owner- and renter-occupied;   Renovate-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a renovate-to-rent program that –  substantially rehabilitates single-family homes that do not meet structural or core system elements of local building codes; and makes improvements in an aggregate dollar amount of not less than 15% of the purchase price of the single-family home;   Homeownership Program Pursuant to a homeownership program that –  requires rental payments and any other fees that are not greater than those collected by the large institutional investor on other similarly situated single-family homes not covered by the eligible homeownership program; is subject to a contract between the large institutional investor and renter that shall be considered a consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property; provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter, who shall be informed of and opts into such reporting; and requires contribution of meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of the single-family home by the renter;   Program to Boost Homeownership Pursuant to a program to boost homeownership that –  provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter who is informed of and opts into such reporting; provides for the right of first refusal and a 30-day ‘‘first look’’ period; and may entail the meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of a single-family home by the renter (whether it is the home the renter occupies or another home);   Repossession In connection with the satisfaction of debts previously contracted in good faith and where the large institutional investor has the right to repossess the single-family home under such contract;   Foreclosure Undertaken by a mortgage servicer, lender, or other entity that has a legal right to a single-family home, for the purpose of loss mitigation or compliance with servicing or investor obligations, and not as a long-term investment strategy, and is solely as a result of –  a foreclosure; a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure; enforcement of a mortgage, deed of trust, or other security interest; or operation of law following borrower default;   Purchase from Another Large Institutional Investor Purchased from another large institutional investor that either owned the single-family home on the date of enactment of the Housing Act or purchased the single-family home in compliance with Section 1001;   Purchase from Investor Not a Large Institutional Investor Purchased from an investor not covered under Section 1001, so long as the purchase occurred not more than two years after the Effective Date;   Newly Constructed Single-Family Home in Senior Community Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion that is intended and operated for occupancy as part of a community for households with one or more members aged 55 years or older, and satisfies visitability standards established by the HUD Secretary; or   Combination of Foregoing Purchases Purchased through a single purchase or combination or series of purchases described in the foregoing bullet points.   Large Institutional Investor:  The term “large institutional investor” means an investment fund, corporation, general or limited partnership, limited liability company, joint venture, association, or other for-profit entity that is a legal entity structured in a manner that is not aforementioned that –  is engaged, in whole or in part, in the business of investing in, owning, renting, managing, or holding single-family homes; and alone or in concert with one or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate, not including any single-family home purchased in an excepted purchase made after the date of enactment of the Housing Act.   A large institutional investor does not include any local, State, Tribal, or Federal government entity or instrumentality thereof. For purposes of the definition of “large institutional investor”, an entity has direct or indirect investment control over a single-family home if the entity –  owns, or has primary authority or fiduciary responsibility to make material investment or management decisions relating to, the single-family home; is, or directly or indirectly controls, the general partner or managing member of the entity that owns the single-family home; is or controls the investment manager, management company, or investment advisor of the entity that owns the single-family home; owns or controls more than 25% of any class of equity interests of the entity that owns the single-family home, unless such entity is a passive investor; or otherwise controls the entity that owns the single-family home.   Purchase:  The term “purchase” includes any purchase, transfer, or other acquisition of a single-family home, including through mergers, acquisitions, construction, foreclosures, or bulk purchases, whether or not for cash consideration.   Single-Family Home:  The term “single-family home” means a structure that contains two or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household.  The term “single-family home” does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).
Selected REIT Tax Issues in Constructing a Data Center
Update In its May 29, 2026 letter to the IRS in response to Notice 2026-23, Nareit offered suggestions regarding regulatory guidance to be placed on the 2026-27 IRS Priority Guidance Plan (2026-27 PGP). Nareit urged the IRS and Treasury Department to provide guidance that certain data center construction-related assets — such as advance deposits for materials, prepayments, and construction-in-progress accounts — qualify as acceptable assets under REIT asset tests. In arguing that this guidance is critical, Nareit cited Sullivan & Worcester LLP's memorandum as offering a detailed technical explanation on the topic.  Ameek Ashok Ponda, Cameron Cosby, Sarah Wellings and Paul Decker co-authored a new memorandum titled "Selected REIT Tax Issues in Constructing a Data Center" on May 26, 2026 (revised August 13, 2026). As investment in digital infrastructure accelerates, developers and investors are facing increasingly complex REIT Tax considerations tied to data center construction. This memorandum provides an analysis for treating deposits and soon-to-be-affixed materials and components as, respectively, “cash items” and “real property” under the REIT rules and calls on the Treasury and IRS to issue confirmatory guidance.
44 Sullivan & Worcester Lawyers Selected as “Best Lawyers” Award Recipients
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester today announced that 44 lawyers were recognized in the 2027 edition of Best Lawyers in America®. 40 of the firm’s lawyers in Boston, New York and Washington, D.C. were selected as “Best Lawyers in America®,” and four Sullivan lawyers were recognized as “Ones to Watch” in the U.S. Best Lawyers in America® The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Boston include Victor Baltera (Environmental Law, Real Estate Law); Howard Berkenblit (Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Harvey Bines (Corporate Compliance Law, Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Ashley Brooks (Real Estate Law); Joel Carpenter (Tax Law); Henry Comstock, Jr. (Trusts and Estates); Christopher Curtis (Tax Law); Patrick Dinardo (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy); John Graham (Nonprofit / Charities Law, Tax Law); David Guadagnoli (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Warren Heilbronner (Real Estate Law); Zachary Hyde (Patent Law); Richard Jones (Tax Law); Karen Kepler (Real Estate Law); Caroline Kupiec (Tax Law); Thomas Meyers (Patent Law); Lisa Mingolla (Trusts and Estates); Louis Monti (Real Estate Law); Cornelius Murray III (Trusts and Estates); David Nagle (Litigation and Controversy - Tax, Tax Law); Ameek Ashok Ponda (Tax Law); Gregory Sampson (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law); Lewis Segall (Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law); Amy Sheridan (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Laura Steinberg (Commercial Litigation); John Steiner (Real Estate Law); Douglas Stransky (Tax Law); Sarah Wellings (Tax Law); and Amy Zuccarello (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy). Sullivan’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Washington, D.C. include John Chilton (Mutual Funds Law); Cameron Cosby (Tax Law); Nicole Crum (Mutual Funds Law); David Leahy (Mutual Funds Law); David Mahaffey (Mutual Funds Law, Securities Regulation); and Stephanie Monaco (Corporate Law, Mutual Funds Law, Private Funds / Hedge Funds Law, Securities Regulation). The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in New York include Carole Bass (Trusts and Estates); J. Truman Bidwell, Jr. (Corporate Law); Domenick Pugliese (Mutual Funds Law); Constantine Ralli (Trusts and Estates); and Marc Stern (Trusts and Estates). Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch Awardees Best Lawyers awards this recognition to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. Sullivan’s lawyers earning this award include Alexander Gansebom (Corporate Governance and Compliance Law, Corporate Law, Health Care Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, Real Estate Law); Emily Goldschmidt (Corporate Law); Ryan Rosenblatt (Commercial Litigation); and Ashley Tan (Real Estate Law). Best Lawyers Selection Methodology Recognition by Best Lawyers in America® is based on a peer review process designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical and legal practice areas. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.
Sullivan & Worcester Attorneys Named to the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyers Guide
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester announced that David Nagle, Ameek Ashok Ponda and Richard Jones were selected for inclusion in the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Tax Lawyers guide. The guide recognizes attorneys for exceptional work in handling tax aspects of transactional matters, complex tax disputes and litigation, and advising private wealth clients and family offices.  Dave is managing partner of Sullivan. He represents companies in tax disputes before the Massachusetts Department of Revenue and the Internal Revenue Service. He also advises companies and individuals in tax audits, administrative appeals, and litigation and state tax issues related to transactions. His recent professional honors include Best Lawyers’ Boston Litigation and Controversy - Tax Law Lawyer of the Year, Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax and International Tax Review’s World Tax Guide. Ameek advises clients on domestic and international taxation matters, with a focus on mergers and acquisitions and real estate investment trusts (REITs). He is nationally recognized for his work in REIT conversions and cross-border matters across a broad range of property sectors. He has received numerous industry honors, including Forbes America's Best-In-State Tax Lawyers, Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax Law and was ranked by Chambers USA as a Recognized Practitioner in Tax (2006-2026) and REITs: Tax (2013-2026). Rich handles state and local tax litigation for companies in a wide range of industries and transactional planning related to corporate, personal income and sales tax matters. A skilled litigator, he has a successful track record of recent landmark victories in tax cases before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. He has received numerous professional awards, including Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Go To Tax Lawyer in 2026 and Boston Magazine Top Lawyers in Tax Law, and was ranked by Chambers USA in Tax. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.

Ameek Ashok Ponda

One of the Largest Global REITs and Its Subsidiary Form a New Joint Venture

Our marquee REIT and Tax teams advised American Tower Corporation (NYSE: AMT), one of the largest global REITs, and its subsidiary CoreSite in the formation of a new joint venture with Stonepeak, a leading alternative investment firm specializing in infrastructure and real property assets, to develop, build and operate an 18-megawatt data center in Denver, Colorado. CoreSite provides IT infrastructure that empowers enterprises and cloud, network and IT service providers to monetize and future-proof their digital businesses. The total estimated development costs for the 18-megawatt data center are expected to be more than $250 million.

Sullivan’s team was led by Ameek Ashok Ponda, director of the Tax Department, with Sullivan Tax partners Joel Carpenter and Sarah Wellings, and associate Connie Lee, contributing to the successful deal.

Ameek Ashok Ponda, Joel R. Carpenter, Sarah D. Wellings and Connie Lee

Ameek Ashok Ponda