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

Dan's practice focuses on representing taxpayers in federal and state tax litigation and controversies as well as transactional planning involving corporate, franchise, personal income and sales/use tax matters. Prior to his employment at Sullivan, Dan was an attorney at the Internal Revenue Service Office of Chief Counsel, where he represented the Internal Revenue Service in litigation before the United States Tax Court and served as a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts.

Dan is also one of the founders of the firm's Opportunity Zone practice group, and has assisted in the structuring of over $1 billion in Opportunity Zone projects throughout the country, including both real estate and operating business. Dan was named a Top 25 Tax Specialist by Opportunity Zone Magazine in 2022.

Dan is a frequent speaker on such matters as Opportunity Zone tax structuring, federal tax credits, federal and state controversy issues, and domicile planning. Dan has also been quoted on various tax matters in publications such as the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, Law360, The Real Deal and Bloomberg Tax.

Dan has successfully represented clients under audit before the Internal Revenue Service and various state departments of revenue on a wide range of matters. For example, Dan successfully secured a multi-million dollar refund for an insurance company before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Dental Service of Massachusetts v. Commissioner, a case of first impression in Massachusetts. Dan has also represented clients in domestic and offshore voluntary disclosures, and has successfully negotiated the abatement of federal tax penalties imposed based on various offshore tax issues.

Education
  • Boston University School of Law (LL.M.)
    • Taxation
  • Catholic University, Columbus School of Law (J.D., magna cum laude)
  • Boston College (B.A.)
Bar & Court Admissions
  • Massachusetts
  • New York
  • U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts
  • U.S. Tax Court
Professional Qualifications
  • Boston Bar Association, Tax Section
  • American Bar Association, Tax Section
Awards & Honors
  • Highly Regarded, general corporate tax, International Tax Review’s World Tax Guide (2024-2026)
  • Top 25 Tax Specialist, Opportunity Zone Magazine (2022)
  • Recommended by The Legal 500 U.S. (2019, 2022-2026)
Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
The Case for Competitiveness: A Menu of Pro-Growth Changes to Massachusetts Business Tax Policy
Daniel Ryan co-authored a white paper with Andrew Mikula for the Pioneer Institute titled "The Case for Competitiveness: A Menu of Pro-Growth Changes to Massachusetts Business Tax Policy," highlighting tax reforms that would enhance Massachusetts' competitiveness. Citing the challenge of outmigration due to tax policy in the Commonwealth, the study focuses on six proposed reforms: Repealing the Estate Tax Replacing the "Throwback Rule" with the "Throw-Out" Rule Increasing the Threshold of the Sting Tax Adopting the Rolling Stock Exemption Eliminating the Minimum Corporate Excise Eliminating the Non-Income Measure of the Corporate Tax
"One Big Beautiful Bill Act" Enshrines Opportunity Zone Provisions
On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" (the “OBBBA”), which contains amendments to sections 1400Z-1 and 1400Z-2 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Original Statute”)—the provisions that establish and govern the Opportunity Zone program. Enacted in 2017 by President Trump in his first term, the Original Statute created a framework for incentivizing investment in economically distressed areas by offering timebound tax benefits to investments in qualified businesses and property within designated Opportunity Zones. Through the OBBBA, President Trump enshrined in the Code one of the signature pieces of legislation from his first term by removing the original sunset provisions and making additional enhancements (the “OZ Amendments”), including those described below. Without the OZ Amendments, key provisions of the Opportunity Zone program would have expired on December 31, 2026. Generally, the Opportunity Zone program provides three (3) significant tax benefits for taxpayers who invest capital gains in a Qualified Opportunity Fund (a “QOF”), provided the QOF then invests its cash in qualified property or a Qualified Opportunity Zone Business (a “QOZB”) that is located in a low-income census tract designated by the chief executive of a state or US territory (a “Qualified Opportunity Zone”): First, a taxpayer can defer paying tax on capital gains that are invested in a QOF and subsequently properly invested by the QOF in qualified property or a QOZB; Second, a taxpayer can reduce the amount of capital gains tax ultimately due with respect to capital gains that are invested in a QOF and subsequently properly invested by the QOF in qualified property or a QOZB; and Third, a taxpayer can benefit from tax-free gain with respect to the sale of any QOF interest held for more than 10 years. Changes to Code Section 1400Z-1: Designations of Qualified Opportunity Zones Under the Original Statute, states and territories had one opportunity to designate Qualified Opportunity Zones, all of which designations were scheduled to expire on December 31, 2026. Following the OZ Amendments, however, new Qualified Opportunity Zones may be designated on July 1, 2026, and every 10 years thereafter, with each designation effective for a 10-year period. Also, the OZ Amendments redefine which census tracts are eligible to be designated as Qualified Opportunity Zones. Beginning on July 1, 2026, any census tract, as determined by the most recent decennial national census, in which the median family income does not exceed 70% (lowered from the previous 80% threshold) of the statewide or metropolitan median family income, as applicable, may be designated as a Qualified Opportunity Zone. In addition, any census tract that, as determined by the most recent decennial national census, has a poverty rate of at least 20% and a median family income that does not exceed 125% of the applicable statewide or metropolitan area median family income, as applicable, may be designated as a Qualified Opportunity Zone. Under the Original Statute, only the 20% poverty rate threshold applied; the income limitation is a new requirement introduced by the OZ Amendments. Finally, census tracts that are contiguous with a qualifying census tract can no longer be designated as a Qualified Opportunity Zone. The new designation regime establishes 10-year investment periods for Qualified Opportunity Zones, creating a steady pipeline of new tracts available for QOF investors. This structure offers greater flexibility and certainty for investors seeking to make QOF investing a permanent part of their capital allocation and investment strategies. At the same time, the OZ Amendments introduce stricter criteria for designating Qualified Opportunity Zones, helping achieve the Opportunity Zone program goals of directing benefits to genuinely underserved communities. Changes to Code Section 1400Z-2: Tax Effects of the OZ Amendments Under the OZ Amendments, the payment of capital gains tax that would be due but for the investment of such capital gains in a QOF is deferred for up to five (5) years following the date of the QOF investment or until the investment is sold, whichever comes first. Additionally, if a QOF investment is held for at least five (5) years, the amount of capital gains tax due is reduced by 10%. The OZ Amendments also introduce the concept of a Qualified Rural Opportunity Fund (a “QROF”). A QROF essentially operates in the same manner as a QOF, but for purposes of the qualifying under the Opportunity Zone program, as amended by the OZ Amendments, at least 70% of the assets owned or leased by the QROF must be located in a Qualified Opportunity Zone comprised entirely of a “rural area” or at least 70% of the assets owned or leased by a QOZB that is owned by a QROF must be used in a Qualified Opportunity Zone comprised entirely of a “rural area.” As defined in the OZ Amendments, a “rural area” is either a city or town with a population of less than 50,000 or any urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a city or town with a population greater than 50,000. The OZ Amendments encourage investment in QROFs by providing a 30% reduction in capital gains tax on qualifying amounts invested—an increase from the previous 10% reduction available for investments in QOFs. Further, the OZ Amendments relax the “substantial improvement” standard for preexisting structures located in a “rural area.” Outside of a “rural area,” a QOF or QOZB must invest at least an amount equal to the purchase price of a preexisting structure in improvements to qualify for Opportunity Zone benefits. For preexisting structures in “rural areas,” however, the required investment in improvements is reduced to 50% of the acquisition price. Finally, the OZ Amendments cap the holding period for each QOF or QROF investment at 30 years. The investment must be disposed of within 30 years of the investment date; otherwise, on the 30-year anniversary, the basis in the QOF or QROF interest is stepped up to its fair market value. The QROF framework dramatically expands the potential of the Opportunity Zone program and unlocks multiple new potential strategies for investors. The reduced “substantial improvement” standard for QROFs could qualify relatively smaller or lower-value rural properties for Opportunity zone benefits by making it possible and profitable to renovate or repurpose existing rural structures that would not meet the cost thresholds for QOFs, such as the revitalization of historic “main street” properties, the adaptive reuse of barns or warehouses for community or light industrial purposes, and small-scale hospitality renovations (e.g., motels, campgrounds, B&Bs). In addition, QROFs can more feasibly support the improvement and expansion of rural infrastructure—such as broadband, water, waste management, or renewable energy installations and facilities for agriculture or forestry—where project costs may not justify high QOF-level improvement requirements or where initial investment outlays and improvement costs are lower. QROFs present potential for smaller workforce or affordable housing projects in rural areas, which may struggle to hit QOF investment thresholds. Moreover, community centers, healthcare clinics, and educational/training centers—often serving populations too small for QOF economics—fit better within the QROF structure. New Reporting Requirements The OZ Amendments impose additional reporting requirements for QOFs, QROFs, and QOZBs. These new reporting requirements include the reporting of the value of the assets purchased and leased, the census tracts in which the qualifying investments are located, and the number of employees located in the Qualified Opportunity Zone, or other information related to the employment impact of the QOF, QROF, and QOZB. For real property, the number of residential units must also be reported. The names, addresses and taxpayer identification numbers of investors that sell an interest in a QOF or QROF must also be identified each year.  Also, the OZ Amendments impose penalties for the failure to file the required information and appropriate funds to the IRS to enable the IRS to make annual reports showing information such as the number of QOFs and QROFs, the employment impact, and the aggregate amount invested. These new reporting requirements enable regulators and the public to better assess whether Opportunity Zone incentives are achieving their intended economic and social benefits, particularly in underserved or rural areas. This regulatory shift, including stricter documentation, regular reporting deadlines, and potential penalties for inaccuracies or omissions, may increase administrative costs, but it also builds greater market confidence in the Opportunity Zone program and helps ensure that tax benefits are tied to demonstrable community impact. Takeaways The OZ Amendments make the tax benefits permanent, ensure that there will be a reduction in capital gains tax due if an investment in a QOF or QROF is held for at least five (5) years, and create a process for new Qualified Opportunity Zones to be designated every 10 years. Additionally, the OZ Amendments' new OZ Statute encourages investment in rural areas by providing additional tax savings to investments in those areas, helping deliver Opportunity Zone benefits to small-scale projects that could create a steady flow of investment to rural communities. Finally, the new reporting requirements create a more robust framework for oversight, improve program credibility, and drive more targeted and responsible investment activity in Opportunity Zones.
Top Tier Firm, Legal 500 United States 2026
Sullivan & Worcester Ranked in the Legal 500 United States 2026 Edition
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester announced that its practice groups and attorneys have been ranked and recommended in the Legal 500 United States 2026. The firm’s Real Estate practice was newly ranked Tier 1 in the “Real estate – mid-market ($0-500m)” category and the firm maintained rankings across a variety of practice areas. Partners Nicole Crum and John Steiner were newly ranked as Leading Partners and Ryan Rosenblatt as a Next Generation Partner. Peers and more than 300,000 corporate counsel were surveyed and interviewed globally in the past 12 months to assess law firms’ overall visibility and reputation, culminating in detailed rankings and editorial. The Legal 500 is an independent guide, and firms and individuals are recommended purely on merit. Sullivan's lawyers received the following rankings: Leading Partners: The Legal 500’s Guide to Outstanding Lawyers Nationwide Benjamin Armour - M&A: Middle-Market (Sub-$500m); M&A: middle-market ($0-250m) Ameek Ashok Ponda - Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)  Nicole Crum - Mutual/registered/exchange-traded funds Lewis Segall - M&A: Middle-Market (Sub-$500m); M&A: middle-market ($0-250m) John Steiner - Real estate – mid-market ($0-500m) Douglas Stransky - International Tax Joel Telpner - Fintech Next Generation Partners: The Legal 500’s Guide to Up-and-Coming Lawyers Nationwide Ryan Rosenblatt - General commercial disputes – mid-market ($250-500m) Sarah Wellings - Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) Practice Areas Ranked and Attorneys Recognized Corporate Governance “Our lead partner, Nicole Crum, who leads the investment industry practice, is exceptional. She demonstrates strong industry knowledge yet is very personable and anticipates what we need to know or what we should consider doing to handle any matter. The team roll up their sleeves and provide recommendations as to how we as a board should handle any matter. Strong service commitment and work ethic!” “The team we have at Sullivan & Worcester has served our company for years and knows the management team, staff as well as our board members. They are extremely responsive and proactive and anticipate what we should be aware of, concerned about, excited about, and how to handle oversight, processes and protocols to ensure we are carrying out our fiduciary duties. The partners are experts in this industry.” Leading Partner: Nicole Crum Recommended Lawyers: Howard Berkenblit, David Leahy Dispute Resolution/General Commercial Disputes “Diverse skillset. Client centric. Transparency. Urgency provided on all matters.” “I have worked with Gerry Silver for over 15 years and have found his pragmatic approach to complex matters refreshing. He understands our business, culture and market, and will give me his opinion in a digestible manner.” Next Generation Partner: Ryan Rosenblatt Recommended Lawyers: Gerry Silver, Patrick Dinardo, Laura Steinberg, Michael Sullivan, Amy Zuccarello, Erika Todd, Christopher Shields, Anna Lea McNerney Employee Benefits, Executive Compensation and Retirement Plans: Design “The level of expertise is top shelf. David Guadagnoli seems to know all of ERISA and IRS rulings.” “David Guadagnoli and Amy Sheridan both have superior knowledge in their respective areas. I value the ability to raise issues whether simple or complex. The firm takes the same diligent approach across all spectrums of complexity.” Recommended Lawyers: David Guadagnoli, Amy Sheridan Environment: Transactional Fintech “Sullivan & Worcester is one of the finest firms with which I have worked.” “The lawyers are excellent, and the firm consistently provides the highest quality of customer service.” Leading Partner: Joel Telpner Recommended Lawyers: Natalie Lederman, Benjamin Armour, Scott Kaufman, Harvey Bines, Christopher Curtis Land Use/Zoning Recommended Lawyers: Gregory Sampson, Ashley Brooks, Victor Baltera, Karen Kepler, Ashley Tan M&A: Corporate and Commercial: Venture Capital and Emerging Companies Recommended Lawyers: Scott Kaufman, Lewis Segall, Benjamin Armour, Michael Student M&A: Middle-Market ($0-250m) “The partner Lewis Segall has been working with our company for 15 years and we have a good working relationship with him. He knows our history and very attentive to our needs.” “Lewis Segall is very attentive to our needs. We very much value him.” Leading Partners: Benjamin Armour, Lewis Segall Recommended Lawyers: Natalie Lederman Mutual/Registered/Exchange-Traded Funds “Sullivan & Worcester's practice is defined by its deep expertise in investment funds and its ability to deliver clear, commercially grounded advice across the full fund lifecycle—from formation and structuring to regulatory compliance and complex transactions.” “The team is highly experienced, collaborative, and excel in efficient execution and clear communication.” Leading Partner: Nicole Crum Recommended Lawyers: David Leahy, David Mahaffey, Rachael Schwartz Real Estate Leading Partner: John Steiner Recommended Lawyers: Ashley Brooks, Karen Kepler, Gregory Sampson, Sharon Leifer, Louis Monti, Spencer Stone, Ashley Tan Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) “We have built multiple complex and sophisticated REIT platforms over the years and worked with many top-tier REIT specialists, but Sullivan’s REIT practice is by far the best, with Sarah Wellings.” Leading Partner: Ameek Ashok Ponda Next Generation Partner: Sarah Wellings Recommended Lawyers: Angela Gomes, Louis Monti, Shu Wei, Cameron Cosby International Tax “The international collaboration with S&W is exceptional.” “What really stands out is their willingness to engage, openness to different ideas and opinions, clearly expressed expectations, and clients' objectives.” Leading Partner: Douglas Stransky Recommended Lawyers: Lewis Greenwald, Eric Rietveld Tax > US Taxes: Contentious Recommended Lawyers: Richard Jones, David Nagle, Daniel Ryan, Caroline Kupiec Tax > US Taxes: Non-Contentious “Sarah Wellings is, quite simply, the best lawyer we have ever worked with. Her expertise extends far beyond tax and REIT matters, encompassing governance, financing, and complex commercial issues. Decades of experience and technical mastery make her an indispensable partner. Sarah is our central point of contact who makes everything seamless. Her in-house counsel background gives her a unique client perspective: she anticipates needs, solves problems before they arise, and delivers concise, well-structured updates that simplify even the most intricate issues. She coordinates effortlessly with all parties involved. Her judgment is exceptional. Sarah strikes the perfect balance between comprehensive academic rigor and practical, business-oriented advice. She combines technical REIT/tax excellence with commercial instincts, ensuring every recommendation is both legally sound and strategically smart. Her ability to translate complex law into clear, actionable guidance is unmatched. Sarah is incredibly responsive without ever sacrificing quality. She treats our matters as her own, demonstrating a rare ownership mindset and collaborative spirit. Her integrity is uncompromising, giving us absolute confidence in her counsel. In short, Sarah Wellings defines legal excellence: reliable, commercially minded, and client-focused. Working with her feels like being in the safest possible hands; she consistently exceeds expectations and orchestrates complex transactions with clarity and precision.” Recommended Lawyers: Ameek Ashok Ponda, Richard Jones, Douglas Stransky, Sarah Wellings 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.
Top Federal Tax Policies Of 2025
Daniel Ryan, partner in Sullivan & Worcester’s tax department, was quoted in the article “Top Federal Tax Policies of 2025,” published by Law360 Tax Authority [sub. req’d] on December 22, 2025. The article examines the most consequential federal tax policy developments of the year, including changes enacted through the budget reconciliation bill, evolving IRS guidance and updates to the federal opportunity zone program. Dan commented that while the guidance issued this year is a starting point, significant uncertainty remains regarding which areas governors will designate as new opportunity zones in future rounds, including those expected next year and in 2027. “Where the new zones are will strongly influence the level of investment and use of the program,” said Dan.

Daniel P. Ryan

Dan's practice focuses on representing taxpayers in federal and state tax litigation and controversies as well as transactional planning involving corporate, franchise, personal income and sales/use tax matters. Prior to his employment at Sullivan, Dan was an attorney at the Internal Revenue Service Office of Chief Counsel, where he represented the Internal Revenue Service in litigation before the United States Tax Court and served as a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts.

Dan is also one of the founders of the firm's Opportunity Zone practice group, and has assisted in the structuring of over $1 billion in Opportunity Zone projects throughout the country, including both real estate and operating business. Dan was named a Top 25 Tax Specialist by Opportunity Zone Magazine in 2022.

Dan is a frequent speaker on such matters as Opportunity Zone tax structuring, federal tax credits, federal and state controversy issues, and domicile planning. Dan has also been quoted on various tax matters in publications such as the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, Law360, The Real Deal and Bloomberg Tax.

Dan has successfully represented clients under audit before the Internal Revenue Service and various state departments of revenue on a wide range of matters. For example, Dan successfully secured a multi-million dollar refund for an insurance company before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Dental Service of Massachusetts v. Commissioner, a case of first impression in Massachusetts. Dan has also represented clients in domestic and offshore voluntary disclosures, and has successfully negotiated the abatement of federal tax penalties imposed based on various offshore tax issues.

Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
The Case for Competitiveness: A Menu of Pro-Growth Changes to Massachusetts Business Tax Policy
Daniel Ryan co-authored a white paper with Andrew Mikula for the Pioneer Institute titled "The Case for Competitiveness: A Menu of Pro-Growth Changes to Massachusetts Business Tax Policy," highlighting tax reforms that would enhance Massachusetts' competitiveness. Citing the challenge of outmigration due to tax policy in the Commonwealth, the study focuses on six proposed reforms: Repealing the Estate Tax Replacing the "Throwback Rule" with the "Throw-Out" Rule Increasing the Threshold of the Sting Tax Adopting the Rolling Stock Exemption Eliminating the Minimum Corporate Excise Eliminating the Non-Income Measure of the Corporate Tax
"One Big Beautiful Bill Act" Enshrines Opportunity Zone Provisions
On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" (the “OBBBA”), which contains amendments to sections 1400Z-1 and 1400Z-2 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Original Statute”)—the provisions that establish and govern the Opportunity Zone program. Enacted in 2017 by President Trump in his first term, the Original Statute created a framework for incentivizing investment in economically distressed areas by offering timebound tax benefits to investments in qualified businesses and property within designated Opportunity Zones. Through the OBBBA, President Trump enshrined in the Code one of the signature pieces of legislation from his first term by removing the original sunset provisions and making additional enhancements (the “OZ Amendments”), including those described below. Without the OZ Amendments, key provisions of the Opportunity Zone program would have expired on December 31, 2026. Generally, the Opportunity Zone program provides three (3) significant tax benefits for taxpayers who invest capital gains in a Qualified Opportunity Fund (a “QOF”), provided the QOF then invests its cash in qualified property or a Qualified Opportunity Zone Business (a “QOZB”) that is located in a low-income census tract designated by the chief executive of a state or US territory (a “Qualified Opportunity Zone”): First, a taxpayer can defer paying tax on capital gains that are invested in a QOF and subsequently properly invested by the QOF in qualified property or a QOZB; Second, a taxpayer can reduce the amount of capital gains tax ultimately due with respect to capital gains that are invested in a QOF and subsequently properly invested by the QOF in qualified property or a QOZB; and Third, a taxpayer can benefit from tax-free gain with respect to the sale of any QOF interest held for more than 10 years. Changes to Code Section 1400Z-1: Designations of Qualified Opportunity Zones Under the Original Statute, states and territories had one opportunity to designate Qualified Opportunity Zones, all of which designations were scheduled to expire on December 31, 2026. Following the OZ Amendments, however, new Qualified Opportunity Zones may be designated on July 1, 2026, and every 10 years thereafter, with each designation effective for a 10-year period. Also, the OZ Amendments redefine which census tracts are eligible to be designated as Qualified Opportunity Zones. Beginning on July 1, 2026, any census tract, as determined by the most recent decennial national census, in which the median family income does not exceed 70% (lowered from the previous 80% threshold) of the statewide or metropolitan median family income, as applicable, may be designated as a Qualified Opportunity Zone. In addition, any census tract that, as determined by the most recent decennial national census, has a poverty rate of at least 20% and a median family income that does not exceed 125% of the applicable statewide or metropolitan area median family income, as applicable, may be designated as a Qualified Opportunity Zone. Under the Original Statute, only the 20% poverty rate threshold applied; the income limitation is a new requirement introduced by the OZ Amendments. Finally, census tracts that are contiguous with a qualifying census tract can no longer be designated as a Qualified Opportunity Zone. The new designation regime establishes 10-year investment periods for Qualified Opportunity Zones, creating a steady pipeline of new tracts available for QOF investors. This structure offers greater flexibility and certainty for investors seeking to make QOF investing a permanent part of their capital allocation and investment strategies. At the same time, the OZ Amendments introduce stricter criteria for designating Qualified Opportunity Zones, helping achieve the Opportunity Zone program goals of directing benefits to genuinely underserved communities. Changes to Code Section 1400Z-2: Tax Effects of the OZ Amendments Under the OZ Amendments, the payment of capital gains tax that would be due but for the investment of such capital gains in a QOF is deferred for up to five (5) years following the date of the QOF investment or until the investment is sold, whichever comes first. Additionally, if a QOF investment is held for at least five (5) years, the amount of capital gains tax due is reduced by 10%. The OZ Amendments also introduce the concept of a Qualified Rural Opportunity Fund (a “QROF”). A QROF essentially operates in the same manner as a QOF, but for purposes of the qualifying under the Opportunity Zone program, as amended by the OZ Amendments, at least 70% of the assets owned or leased by the QROF must be located in a Qualified Opportunity Zone comprised entirely of a “rural area” or at least 70% of the assets owned or leased by a QOZB that is owned by a QROF must be used in a Qualified Opportunity Zone comprised entirely of a “rural area.” As defined in the OZ Amendments, a “rural area” is either a city or town with a population of less than 50,000 or any urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a city or town with a population greater than 50,000. The OZ Amendments encourage investment in QROFs by providing a 30% reduction in capital gains tax on qualifying amounts invested—an increase from the previous 10% reduction available for investments in QOFs. Further, the OZ Amendments relax the “substantial improvement” standard for preexisting structures located in a “rural area.” Outside of a “rural area,” a QOF or QOZB must invest at least an amount equal to the purchase price of a preexisting structure in improvements to qualify for Opportunity Zone benefits. For preexisting structures in “rural areas,” however, the required investment in improvements is reduced to 50% of the acquisition price. Finally, the OZ Amendments cap the holding period for each QOF or QROF investment at 30 years. The investment must be disposed of within 30 years of the investment date; otherwise, on the 30-year anniversary, the basis in the QOF or QROF interest is stepped up to its fair market value. The QROF framework dramatically expands the potential of the Opportunity Zone program and unlocks multiple new potential strategies for investors. The reduced “substantial improvement” standard for QROFs could qualify relatively smaller or lower-value rural properties for Opportunity zone benefits by making it possible and profitable to renovate or repurpose existing rural structures that would not meet the cost thresholds for QOFs, such as the revitalization of historic “main street” properties, the adaptive reuse of barns or warehouses for community or light industrial purposes, and small-scale hospitality renovations (e.g., motels, campgrounds, B&Bs). In addition, QROFs can more feasibly support the improvement and expansion of rural infrastructure—such as broadband, water, waste management, or renewable energy installations and facilities for agriculture or forestry—where project costs may not justify high QOF-level improvement requirements or where initial investment outlays and improvement costs are lower. QROFs present potential for smaller workforce or affordable housing projects in rural areas, which may struggle to hit QOF investment thresholds. Moreover, community centers, healthcare clinics, and educational/training centers—often serving populations too small for QOF economics—fit better within the QROF structure. New Reporting Requirements The OZ Amendments impose additional reporting requirements for QOFs, QROFs, and QOZBs. These new reporting requirements include the reporting of the value of the assets purchased and leased, the census tracts in which the qualifying investments are located, and the number of employees located in the Qualified Opportunity Zone, or other information related to the employment impact of the QOF, QROF, and QOZB. For real property, the number of residential units must also be reported. The names, addresses and taxpayer identification numbers of investors that sell an interest in a QOF or QROF must also be identified each year.  Also, the OZ Amendments impose penalties for the failure to file the required information and appropriate funds to the IRS to enable the IRS to make annual reports showing information such as the number of QOFs and QROFs, the employment impact, and the aggregate amount invested. These new reporting requirements enable regulators and the public to better assess whether Opportunity Zone incentives are achieving their intended economic and social benefits, particularly in underserved or rural areas. This regulatory shift, including stricter documentation, regular reporting deadlines, and potential penalties for inaccuracies or omissions, may increase administrative costs, but it also builds greater market confidence in the Opportunity Zone program and helps ensure that tax benefits are tied to demonstrable community impact. Takeaways The OZ Amendments make the tax benefits permanent, ensure that there will be a reduction in capital gains tax due if an investment in a QOF or QROF is held for at least five (5) years, and create a process for new Qualified Opportunity Zones to be designated every 10 years. Additionally, the OZ Amendments' new OZ Statute encourages investment in rural areas by providing additional tax savings to investments in those areas, helping deliver Opportunity Zone benefits to small-scale projects that could create a steady flow of investment to rural communities. Finally, the new reporting requirements create a more robust framework for oversight, improve program credibility, and drive more targeted and responsible investment activity in Opportunity Zones.
Top Tier Firm, Legal 500 United States 2026
Sullivan & Worcester Ranked in the Legal 500 United States 2026 Edition
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester announced that its practice groups and attorneys have been ranked and recommended in the Legal 500 United States 2026. The firm’s Real Estate practice was newly ranked Tier 1 in the “Real estate – mid-market ($0-500m)” category and the firm maintained rankings across a variety of practice areas. Partners Nicole Crum and John Steiner were newly ranked as Leading Partners and Ryan Rosenblatt as a Next Generation Partner. Peers and more than 300,000 corporate counsel were surveyed and interviewed globally in the past 12 months to assess law firms’ overall visibility and reputation, culminating in detailed rankings and editorial. The Legal 500 is an independent guide, and firms and individuals are recommended purely on merit. Sullivan's lawyers received the following rankings: Leading Partners: The Legal 500’s Guide to Outstanding Lawyers Nationwide Benjamin Armour - M&A: Middle-Market (Sub-$500m); M&A: middle-market ($0-250m) Ameek Ashok Ponda - Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)  Nicole Crum - Mutual/registered/exchange-traded funds Lewis Segall - M&A: Middle-Market (Sub-$500m); M&A: middle-market ($0-250m) John Steiner - Real estate – mid-market ($0-500m) Douglas Stransky - International Tax Joel Telpner - Fintech Next Generation Partners: The Legal 500’s Guide to Up-and-Coming Lawyers Nationwide Ryan Rosenblatt - General commercial disputes – mid-market ($250-500m) Sarah Wellings - Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) Practice Areas Ranked and Attorneys Recognized Corporate Governance “Our lead partner, Nicole Crum, who leads the investment industry practice, is exceptional. She demonstrates strong industry knowledge yet is very personable and anticipates what we need to know or what we should consider doing to handle any matter. The team roll up their sleeves and provide recommendations as to how we as a board should handle any matter. Strong service commitment and work ethic!” “The team we have at Sullivan & Worcester has served our company for years and knows the management team, staff as well as our board members. They are extremely responsive and proactive and anticipate what we should be aware of, concerned about, excited about, and how to handle oversight, processes and protocols to ensure we are carrying out our fiduciary duties. The partners are experts in this industry.” Leading Partner: Nicole Crum Recommended Lawyers: Howard Berkenblit, David Leahy Dispute Resolution/General Commercial Disputes “Diverse skillset. Client centric. Transparency. Urgency provided on all matters.” “I have worked with Gerry Silver for over 15 years and have found his pragmatic approach to complex matters refreshing. He understands our business, culture and market, and will give me his opinion in a digestible manner.” Next Generation Partner: Ryan Rosenblatt Recommended Lawyers: Gerry Silver, Patrick Dinardo, Laura Steinberg, Michael Sullivan, Amy Zuccarello, Erika Todd, Christopher Shields, Anna Lea McNerney Employee Benefits, Executive Compensation and Retirement Plans: Design “The level of expertise is top shelf. David Guadagnoli seems to know all of ERISA and IRS rulings.” “David Guadagnoli and Amy Sheridan both have superior knowledge in their respective areas. I value the ability to raise issues whether simple or complex. The firm takes the same diligent approach across all spectrums of complexity.” Recommended Lawyers: David Guadagnoli, Amy Sheridan Environment: Transactional Fintech “Sullivan & Worcester is one of the finest firms with which I have worked.” “The lawyers are excellent, and the firm consistently provides the highest quality of customer service.” Leading Partner: Joel Telpner Recommended Lawyers: Natalie Lederman, Benjamin Armour, Scott Kaufman, Harvey Bines, Christopher Curtis Land Use/Zoning Recommended Lawyers: Gregory Sampson, Ashley Brooks, Victor Baltera, Karen Kepler, Ashley Tan M&A: Corporate and Commercial: Venture Capital and Emerging Companies Recommended Lawyers: Scott Kaufman, Lewis Segall, Benjamin Armour, Michael Student M&A: Middle-Market ($0-250m) “The partner Lewis Segall has been working with our company for 15 years and we have a good working relationship with him. He knows our history and very attentive to our needs.” “Lewis Segall is very attentive to our needs. We very much value him.” Leading Partners: Benjamin Armour, Lewis Segall Recommended Lawyers: Natalie Lederman Mutual/Registered/Exchange-Traded Funds “Sullivan & Worcester's practice is defined by its deep expertise in investment funds and its ability to deliver clear, commercially grounded advice across the full fund lifecycle—from formation and structuring to regulatory compliance and complex transactions.” “The team is highly experienced, collaborative, and excel in efficient execution and clear communication.” Leading Partner: Nicole Crum Recommended Lawyers: David Leahy, David Mahaffey, Rachael Schwartz Real Estate Leading Partner: John Steiner Recommended Lawyers: Ashley Brooks, Karen Kepler, Gregory Sampson, Sharon Leifer, Louis Monti, Spencer Stone, Ashley Tan Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) “We have built multiple complex and sophisticated REIT platforms over the years and worked with many top-tier REIT specialists, but Sullivan’s REIT practice is by far the best, with Sarah Wellings.” Leading Partner: Ameek Ashok Ponda Next Generation Partner: Sarah Wellings Recommended Lawyers: Angela Gomes, Louis Monti, Shu Wei, Cameron Cosby International Tax “The international collaboration with S&W is exceptional.” “What really stands out is their willingness to engage, openness to different ideas and opinions, clearly expressed expectations, and clients' objectives.” Leading Partner: Douglas Stransky Recommended Lawyers: Lewis Greenwald, Eric Rietveld Tax > US Taxes: Contentious Recommended Lawyers: Richard Jones, David Nagle, Daniel Ryan, Caroline Kupiec Tax > US Taxes: Non-Contentious “Sarah Wellings is, quite simply, the best lawyer we have ever worked with. Her expertise extends far beyond tax and REIT matters, encompassing governance, financing, and complex commercial issues. Decades of experience and technical mastery make her an indispensable partner. Sarah is our central point of contact who makes everything seamless. Her in-house counsel background gives her a unique client perspective: she anticipates needs, solves problems before they arise, and delivers concise, well-structured updates that simplify even the most intricate issues. She coordinates effortlessly with all parties involved. Her judgment is exceptional. Sarah strikes the perfect balance between comprehensive academic rigor and practical, business-oriented advice. She combines technical REIT/tax excellence with commercial instincts, ensuring every recommendation is both legally sound and strategically smart. Her ability to translate complex law into clear, actionable guidance is unmatched. Sarah is incredibly responsive without ever sacrificing quality. She treats our matters as her own, demonstrating a rare ownership mindset and collaborative spirit. Her integrity is uncompromising, giving us absolute confidence in her counsel. In short, Sarah Wellings defines legal excellence: reliable, commercially minded, and client-focused. Working with her feels like being in the safest possible hands; she consistently exceeds expectations and orchestrates complex transactions with clarity and precision.” Recommended Lawyers: Ameek Ashok Ponda, Richard Jones, Douglas Stransky, Sarah Wellings 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.
Top Federal Tax Policies Of 2025
Daniel Ryan, partner in Sullivan & Worcester’s tax department, was quoted in the article “Top Federal Tax Policies of 2025,” published by Law360 Tax Authority [sub. req’d] on December 22, 2025. The article examines the most consequential federal tax policy developments of the year, including changes enacted through the budget reconciliation bill, evolving IRS guidance and updates to the federal opportunity zone program. Dan commented that while the guidance issued this year is a starting point, significant uncertainty remains regarding which areas governors will designate as new opportunity zones in future rounds, including those expected next year and in 2027. “Where the new zones are will strongly influence the level of investment and use of the program,” said Dan.

Daniel P. Ryan

Daniel P. Ryan