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

Ben is the leader of the Mergers & Acquisitions group at Sullivan. He represents clients in a range of complex corporate matters, with a focus on mergers and acquisitions, private equity, and capital raising transactions.

Ben provides sophisticated transactional counsel to diverse clients pursuing growth strategies, liquidity events, and the investment of capital. He represents public and private companies and investment funds across a broad array of industries, including technology and artificial intelligence, fintech, life sciences, medical technology, gaming, and sports and entertainment.

Ben advises clients through all stages of the corporate life cycle – including initial formation, early-stage financing, growth, and exit. Ben’s practice includes an emphasis on cross-border work and assisting clients maximize business opportunities in the U.S. market. His practice also encompasses a range of corporate governance and emerging companies matters.

Ben is a leader of the firm’s Opportunity Zones practice group and advises a range of clients in forming private investment funds, partnerships, joint ventures and other investment structures to take advantage of the U.S. Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017's Opportunity Zone Program. He also plays an active role in the firm’s Fintech and Blockchain practice group and counsels companies with respect to blockchain and related technologies, virtual currencies and digital token sales, and related securities laws and regulatory matters.

Education
  • Boston University School of Law (J.D.)
  • Amherst College (B.A., cum laude)
Bar & Court Admissions
  • Massachusetts
  • New York
Professional Qualifications
  • Boston Bar Association
  • Accelerator Program, Association for Corporate Growth (2013-2014)
  • Managing Editor, Boston University International Law Journal (2006-2007)
Awards & Honors
  • Recognized as a Leading Partner by The Legal 500 U.S. (2025-2026) 
  • Recognized as a Leading Lawyer by The Legal 500 U.S. (2024) 
  • Recognized as a Next Generation Lawyer by The Legal 500 U.S.(2017-2022)
  • Recommended by The Legal 500 U.S. (2017-2026)
  • Edward F. Hennessey Scholar
  • Boston Magazine Top Lawyers, Corporate Law (2025)
Community Engagement
  • Former Trustee, Meadowbrook School of Weston 
Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
"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.
Proposed Bipartisan Amendments to the Opportunity Zone Statute Could Have a Significant Effect on Current and Potential Investors
Late last week, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives introduced an expansive bicameral bill, titled the Opportunity Zones Transparency, Extension, and Improvement Act (the “OZ Bill”). This proposed legislation would amend Sections 1400Z-1 and 1400Z-2 (the “Original OZ Act”) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) in substantial ways, including: disqualifying certain census tracts that have previously been designated as Qualified Opportunity Zones; designating unpopulated industrial brownfields as Qualified Opportunity Zones; introducing additional information reporting requirements for Qualified Opportunity Funds (“QOFs”), persons investing in QOFs, and Qualified Opportunity Zone Businesses (“QOZBs”); introducing penalties for failing to comply with the information reporting requirements; extending the time in which a QOF investor has to pay capital gains tax on an initial investment by two (2) years; allowing an additional 5% reduction in the capital gain tax ultimately due if a QOF investment is held for six (6) years; allowing for feeder funds to invest in a QOF; and providing federal funding for certain projects. Disqualification of Census Tracts The OZ Bill would eliminate any previously designated Qualified Opportunity Zone (“QOZ”) if the associated census tract has a median family income in excess of 130% of the national median family income, unless the poverty rate in such census tract is 30% or more (not including college students). In addition, the chief executive officer of a state may request that certain other census tracts be disqualified as QOZs if the continued designation of such census tract as a QOZ is not consistent with the purposes of the OZ Bill or the Original OZ Act. These “disqualified census tracts” would have to be identified no later than 12 months following enactment of the OZ Bill. The chief executive of a state may nominate replacement census tracts as Qualified Opportunity Zones. Importantly, preexisting trades or businesses operated by a QOF or QOZB in a disqualified census tract can retain the tax benefits of the Original OZ Act so long as a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 or similar offering memorandum or disclosure statement has been prepared disclosing an intent to invest in the disqualified census tract, and (1) the QOF or QOZB has made, or has entered into binding commitments to make, an investment of at least $250,000 that has been designated in writing for use in the trade or business, or (2) the IRS has determined that the entity has relied upon the designation of the disqualified census tract as a QOZ and has suffered a loss as a result of the removal of the designation. Brownfield Industrial Tracts The OZ Bill would allow unpopulated brownfield industrial tracts that are contiguous to a QOZ or has been merged into a QOZ as a result of the 2020 Census to be designated as QOZs. Such tracts would have to be nominated by the chief executive of each state or territory and would not count against the limitation on the number of QOZs in each state or territory. Information Reporting Requirements The OZ Bill would introduce a new section of the Code, section 6039K.  Code section 3039K would require every QOF to annually file an information return that reports a host of information, including the value of property held by the QOF, the name and taxpayer identification number (“TIN”) of the QOZB a QOF has invested in, the NAICC code for the business conducted by the QOF or QOZB, the census tract the QOF or QOZB operates in, the value of the property owned or leased by the QOF or QOZB, the number of residential units held by the QOF or QOZB (if any), and the average number of full time equivalent employees of the QOF or QOZB. Additionally, each QOF would be required to identify the name and TIN of each person who disposed of an interest in the QOF, as well as the dates acquired and disposed, and the amount of investment disposed.  The QOF would also have to provide some of this information to its investors. In addition, the OZ Bill would introduce new Code section 6039L, which would require QOF investors to provide information annually regarding an investment in a QOF.  Such information would include the name and TIN of the QOF, the amount of short- and long-term gains invested, and information related to the disposition of any QOF investment. Finally, the OZ Bill would introduce new Code section 6039M, which would require a QOZB to report certain information to be determined by the IRS by Regulation. The OZ Bill would also impose penalties for the failure to provide the information returns identified above, ranging from $500 to $50,000 (adjusted by inflation after 2023), depending on the nature of the failure and the amount of assets in the QOF. Data Reporting The OZ Bill would require, as soon as practicable after enactment, a report on QOFs that will include the total number of QOFs, the dollar amount of assets held in QOFs, the dollar amounts by investments across each NAICC industry code, the percentage of census tracts that have received QOF investment, the number of employees of a QOZB in each QOZ, and the amount of QOF investment in real property and other qualified opportunity zone property. The OZ Bill would also require studies into of the effects of QOF investment on poverty and employment, and new businesses. Modification of Certain Rules for Investment The OZ Bill would effectively extend the opportunity zone program for two years by making December 31, 2028 the date upon which the tax would be due on any deferred capital gains invested in a QOF. As noted above, the OZ Bill would also allow for an additional 5% reduction on the capital gains tax due if the investment in a QOF is held for six (6) years. These provisions would apply to QOF investments made after December 22, 2017. The OZ Bill would also allow for so-called “feeder funds” to invest in QOFs. A feeder fund, for the purposes of the OZ Bill, is any investment vehicle organized as a partnership and formed for the purpose of investing in a QOF. All investments into the feeder fund must be made in cash, and no less than 95% of the assets of the feeder fund must be QOF investments.
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.
Sullivan & Worcester Recognized by Chambers FinTech 2026
Sullivan & Worcester has been nationally recognized for FinTech Legal and FinTech Legal: Blockchain & Cryptocurrencies in the 2026 Chambers FinTech Guide. Joel Telpner was individually recognized in the FinTech Legal: Blockchain & Cryptocurrencies category. Chambers FinTech Guide helps clients discover the leading lawyers and other professionals in the fintech industry across the world. These rankings are based on thousands of thorough research interviews conducted by Chambers’ independent research team. Chambers noted the following in its assessment of the firm and Joel: What the team is known for Sullivan & Worcester's FinTech practice centres on advising cryptocurrency businesses, large enterprises and emerging start-ups on blockchain and digital assets issues. The firm provides key securities law, product structuring and regulatory compliance advice. Notable practitioners Joel Telpner is well regarded for his work on enterprise blockchain solutions and on the development of the law surrounding stablecoins. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a global, mid-sized 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.

Benjamin J. Armour

Ben is the leader of the Mergers & Acquisitions group at Sullivan. He represents clients in a range of complex corporate matters, with a focus on mergers and acquisitions, private equity, and capital raising transactions.

Ben provides sophisticated transactional counsel to diverse clients pursuing growth strategies, liquidity events, and the investment of capital. He represents public and private companies and investment funds across a broad array of industries, including technology and artificial intelligence, fintech, life sciences, medical technology, gaming, and sports and entertainment.

Ben advises clients through all stages of the corporate life cycle – including initial formation, early-stage financing, growth, and exit. Ben’s practice includes an emphasis on cross-border work and assisting clients maximize business opportunities in the U.S. market. His practice also encompasses a range of corporate governance and emerging companies matters.

Ben is a leader of the firm’s Opportunity Zones practice group and advises a range of clients in forming private investment funds, partnerships, joint ventures and other investment structures to take advantage of the U.S. Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017's Opportunity Zone Program. He also plays an active role in the firm’s Fintech and Blockchain practice group and counsels companies with respect to blockchain and related technologies, virtual currencies and digital token sales, and related securities laws and regulatory matters.

Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
"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.
Proposed Bipartisan Amendments to the Opportunity Zone Statute Could Have a Significant Effect on Current and Potential Investors
Late last week, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives introduced an expansive bicameral bill, titled the Opportunity Zones Transparency, Extension, and Improvement Act (the “OZ Bill”). This proposed legislation would amend Sections 1400Z-1 and 1400Z-2 (the “Original OZ Act”) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) in substantial ways, including: disqualifying certain census tracts that have previously been designated as Qualified Opportunity Zones; designating unpopulated industrial brownfields as Qualified Opportunity Zones; introducing additional information reporting requirements for Qualified Opportunity Funds (“QOFs”), persons investing in QOFs, and Qualified Opportunity Zone Businesses (“QOZBs”); introducing penalties for failing to comply with the information reporting requirements; extending the time in which a QOF investor has to pay capital gains tax on an initial investment by two (2) years; allowing an additional 5% reduction in the capital gain tax ultimately due if a QOF investment is held for six (6) years; allowing for feeder funds to invest in a QOF; and providing federal funding for certain projects. Disqualification of Census Tracts The OZ Bill would eliminate any previously designated Qualified Opportunity Zone (“QOZ”) if the associated census tract has a median family income in excess of 130% of the national median family income, unless the poverty rate in such census tract is 30% or more (not including college students). In addition, the chief executive officer of a state may request that certain other census tracts be disqualified as QOZs if the continued designation of such census tract as a QOZ is not consistent with the purposes of the OZ Bill or the Original OZ Act. These “disqualified census tracts” would have to be identified no later than 12 months following enactment of the OZ Bill. The chief executive of a state may nominate replacement census tracts as Qualified Opportunity Zones. Importantly, preexisting trades or businesses operated by a QOF or QOZB in a disqualified census tract can retain the tax benefits of the Original OZ Act so long as a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 or similar offering memorandum or disclosure statement has been prepared disclosing an intent to invest in the disqualified census tract, and (1) the QOF or QOZB has made, or has entered into binding commitments to make, an investment of at least $250,000 that has been designated in writing for use in the trade or business, or (2) the IRS has determined that the entity has relied upon the designation of the disqualified census tract as a QOZ and has suffered a loss as a result of the removal of the designation. Brownfield Industrial Tracts The OZ Bill would allow unpopulated brownfield industrial tracts that are contiguous to a QOZ or has been merged into a QOZ as a result of the 2020 Census to be designated as QOZs. Such tracts would have to be nominated by the chief executive of each state or territory and would not count against the limitation on the number of QOZs in each state or territory. Information Reporting Requirements The OZ Bill would introduce a new section of the Code, section 6039K.  Code section 3039K would require every QOF to annually file an information return that reports a host of information, including the value of property held by the QOF, the name and taxpayer identification number (“TIN”) of the QOZB a QOF has invested in, the NAICC code for the business conducted by the QOF or QOZB, the census tract the QOF or QOZB operates in, the value of the property owned or leased by the QOF or QOZB, the number of residential units held by the QOF or QOZB (if any), and the average number of full time equivalent employees of the QOF or QOZB. Additionally, each QOF would be required to identify the name and TIN of each person who disposed of an interest in the QOF, as well as the dates acquired and disposed, and the amount of investment disposed.  The QOF would also have to provide some of this information to its investors. In addition, the OZ Bill would introduce new Code section 6039L, which would require QOF investors to provide information annually regarding an investment in a QOF.  Such information would include the name and TIN of the QOF, the amount of short- and long-term gains invested, and information related to the disposition of any QOF investment. Finally, the OZ Bill would introduce new Code section 6039M, which would require a QOZB to report certain information to be determined by the IRS by Regulation. The OZ Bill would also impose penalties for the failure to provide the information returns identified above, ranging from $500 to $50,000 (adjusted by inflation after 2023), depending on the nature of the failure and the amount of assets in the QOF. Data Reporting The OZ Bill would require, as soon as practicable after enactment, a report on QOFs that will include the total number of QOFs, the dollar amount of assets held in QOFs, the dollar amounts by investments across each NAICC industry code, the percentage of census tracts that have received QOF investment, the number of employees of a QOZB in each QOZ, and the amount of QOF investment in real property and other qualified opportunity zone property. The OZ Bill would also require studies into of the effects of QOF investment on poverty and employment, and new businesses. Modification of Certain Rules for Investment The OZ Bill would effectively extend the opportunity zone program for two years by making December 31, 2028 the date upon which the tax would be due on any deferred capital gains invested in a QOF. As noted above, the OZ Bill would also allow for an additional 5% reduction on the capital gains tax due if the investment in a QOF is held for six (6) years. These provisions would apply to QOF investments made after December 22, 2017. The OZ Bill would also allow for so-called “feeder funds” to invest in QOFs. A feeder fund, for the purposes of the OZ Bill, is any investment vehicle organized as a partnership and formed for the purpose of investing in a QOF. All investments into the feeder fund must be made in cash, and no less than 95% of the assets of the feeder fund must be QOF investments.
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.
Sullivan & Worcester Recognized by Chambers FinTech 2026
Sullivan & Worcester has been nationally recognized for FinTech Legal and FinTech Legal: Blockchain & Cryptocurrencies in the 2026 Chambers FinTech Guide. Joel Telpner was individually recognized in the FinTech Legal: Blockchain & Cryptocurrencies category. Chambers FinTech Guide helps clients discover the leading lawyers and other professionals in the fintech industry across the world. These rankings are based on thousands of thorough research interviews conducted by Chambers’ independent research team. Chambers noted the following in its assessment of the firm and Joel: What the team is known for Sullivan & Worcester's FinTech practice centres on advising cryptocurrency businesses, large enterprises and emerging start-ups on blockchain and digital assets issues. The firm provides key securities law, product structuring and regulatory compliance advice. Notable practitioners Joel Telpner is well regarded for his work on enterprise blockchain solutions and on the development of the law surrounding stablecoins. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a global, mid-sized 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.

Benjamin J. Armour

Novomatic, an International Gambling Company Acquires San Francisco-based Present Creative

Sullivan represented Novomatic digital division Greentube in its acquisition of San Francisco-based Present Creative. Novomatic, an international gambling company, has announced its intention to expand into the U.S., and Sullivan serves as M&A deal counsel. Greentube’s acquisition of Present Creative, Greentube’s first US acquisition, was completed in November 2022. The acquisition will see Greentube further expand its presence in the U.S., where it has made significant inroads over the last 12 months, with the supplier bolstering its local product offering.

Benjamin J. Armour and Johanna Colpritt

Casino Roulette with Ball on Number 23

Benjamin J. Armour

Benjamin J. Armour