Solo 401K rental investment with a recourse loan

Solo 401K rental investment with a recourse loan

Flipper/Rehabber · Anaheim, CA · Member since 2010 · 188 posts · 118 votes

Ok, right off the bat, I know Solo 401K’s cannot directly borrow using a recourse loan. But hear me out and let’s discuss a specific scenario: 

An LLC is created with 3 equal partners. One partner is a Solo-K and the other two partners are not "disqualified persons". The goal is to buy cash flowing rentals. Let's assume the LLC gets a recourse loan (for a rental property) and only the two partners (not the trustee of the 401K) signs a "personal guaranty". Let's also assume the lender is OK with the trustee (me) of the Solo-K not signing a personal guaranty. In this scenario, the 401K benefits from a recourse loan and the lender has no recourse against the trustee. Any idea if this would fly? Do you think this is a prohibited transaction?

0Reply
20 views

Most Popular Reply

Accountant · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2015 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
6y

@Chris Weiler

"Any idea if this would fly?"

Generally, yes.  Happens all the time.  The loan is not recourse to the retirement plan member.

Work with a tax professional who knows what they're doing to ensure the 401k member isn't incurring UBTI via UDFI.

See this reply in the discussion

3 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Carl FischerPro Member
    Rental Property Investor · Ambler, PA · Member since 2015 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    6y

    @Chris Weiler

    It looks like it is non recourse to you Personally and the 401k. 

  • Accountant · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2015 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    6y

    @Chris Weiler

    "Any idea if this would fly?"

    Generally, yes.  Happens all the time.  The loan is not recourse to the retirement plan member.

    Work with a tax professional who knows what they're doing to ensure the 401k member isn't incurring UBTI via UDFI.

  • Accountant, Enrolled Agent · Grayslake, IL · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    6y

    As long as the loan does not have a guarantee of the beneficiary of the retirement account it is perfectly fine.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.