Even if you gave them a small equity component that does not mean that the architect has a skill to manage a construction project 

But the more you dive into tax stratgies, the more you realize that if you let that define what you are going to do, it's really the tail waging the dog.

Based on the properties they are currently renting, you can define the four components of a property profile.Location - The locations where significant percentages of the target segment are renting today.Property type - What type(s) of properties are they renting today?

Much easier on new construction than an existing building as long as you have good receipts along the way for building components.

As a CPA, why would you not also recommend she divide up the component costs of the renovation(ie cost of cabinets, floors, etc) into separate depreciable components, getting 80-90% of the benefit of a renovation cost seg without the cost?

I don’t think it’s one answer as with many things it depends. 5% is probably to high for a fully updated property taking into consideration the major components.

With $1.2M+ in properties and significant rehab, the depreciation benefit could be substantial - but so is the audit exposure if you get it wrong.The issue isn't that you'll be "no where as thorough" - it's that the IRS prefers engineering-based studies with detailed component breakdowns.

Look at the major components: roofs, siding, kitchens, baths, furnaces and ac units.

If the exit mechanics aren’t clearly defined up front, these deals can drift and create tension fast.This tends to show up more in secondary markets with local owners who are asset-rich but liquidity-constrained, especially where bank execution isn’t straightforward.When it works, it’s less about clever structure and more about clean incentives and realistic assumptions on timing. 

Yes,  they measured all components of properties and split them into different depreciation categories.