Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1961. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1962. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.S.I.S.)--Regis University, Denver, Colo., 2009. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on Jul. 26, 2010). Includes bibliographical references.

by Cheng Ngai Fai, Tong Wai Kin, Kenneth. / Thesis (M.B.A.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1997. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 50). / Chapter 1. --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Chapter 2. --- OBJECTIVES --- p.4 / Chapter 3. --- LITERATURE REVIEW --- p.6 / Overview of REITs --- p.6 / The Current Market of REIT --- p.8 / Regulations Imposed on REITs --- p.10 / Performance of the REITs --- p.12 / Key Success Factors and Marketability of REITs --- p.14 / Avoid Double Taxation --- p.14 / Current Income --- p.15 / High Liquidity --- p.15 / Professional Management --- p.16 / Portfolio Diversification --- p.16 / Performance Monitoring --- p.17 / Inflationary Hedge --- p.18 / Attraction of REITs to Pension Investors --- p.19 / REIT Dependence on Capital Markets --- p.20 / Who Will Supply the Capital --- p.21 / Four Basic Investment Methods --- p.23 / Real Estate Analysis --- p.24 / Chapter 4. --- HONG KONG ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ENVIRONMENT --- p.25 / General Economy --- p.25 / Hong Kong Stock Market --- p.28 / Hong Kong Debt Market --- p.30 / Hong Kong Property Market --- p.32 / Chapter 5. --- ANALYSIS --- p.35 / Hong Kong Stock Market --- p.35 / Simulation of REIT in Hong Kong --- p.39 / Chapter 6. --- DISCUSSION --- p.43 / Internal Rate of Returns --- p.43 / Risks and Returns --- p.44 / Limitations on Our Studies --- p.45 / Conclusions --- p.45 / APPENDIX --- p.47 / BIBLIOGRAPHY --- p.52

published_or_final_version / Real Estate and Construction / Master / Master of Science in Real Estate and Construction

Real Estate Investment Trusts (REIT’s) provide certain benefits for investors as opposed to them directly investing in property. Many countries worldwide have already established tax systems for REIT’s which give natural persons and companies the benefit of not outlaying substantial capital, and provide certain tax dispensations to them. The concept of a REIT is new to South Africa. The vehicles that have been used by investors in the past to invest indirectly in property have been Property Unit Trusts (PUTs) and Property Loan Stock Companies (PLS). These different types of entities have had different taxation rules applied to them, as they differed in legal entity, i.e. a trust versus a company. The different types of entity were historically a deterrent to foreign investors who preferred to invest in countries that had the REIT structure and certain tax dispensations. The National Treasury and the South African Revenue Service (SARS) decided to collaborate in this matter so as to encourage foreign property investment, and launched with effect from 1 April 2013, a new REIT tax dispensation for investors in property portfolios. The REIT created a unified regime in South Africa. All portfolios wanting to call themselves REITs had to qualify under certain requirements, and then they would be eligible for the new section 25BB tax dispensation. The South African REIT market is relatively new when compared to the Australian REIT market, which is the second largest in the world. The Australian REIT market has been around for approximately forty three years more than the South African REIT market. The Australian REIT regime is analysed in terms of how REITs are taxed in that country. The final chapter provides a comparison between the South African and Australian REIT regimes. The major differences are identified as to how each country taxes the REITs and the respective shareholders, and from these a few proposals are made which could improve the South African REIT regime in order for it to stand up to worldwide scrutiny.

The first essay of this dissertation investigates the relationship between downside risk and returns of real estate investment trusts (REITs) and assesses the performance of real estate mutual funds (REMFs). We measure the asymmetric risk through downside and upside betas and through the measures incorporated higher moments such as coskewness and Leland's beta. We do not find significant contemporary relationship between the asymmetric risk and returns of REITs. There are only a small portion of REITs reacting to up and down market conditions differently. We find weak evidence that this asymmetric movement of REITs to market may be due to small and value components embedded in REITs. We evaluate the performance of real estate mutual funds (REMFs) from the asymmetric risk perception. According to our results, most of REMFs do not outperform the market. The downside risk helps to explain some of the abnormal returns associated with REMFs. However, the evaluation may be sensitive to the choices of the model and the market index being used. The second essay examines the liquidity of Asian REITs. We use various measures to assess the liquidity of JREITs and SREITs. The overall evidence indicates that the liquidity of JREITs is greater than that of SREITs. Comparing to non-REIT stocks, JREITs are less liquid than Japanese common stocks while there is no significant difference in liquidity between SREITs and Singaporean common stocks. There is also strong evidence that US REITs have smaller spreads and are traded more often than both JREITs and SREITs. We also find that the primary determinants of JREIT spreads are turnover and return volatility. The secondary factors that affect the spread of JREITs are life and property holdings. The dominant factors affecting SREITs' spreads are price, return volatility, and life. The significance of life suggests that there is a learning effect existed in both JREIT and SREIT markets in 2005.

On 1 May 2013, real estate investment trusts (REITs), a listed property product, had legislation about it introduced in the South African property market. Prior to the introduction of this REIT legislation, property unit trusts (PUTs) and property loan stocks (PLSs) were the two predominant types of listed property investment products in South Africa. However, both the PUT and PLS are subject to uneven regulation and taxation, and they lack flexibility. The REIT legislation was introduced to eliminate some of the problems of the PUTs and PLSs, by creating: a more unified tax treatment of listed property companies, more stringent regulatory requirements and uplifting the South African property market to a level that is internationally competitive. It is therefore considered valuable to empirically investigate whether or not the introduction of the REIT framework into the listed South African property market will be advantageous to investors, and whether or not it would lead to improvement in the efficiency, regulation and taxation of the listed property market. A questionnaire was used to collect primary data to analyze the research problem. The questionnaire used a Likert scale format that consisted of 20 questions. There were a total of 58 useable respondents, each of who fell into 1 of 5 occupational categories. The questions were divided into 4 unifying themes and the findings were analyzed according to these themes. From the analysis of the responses it was found that the REIT legislation is perceived as a welcomed and suitable introduction to the South African listed property market. We could also infer that REITs allow for a more favorable tax dispensation, improved regulation, increased international competitiveness and enhanced liquidity within the listed property market. Overall, there is a perception that investors, especially fund managers, would find it potentially advantageous to include South African REITs or a higher proportion of such REITs in their investment portfolios.

Listed property entities on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange fall under the category of ‘Financials - Real Estate’. There are four types of property entities that a prospective investor can consider namely: Property Unit Trusts, Property Loan Stock Companies, Real Estate Holding and Development Companies and Real Estate Investment Trusts. The listed property sector allows investors to enter the property investment market in a uniquely affordable and secure way without the added risk, expense and administration that comes with direct property investment. This study evaluates the investment performance of the various property fund types through the implementation of Jensen’s alpha, the Sharpe ratio and Treynor ratio in an effort to establish whether there is a significant difference in the returns that can be obtained from the diverse funds given the associated risks. An analysis of the total returns and standard deviation of the property industry shows that the real estate market is affected by changes that take place in the macro economy. It is also investigated whether there is a differential risk associated with investing in these funds. We find that there is no significant difference between the performances of the various funds and there is no differential level of risk associated with investing in the property funds. An analysis of the fluctuation of total returns and standard deviation of the property funds over the eleven year period shows that the property sector is affected by changes in economic conditions however the changes are not enough to cause colossal volatility. For instance, the global recession of 2008 had an impact on the property industry returns but the sector has since made a steady recovery.

Diss. Stockholm : Stockholms universitet, 2005.