Canonical page: https://sequoia-research.com/writing/best-dst-1031-exchange-companies-2026-what-a-meaningful-comparison-should-include Author: Sequoia Research Published: 2026-10-17T00:23:27.382Z Updated: 2026-10-17T00:23:27.382Z # Best DST 1031 Exchange Companies (2026): What a Meaningful Comparison Should Include ## What Is This Article About? This article compares a defined set of firms that provide DST services using public details reviewed in October 2026. It looks at the services they describe, how firms disclose their pay, the research they offer, and the support investors can expect to discuss. It also shows where the public record leaves a question open. The purpose is to help you build a useful shortlist and a focused request for details before choosing a firm or an investment. ## Table of Contents - [How We Chose the Comparison and Its Limits](#how-we-chose-the-comparison-and-its-limits) - [The 2026 Provider Comparison](#the-2026-provider-comparison) - [Start With the Service You Need](#start-with-the-service-you-need) - [Compare DST Fees on the Same Basis](#compare-dst-fees-on-the-same-basis) - [Compare Research You Can Actually Review](#compare-research-you-can-actually-review) - [Separate Advertised Access From Available Offerings](#separate-advertised-access-from-available-offerings) - [Compare Support Before and After Closing](#compare-support-before-and-after-closing) - [Check the Brand, the Firm, and the Person](#check-the-brand-the-firm-and-the-person) - [Build a Shortlist Around Your Priorities](#build-a-shortlist-around-your-priorities) - [Send the Same Information Request to Each Provider](#send-the-same-information-request-to-each-provider) - [What a Company Comparison Cannot Decide](#what-a-company-comparison-cannot-decide) - [Frequently Asked Questions](#frequently-asked-questions) - [About Sequoia Research](#about-sequoia-research) ## How We Chose the Comparison and Its Limits The phrase “best DST 1031 exchange companies” can describe several different jobs. A sponsor organizes an offering and oversees its plan. A securities firm may recommend or place interests in it. A qualified intermediary, often called a QI, serves a separate role in an exchange. A company name alone does not tell you which job it performs. This review focuses on three public-facing firms that describe access to DST investments: Kay Properties, 1031 Crowdfunding, and Realized. We chose them because their public pages describe service models and research resources that an investor can begin to compare. Their inclusion is not an endorsement or a claim that they represent the whole market. The review date is October 16, 2026. We opened the firm pages and the cited disclosure records. We did not create accounts, inspect private investor files, request personalized quotes, or test the firms' service. We also did not audit their investment results or check the registration of each person who works through them. The review uses the same four main fields: services, compensation, research, and investor support. We also note legal identity and deal access because those can change the meaning of the other fields. A stated service is evidence of what the firm offers or describes. It is not evidence of how well the firm performs it. A published process can support an interview question. It cannot show that each deal received the same depth of review. We use “not established from reviewed sources” when a public page does not settle a point. That phrase does not mean the service is absent. It means the reader needs another record before comparing firms on that point. No overall winner is named. A sound choice requires more facts. These include your needs, the person serving you, current agreements, open deals, and a full cost quote. The public sources are enough to identify meaningful differences and questions, but not enough to pick a firm for each investor. ## The 2026 Provider Comparison The table summarizes the records we could review. Each row needs to be read with its source dates and limits. Rates or services may differ by deal, account, representative, and agreement. | Provider | Service described in reviewed sources | Compensation information | Research and support evidence | |---|---|---|---| | Kay Properties | DST marketplace with educational resources and offerings from multiple sponsors | No investor-specific fee schedule established in this review; request the current securities firm's disclosure and offering costs | Public diligence page describes appraisal, loan, condition, and market-data review; ongoing service terms need confirmation | | 1031 Crowdfunding | Online marketplace and paperwork guidance; platform disclosure names Capulent for broker-dealer services | Capulent's January 2026 Form CRS describes transaction-based commissions and a general upfront sales-load range; exact deal costs require offering documents | Platform describes investor guidance and access to documents; Capulent's CRS says it does not monitor investments after the transaction | | Realized | Marketplace and portfolio services, with brokerage and advisory relationships described separately | June 2025 Form CRS distinguishes commissions from quarterly asset-based advisory fees; exact terms depend on agreement | Public pages describe research and reporting tools; CRS distinguishes advisory monitoring from brokerage service | ### Kay Properties: Public Research Process, Costs to Confirm Kay's home page advertises a marketplace spanning multiple sponsors and states that deals are subject to availability. It also provides educational resources. Those features are useful starting points for an investor seeking to compare several options. We did not verify a current inventory tailored to an investor or treat the advertised counts as guaranteed access. See [Kay Properties' marketplace overview](https://www.kpi1031.com/). The firm's diligence page lists review areas including valuation, property condition, loan terms, sponsor assumptions, and outside market data. That is more useful than a bare statement that deals are screened. The next step is to request a sample of the work relevant to a deal under consideration. A process description does not show the findings or resolve the risks. See [Kay Properties' due diligence process](https://www.kpi1031.com/due-diligence-process/). The cost question remains open in this bounded review. Free access to a marketplace does not show the cost of investing through it. Ask for the exact legal name of the securities firm, its current relationship summary, and a written account of pay for the proposed investment. Confirm the scope of service after closing in the same request. ### 1031 Crowdfunding: Platform Guidance and a Separate Securities Firm The platform describes online property research, paperwork help, and deal guidance. Its footer says 1031 Crowdfunding is not a registered broker-dealer and names Capulent, LLC for broker-dealer services. This is a clear reason to separate the website brand from the firm performing regulated work. See [1031 Crowdfunding's platform and disclosures](https://www.1031crowdfunding.com/). Capulent's January 1, 2026 Form CRS describes commissions deducted from invested funds. It gives a general upfront sales-load range of 3% to 10% and points readers to the deal documents for fees. This is a firm-wide description of its securities business, not a quote for each DST on the platform. The same form states that Capulent does not monitor investments after the deal. See [Capulent's January 2026 Form CRS](https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/crs_155155.pdf). An investor should ask who provides later administrative help and whether any separate monitoring service exists. A friendly contact and a formal duty to review the investment over time are distinct parts of the service. The source does not show that post-closing questions go unanswered; it defines a limit on the brokerage service described. ### Realized: Confirm Whether the Relationship Is Brokerage or Advisory Realized's public advisor page describes research, portfolio tools, and reporting. It also describes several fee models. Those features may be relevant when a financial advisor is involved, but the applicable services must be tied to the investor's arrangement. See [Realized's advisor platform page](https://www.realized1031.com/advisor). The current linked Form CRS we reviewed is dated June 30, 2025. It describes commissions for brokerage service and quarterly asset-based fees for advisory service. It also says brokerage accounts are not monitored as part of that service, while advisory holdings and performance receive review. These distinctions are more useful than treating all Realized clients as having the same relationship. See [Realized Financial's June 2025 Form CRS](https://www.realized1031.com/hubfs/common-files/disclosures/FormCRS.pdf). Its FAQ describes a client dashboard and help after an exchange. The existence of those features does not settle who is responsible for advice, how often a review occurs, or what it costs. Confirm those points in the current agreement. See [Realized's investor FAQ](https://www.realized1031.com/frequently-asked-questions). ### What This Sample Supports The strongest supported difference is the stated service model. One firm emphasizes a marketplace and detailed screening topics. Another separates platform assistance from the securities firm's deal service. A third describes both brokerage and advisory options with different ongoing duties. The sources do not show which firm produces the best investment outcomes, offers the lowest total cost to a particular investor, or delivers the fastest service. Those conclusions would need evidence beyond a public website review. ## Start With the Service You Need Before comparing firms, write down the work you expect them to do. The list should describe tasks rather than broad labels such as “full service.” A task can be assigned, priced, and checked. A broad label can mean different things to different people. You may need help understanding DST structures, reviewing several deals, organizing an exchange, or monitoring an existing portfolio. You may already have a tax advisor and financial planner. Those facts change the service gap the DST firm needs to fill. Separate three stages: before the investment, at closing, and during ownership. Before investing, you may want written comparisons and clear risk explanations. At closing, you may need clear coordination with your QI and the issuer. During ownership, you may want reporting, a contact for questions, and a defined review process. The same person may assist across those stages, but do not assume that each task is included in the original fee. Ask which services are part of the proposed relationship and which require another agreement or fee. Investor.gov explains that Form CRS is intended to summarize a firm's services, fees, conflicts, and other relationship details. It is a useful starting point for comparing what a firm says it will do. Read the full agreement as well. See [Investor.gov's Form CRS guidance](https://www.investor.gov/CRS). Keep the QI role separate. IRS guidance describes use of a qualified intermediary as one safe harbor for avoiding actual or constructive receipt of exchange funds. Choosing a DST service firm does not, by itself, show who is acting as QI or how the exchange is structured. See the [IRS exchange-intermediary FAQ](https://www.irs.gov/faqs/sale-or-trade-of-business-depreciation-rentals/sales-trades-exchanges/sales-trades-exchanges-2). A useful request could name three tasks. Ask for a written review of three suitable deals, help with closing records, and a plan for later questions. Each firm then has clear work to describe. It also makes it easier to notice when a quote covers only part of the work. ## Compare DST Fees on the Same Basis A fee review begins with the base, timing, and recipient of each charge. A percentage without those details is incomplete. It may apply to invested equity, gross property value, or another defined amount. It may be charged once, each year, or only when an event occurs. Separate pay for the service relationship from costs inside the investment. The firm may receive a commission or an advisory fee. The deal may also include acquisition, financing, management, and sale-related costs. Some items may be paid through the deal rather than billed directly to you. Ask for a complete cost schedule for the investment and account type. Then trace each line to the deal document, service agreement, or other source. Do not fill a missing number with an industry average simply to finish the table. ### A Hypothetical Comparison Over Two Holding Periods Suppose two fictional service arrangements are being compared for a $400,000 allocation. Arrangement A has a 4% upfront charge and no further service fee in this example. Arrangement B has no upfront service charge and a 0.75% annual fee on a constant $400,000 base. These are invented terms, not quotes from the three firms above. Arrangement A costs $16,000 upfront. Arrangement B costs $3,000 a year under the stated constant-base assumption. Over five years, the second arrangement costs $15,000. Over ten years, it costs $30,000. | Illustrative service cost | Five-year hold | Ten-year hold | |---|---:|---:| | Arrangement A: 4% upfront | $16,000 | $16,000 | | Arrangement B: 0.75% each year | $15,000 | $30,000 | The table does not show total investment costs, changes in asset value, taxes, time value of money, or differences in service. It also assumes that the annual fee base stays fixed. Those limits matter. A lower nominal total in one column is not enough to show better value. Ask what services continue during a longer hold. If an annual fee pays for defined monitoring and reviews, compare that work with the service included in the upfront option. If neither arrangement includes the task you need, the cost review has not answered your service question. ### Ask About Payments That Do Not Appear on Your Invoice A fee can affect incentives even when you do not receive a separate bill. Ask whether pay varies by sponsor, deal, account type, or amount invested. Ask whether a related entity receives another fee from the deal. A written answer should name the payment and its source. “The sponsor pays us” leaves open how the deal funds that payment and how it affects the investor's economics. Request the relevant page in the deal documents and a dollar illustration for your proposed amount. Do not interpret a published range as the fee you will pay. The deal still needs a stated schedule. The same discipline applies when a firm says fees are negotiable: obtain the agreed terms in writing. ## Compare Research You Can Actually Review Research is easier to compare when you can inspect a work product. Ask each firm for a sample report or a redacted example. If the full report is not shared, ask what findings and supporting records can be provided to you and your advisors. A useful report separates source facts, assumptions, analysis, and unanswered questions. It should tell you which records were reviewed and when. A report date alone does not show how current the underlying rent roll, loan details, or market data is. Choose one issue and follow it through the report. For example, if the sponsor assumes rent growth, find the source, the market data, and the downside case. If a loan can restrict cash payments, find the trigger and the cash-flow effect. This small exercise can reveal more than the report's page count. Ask who wrote the analysis and who reviewed it. Establish whether the report came from the sponsor, the securities firm, a paid outside firm, or another party. Each can contribute details, but their roles and incentives differ. FINRA's private placement guidance discusses reasonable investigation of the issuer, management, assets, business claims, and intended use of proceeds. It also addresses follow-up on red flags. A report described as “third party” does not remove the need to understand its scope or limitations. See [FINRA Regulatory Notice 23-08](https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/23-08). The public sample provides useful starting questions. Kay lists concrete review topics. Realized describes a portfolio research process. 1031 Crowdfunding describes access to investment documents and guidance. None of those website statements proves that a particular investor has received enough evidence to assess a particular deal. A strong review therefore has two columns: process described and work product reviewed. If the second column is empty, leave it empty. Do not award a research-quality label based only on the first column. ## Separate Advertised Access From Available Offerings A firm may advertise relationships with many sponsors or a large number of investments. That describes the platform's stated reach. It does not show which options are open, approved, and appropriate for you today. Ask for a dated list tailored to your situation. The list should distinguish active deals from past deals and items that are still under review. It should also show any relevant access limits. A property displayed online may no longer have capacity when you are ready to invest. The distinction matters in the sample. Kay states that deals are subject to availability. The 1031 Crowdfunding platform describes restrictions on newly registered users' access to certain previously posted deals. Obtain a current list tailored to the investor before comparing the number of choices displayed on each website. Do not compare sponsor counts unless the definitions match. One firm may count each sponsor it has worked with. Another may count only sponsors with an open deal. A third may count approved relationships even when no deal is available. Ask whether the firm can explain why a deal is absent. The reason could be availability, product review, a selling agreement, investor eligibility, or the service model. The answer helps you understand the limits of the menu without assuming that missing products were rejected for poor quality. For a fictional example, Provider A lists 30 sponsors and Provider B lists 12. After applying one investor's needs, A has two suitable deals with room available, while B has three. The larger sponsor count did not produce the larger usable choice set. The figures are illustrative, but the review problem is real. Focus on the quality and fit of the options that remain after those checks. A long list cannot make an unsuitable investment appropriate. A short list should still be broad enough to support a reasoned explanation of the alternatives considered. ## Compare Support Before and After Closing Support should be described as a set of actions. Ask who checks the status of paperwork, who answers deal questions, and who confirms that the issuer accepted the investment. Ask who takes over when the usual contact is away. A closing team can help coordinate records, but its work does not erase an exchange deadline or guarantee acceptance. The QI, tax advisor, issuer, and securities firm may have separate duties. Request a simple responsibility chart with named contacts and due dates. For a deferred exchange, IRS instructions describe the 45-day identification period and the receipt deadline. The latter is generally the earlier of 180 days or the relevant return due date, including extensions. A firm's estimated closing speed is not a substitute for applying the rules to your deal. See the [IRS Instructions for Form 8824](https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i8824). After closing, separate access to details from a promise to monitor. A portal may display reports. A contact may help obtain a missing statement. A formal review service may assess changes and discuss them with you. Those are useful but different functions. The account type changes the stated duties, as the summaries above show. The correct question is which agreement governs your service, not whether the website uses words such as “long term” or “support.” Ask for the normal reporting cycle and the process for urgent issues. If a distribution changes, who explains the cause? If a sponsor sends a consent request, who helps you understand what decision is being requested? If a contact leaves, how is the account transferred? A useful answer can be modest. “We help obtain issuer reports and route questions, but do not provide ongoing investment monitoring” is clearer than a broad promise that cannot be tied to a task. You can then decide whether another advisor needs to fill that gap. ## Check the Brand, the Firm, and the Person Company reviews often use familiar brands because that is how investors find them. Before engaging a firm, match the brand to the legal firm and the individual who will serve you. Ask for the person's full name and registration number, the firm's legal name, and the capacity in which the person will act. Use official records to check those details. Do not rely only on a badge, logo, or a copy of a report sent by the salesperson. Investor.gov explains that BrokerCheck can show a broker's current firm, employment history, qualifications, and reported disclosures. The record is useful background, but it is not an approval of a DST or a rating of the person's investment skill. See [Investor.gov's guide to using BrokerCheck](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/getting-started/working-investment-professional/using-brokercheck). Read the firm's relationship summary alongside the website. If they describe different levels of service, ask which one applies. A broad marketing page can discuss several business lines, while the agreement may cover only one of them. Public pages can also contain inconsistent statements. In this review, Realized's general disclosure page describes a minority ownership interest in Realized Financial, while its advisor-page footer calls that firm a subsidiary. We did not resolve the ownership difference from those pages. The appropriate next step is a current legal-entity explanation, rather than silently choosing one statement. See [Realized's general disclosures](https://www.realized1031.com/disclosures) and [advisor-page footer](https://www.realized1031.com/advisor). That observation is a bounded document inconsistency, not a finding of misconduct. It shows why a review should preserve unresolved points. A useful table allows the reader to see both the supported facts and the questions still open. For each firm, confirm the contracting entity before signing. The party named in the agreement is the one whose stated services and obligations you need to understand. A shared brand should not blur that relationship. ## Build a Shortlist Around Your Priorities The public sample can guide interviews, but a shortlist should begin with your required service. Write down the tasks you need and the evidence you want to review. Then compare each firm's response against those needs. Consider three fictional investors. Their examples illustrate different questions, not recommendations for the named firms. ### An Investor Who Needs Help Learning the Structure Mara has sold rental property before but has not owned a DST. She wants clear explanations and a way to compare several alternatives. Her first review focuses on education, access to source records, and the ability to discuss a downside case in plain language. She could ask each firm to explain the same hypothetical cash-flow problem. Can the representative distinguish a distribution from a return of principal? Can the person point to the loan terms that affect cash payments? Does the answer stay clear when the scenario becomes less favorable? Mara should not treat the volume of educational content as a measure of personal service. A large video library may help, but she still needs to know who will answer her questions and which records she can review before deciding. ### An Investor Who Wants Ongoing Portfolio Review Owen already has several private real estate holdings. He wants help understanding changes across the portfolio. His review starts with the scope of ongoing review, the holdings covered, the reporting method, and the fee base. He should ask whether the firm reviews only investments placed through its platform or also considers outside holdings. He should also confirm whether the work is a formal advisory service, periodic administrative support, or access to a dashboard. A lower upfront cost may matter less to Owen if it comes with no ongoing review. At the same time, an annual fee should be tied to work he can identify. The service agreement, sample report, and proposed fee schedule are more important to his shortlist than a general customer rating. ### An Investor Working With an Existing Advisor Elena has a financial advisor who already coordinates her broader plan. She wants a DST firm that can share records and work within that relationship. Her questions focus on who makes recommendations, who performs research, and who charges for each part of the work. She should ask whether the two firms' services overlap. If both charge for monitoring, the work should be clear. If each assumes the other handles a task, that gap should be resolved before closing. A platform built for advisor collaboration may deserve a closer look for Elena. That is a reason to request a demonstration and records, not a reason to assume it is the best fit. The arrangement still needs to work for her advisor and her investment needs. ## Send the Same Information Request to Each Provider Use one request so that the responses are comparable. Give each firm the same description of your needs and the same deadline for an answer. Share only the personal details needed at this stage of the discussion. Ask for the legal firm and individual who would serve you, the proposed service type, and the current relationship summary. Request a written list of services before, at, and after closing. Ask which tasks are excluded or require a separate engagement. For costs, request a dollar illustration for the same proposed investment amount and holding periods. Ask the firm to separate service compensation from deal-level costs and explain any payments from sponsors or affiliates. If exact deal costs are not yet known, mark them as pending. For research, request a sample report and a list of source records that you can inspect. Ask how the firm handles findings that remain unresolved. A response should show the path from a question to evidence, not only the name of a research team. For access, request a dated list of relevant deals and the limits on availability. For support, request the contact structure and reporting process. Ask how service continues if the representative leaves or the deal lasts longer than expected. Keep the replies in a review file. Use simple status labels such as received, partly answered, and not received. Those labels describe your evidence. They should not be converted into a quality score without a sound reason. If an answer conflicts with a source, quote the two short passages in your private notes and ask for a current explanation. Do not resolve a material difference by assuming the more favorable statement is correct. Update the review only when the new evidence supports the change. ## What a Company Comparison Cannot Decide Research on a firm does not value the underlying real estate. It does not tell you whether the rent assumptions are realistic, the debt terms are workable, or the price leaves room for a satisfactory result. Those questions require a review of the offering. It also does not show tax eligibility. IRS Revenue Ruling 2004-86 addresses a DST with specified facts. A company's experience with exchanges does not show that each investment or exchange qualifies. See [IRS Revenue Ruling 2004-86](https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-04-86.pdf). The SEC warns that private placements can involve limited details, illiquidity, and loss of capital. A Form D filing is not SEC approval. A careful service review helps you choose how to do the work; it does not remove the investment risks. See the [SEC private placement investor bulletin, updated September 21, 2026](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin). Use the review to narrow the next conversations. The useful outcome is a short list supported by clear service terms, cost evidence, research access, and a plan for unresolved questions. The final investment decision still needs to stand on the records and your circumstances. ## Frequently Asked Questions ### Which company is the best for a DST 1031 exchange in 2026? This public-source review does not support a universal winner. The right choice depends on the service you need, the firm and representative, current costs, and available investments. The three-firm sample identifies differences to investigate before creating a personal shortlist. ### Are DST sponsors, brokers, and qualified intermediaries the same? They perform different roles. A sponsor organizes and manages a deal, a securities firm may recommend or place it, and a QI may serve a separate role in the exchange. Confirm the legal entity and duties behind each service instead of relying on one brand name. ### Does free marketplace access mean the DST investment has no fees? No. Access to a website can be free while an investment carries commissions, service fees, and costs within the deal. Request the complete schedule for the investment and account relationship. Trace the fees to the current records. ### Is an advisory fee always cheaper than an upfront commission? No. The cost depends on the rate, fee base, holding period, other costs, and services provided. An annual fee can add up over a longer hold. A one-time charge may cover a different service. Compare both cost and scope on the same assumptions. ### Can I compare providers by the number of DSTs they advertise? Use the number only after checking what it includes. It may cover past deals, unavailable capacity, or products not open to you. Request a dated list of relevant, available options and the reasons for any access limits. ### Does a research report guarantee that an offering is sound? No. A report can help you understand the evidence and risks, but it cannot guarantee income or preserve principal. Review its sources, assumptions, dates, and unresolved issues. Ask how its conclusions apply to the deal you are considering. ### Should I expect the broker to monitor my investment after closing? Confirm that in the service agreement. A brokerage relationship may not include ongoing monitoring. Administrative help, access to reports, and formal advisory review are different services. The sample disclosures show why the account type and written scope matter. ## About Sequoia Research Sequoia Research, LLC provides independent research on DSTs and other real estate investment offerings. This educational library helps readers compare source records, understand service models, and identify questions that need further review. ## Sources - [Kay Properties marketplace overview](https://www.kpi1031.com/), live company page without a single page-level publication date; accessed October 16, 2026. Historical material on the page was not treated as a current operating statistic. - [Kay Properties due diligence process](https://www.kpi1031.com/due-diligence-process/), undated live company page; accessed October 16, 2026. - [1031 Crowdfunding platform and disclosures](https://www.1031crowdfunding.com/), live company page, including October 2026 content; accessed October 16, 2026. - [Capulent Form CRS](https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/crs_155155.pdf), January 1, 2026; accessed October 16, 2026. - [Realized advisor platform](https://www.realized1031.com/advisor), undated live company page; accessed October 16, 2026. - [Realized Financial Form CRS](https://www.realized1031.com/hubfs/common-files/disclosures/FormCRS.pdf), June 30, 2025; accessed October 16, 2026. The date is preserved despite retrieval in 2026. - [Realized investor FAQ](https://www.realized1031.com/frequently-asked-questions), undated live company page; accessed October 16, 2026. - [Realized general disclosures](https://www.realized1031.com/disclosures), undated live page; accessed October 16, 2026. Ownership language differs from the advisor-page footer; that point remains unresolved in this review. - [Investor.gov Form CRS guide](https://www.investor.gov/CRS) and [Using BrokerCheck](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/getting-started/working-investment-professional/using-brokercheck), undated current investor resources; accessed October 16, 2026. - [FINRA Regulatory Notice 23-08](https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/23-08), May 9, 2023; accessed October 16, 2026. - [IRS exchange-intermediary FAQ](https://www.irs.gov/faqs/sale-or-trade-of-business-depreciation-rentals/sales-trades-exchanges/sales-trades-exchanges-2), current online guidance; accessed October 16, 2026. - [IRS Instructions for Form 8824](https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i8824), current online instructions for tax year 2025; accessed October 16, 2026. - [IRS Revenue Ruling 2004-86](https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-04-86.pdf), 2004 foundational guidance; accessed October 16, 2026. - [SEC private placement investor bulletin](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin), originally August 17, 2022; updated September 21, 2026; accessed October 16, 2026. ## Related Reading and Tools - [DST Brokers: How to Choose One for Your Investment Needs](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/dst-brokers-how-to-choose-one-for-your-investment-needs) - [1031 Exchange DST Brokers: What They Do During the Exchange Process](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/1031-exchange-dst-brokers-what-they-do-during-the-exchange-process) - [DST Due Diligence: A Practical Checklist Before You Invest](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/dst-due-diligence-a-practical-checklist-before-you-invest)