Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003

For the transition period from                                  to                                 

Commission file number 333-101463 (1933 Act)

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes  x    No  ¨

Aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates:    Not Applicable

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements contained in this Form 10-K of Wells Real Estate Fund XIV, L.P. (the “Partnership”) other than historical facts may be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such statements include, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies and prospects and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, as well as known and unknown risks, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Therefore, such statements are not intended to be a guarantee of our performance in future periods. Such forward-looking statements can generally be identified by our use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “continue,” or other similar words. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date this report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Neither the Partnership nor the general partners make any representations or warranties (expressed or implied) about the accuracy of any such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from any forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K, and we do not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

Any such forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors and are based on a number of assumptions involving judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic, competitive and market conditions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately. To the extent that our assumptions differ from actual results, our ability to meet such forward-looking statements, including our ability to generate positive cash flow from operations; provide distributions to limited partners; and maintain the value of our real estate properties, may be significantly hindered. Following are some of the risks and uncertainties, although not all risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those presented in certain forward-looking statements:

General economic risks

Real estate risks

Page 1

Table of Contents

Other operational risks

Page 2

Table of Contents

PART I

General

Wells Real Estate Fund XIV, L.P. (the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”), a Georgia corporation, serving as its general partners (the “General Partners”). The Partnership was formed on October 25, 2002, for the purpose of acquiring, developing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and managing income producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription for units, the limited partners must elect whether to have their units treated as Cash Preferred Status Units or Tax Preferred Status Units. Thereafter, limited partners have the right to change their prior elections to have some or all of their units treated as Cash Preferred Status Units or Tax Preferred Status Units one time during each quarterly accounting period. Limited partners may vote to, among other things: (a) amend the partnership agreement, subject to certain limitations; (b) change the business purpose or investment objectives of the Partnership; (c) add or remove a general partner; (d) elect a new general partner; (e) dissolve the Partnership; and (f) approve a sale involving all or substantially all of the Partnership’s assets, subject to certain limitations. The majority vote on any of the described matters will bind the Partnership, without the concurrence of the General Partners. Each limited partnership unit has equal voting rights, regardless of which class of unit is selected.

On May 14, 2003, the Partnership commenced an offering of up to $45,000,000 of Cash Preferred or Tax Preferred Status Units ($10.00 per unit) pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership commenced active operations upon receiving and accepting subscriptions for 125,000 Units on July 24, 2003. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership accepted subscriptions for approximately 962,441 Cash Preferred Status Units and 568,246 Tax Preferred Status Units for total limited partner capital contributions of $15,306,870. Pursuant to the terms of the partnership agreement, the original partner’s interest in the Partnership was redeemed for $100 upon the admission of additional limited partners following commencement of operations. After payment of $1,259,199 of selling commissions, $447,139 of organizational and offering costs, $521,662 in acquisition and advisory fees and acquisition expense reimbursements, and investing $9,119,653 in Fund XIII-XIV Associates (as defined below), as of December 31, 2003, the Partnership held net offering proceeds of approximately $4.0 million available for investment in properties.

Management believes that the Partnership would ideally operate through the course of the following five key life cycle phases. The time spent in each phase is dependent upon various economic, industry, market, and other internal/external factors. Some overlap naturally exists in the transition from one phase to the next.

The period during which the Partnership is raising capital through the sale and issuance of limited partner units to the public

The period during which the Partnership invests the capital raised during the fund-raising phase, less upfront fees, into the acquisition of real estate assets

The period during which real estate assets are owned and operated by the Partnership during the initial lease terms of the tenants

Page 3

Table of Contents

The period during which the leases in place at the time of acquisition expire and, thus, the Partnership expends time, effort, and funds to re-lease such space to existing and/or new tenants. Following the holding phase, the Partnership continues to own and operate the real estate assets, evaluate various options for disposition, and market the real estate assets for sale

The period during which the Partnership sells its real estate investments and distributes net sales proceeds to the partners

Management believes that the Partnership is currently straddling the fundraising phase and investing phase and, accordingly, is focusing on raising capital and devoting resources on locating suitable property acquisitions and managing the existing portfolio.

Cash management is a chief area of focus for the Partnership. Historically, the Partnership has not taken out borrowings from third-party lenders and, while operating cash flows and net property sales proceeds are withheld to provide for known events from time to time, the Partnership does not maintain as a general rule cash reserves for unknown events. Instead, during the holding phase, management prefers to maximize operating cash flows distributed to investors commensurate with the period earned; however, it is likely that, during the positioning for sale phase, the Partnership will be required to use cash flow from operations and/or net sale proceeds from the sale of the Partnership’s properties, which would otherwise be available for distribution to limited partners, to fund tenant improvements, leasing commissions and other leasing costs associated with the re-leasing of the Partnership’s properties. The Partnership’s cash needs evolve during the course of its life cycle and, accordingly, volatility in operating returns is a natural and expected part of the process.

Employees

The Partnership has no direct employees. The employees of Wells Capital and Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners, perform a full range of real estate services including leasing and property management, accounting, asset management and investor relations for the Partnership. See Item 11, “Compensation of General Partners and Affiliates,” for a summary of the compensation and fees paid to the General Partners and their affiliates during the year ended December 31, 2003.

Insurance

Wells Management carries comprehensive liability and extended coverage with respect to the properties owned by the Partnership through its interest in a joint venture. In the opinion of management, all such properties are adequately insured.

Competition

The Partnership will experience competition for tenants from owners and managers of competing projects, which may include the General Partners and their affiliates. As a result, the Partnership may provide free rent, reduced charges for tenant improvements and other inducements, all of which may have an adverse impact on results of operations. At the time the Partnership elects to dispose of its properties, the Partnership will also be in competition with sellers of similar properties to locate suitable purchasers for its properties.

Page 4

Table of Contents

During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following two properties through the affiliated joint venture listed below (the “Joint Venture”):

Each of the aforementioned properties was acquired on an all-cash basis. The investment objectives of the joint venture partner listed in the above table are substantially identical to those of the Partnership. The Partnership does not have control over the operations of the Joint Venture; however, it does exercise significant influence. Accordingly, investments in the Joint Venture are recorded using the equity method of accounting.

As of December 31, 2003, the lease expirations scheduled during each of the following ten years for all properties owned by the Joint Venture, assuming no exercise of renewal options or termination rights, are summarized below:

The Joint Venture and properties in which the Partnership owns an interest as of December 31, 2003 during the periods presented are further described below:

Fund XIII-XIV Associates

On August 20, 2003, Fund XIII-XIV Associates was formed for the purposes of acquiring, developing, operating, and selling real properties. All income, loss, net cash flow, resale gain and sale proceeds of Fund XIII-XIV Associates are allocated and distributed to the Partnership and Wells Real Estate Fund XIII, L.P. according to their ownership interests, as calculated by the respective cumulative capital contributions made to Fund XIII-XIV

Page 5

Table of Contents

Associates. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership and Wells Real Estate Fund XIII, L.P. owned approximately 50% and 50%, respectively, of the following two properties based on their respective cumulative capital contributions to Fund XIII-IV Associates:

Siemens – Orlando Building

On October 30, 2003, Fund XIII-XIV Associates acquired the Siemens – Orlando Building, which is comprised of two one-story office buildings, containing approximately 82,000 aggregate rentable square feet, on an approximately 7.5-acre tract of land located in Orlando, Florida. The purchase price of the Siemens – Orlando Building was approximately $11,710,000, including closing costs. The acquisition of the Siemens – Orlando Building was funded by equal capital contributions made to Fund XIII-XIV Associates of approximately $5,855,000 by the Partnership and Wells Real Estate Fund XIII, L.P.

The Siemens – Orlando Building, which was completed in 2002, is leased under net lease agreements (i.e., operating costs and maintenance costs are paid by the tenants) to Siemens Shared Services, LLC (approximately 63%); Rinker Materials of Florida, Inc. (approximately 16%); Cape Canaveral Tour & Travel, Inc. (approximately 12%); and Best Buy Stores, L.P. (approximately 9%). As of December 31, 2003, the Siemens-Orlando Building is 100% leased.

Siemens Shared Services LLC (“Siemens”) occupies approximately 52,000 rentable square feet of the Siemens – Orlando Building. Siemens, a subsidiary of Siemens AG, provides accounting and human resources services to the operating subsidiaries of Siemens AG, including Siemens Corporation, the guarantor of the Siemens lease, which conducts the American operations for Siemens AG. Siemens has its corporate headquarters in Iselin, New Jersey. Siemens AG is a worldwide electronics and electrical engineering company with corporate headquarters in Munich, Germany.

The Siemens lease (the “Siemens Lease”) commenced in 2002 and expires in 2009. The current annual base rent payable under the Siemens Lease is approximately $695,000. Siemens has the right, at its option, to extend the initial term of its lease for two additional three-year periods at 95% of the then-current market rental rate. Siemens has an option to lease additional space in the Siemens – Orlando Building upon such space becoming available and subject to first refusal rights of other tenants of the Siemens – Orlando Building. In addition, Siemens has the right to terminate up to 25,000 rentable square feet of the Siemens lease in 2007 by paying a termination fee equal to $7.47 per rentable square foot terminated.

Rinker Materials of Florida, Inc. (“Rinker”) occupies approximately 13,000 rentable square feet of the Siemens – Orlando Building. Rinker is a privately held concrete company with corporate headquarters in West Palm Beach, Florida. Rinker provides construction and building materials in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, including cement, aggregate, brick, glass block, reinforcing steel, construction chemicals, drywall, and fireplaces. Rinker is a wholly owned subsidiary of Rinker Group Limited (“Rinker Group”), an Australian company with corporate headquarters in Chatswood, Australia. Rinker Group is a worldwide heavy building materials corporation. The Rinker lease (the “Rinker Lease”) commenced in 2003 and expires in 2013. The current annual base rent payable under the Rinker Lease is approximately $170,000. Rinker has the right, at its option, to extend the initial term of its lease for two additional five-year periods at the then-current market rental rate. In addition, Rinker has a right of first refusal to lease additional space in the Siemens – Orlando Building upon such space becoming available.

Cape Canaveral Tour and Travel, Inc. (“Cape Canaveral”) occupies approximately 10,000 rentable square feet of the Siemens – Orlando Building under two separate leases. Cape Canaveral is a subsidiary of Kosmas Group International, Inc. (“Kosmas”), the guarantor of the Cape Canaveral leases (the “Cape Canaveral Leases”). Kosmas is a vacation ownership company with corporate headquarters in New Smyrna Beach, Florida. Kosmas

Page 6

Table of Contents

provides timeshare ownership of ten resorts in New Smyrna Beach, two in Kissimmee, and one in Key West, Florida. The Cape Canaveral Leases, which commenced in 2002 and 2003, expire in 2007. The current annual base rent payable under the Cape Canaveral Leases is approximately $142,000. Cape Canaveral has the right, at its option, to extend the initial term of its leases for two additional five-year periods at the then-current market rental rate.

Best Buy Stores, L.P. (“Best Buy”) occupies approximately 7,000 rentable square feet of the Siemens-Orlando Building. Best Buy is a wholly owned subsidiary of Best Buy Co., Inc. (“Best Buy Co.”). Best Buy Co. is a retailer of consumer electronics, personal computers, entertainment software and appliances in North America. Best Buy Co., whose shares are publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange, has its corporate headquarters located in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Best Buy lease (the “Best Buy Lease”) commenced in 2001 and expires in 2006. The current annual base rent payable under the Best Buy Lease is approximately $102,000. Best Buy has the right, at its option, to extend the initial term of its lease for two additional five-year periods at 95% of the then-current market rental rate.

The average effective annual rental rate per square foot for the Siemens – Orlando Building was approximately $20.26 for 2003, the first year of ownership.

Randstad – Atlanta Building

On December 19, 2003, in a sale-leaseback transaction, Fund XIII-XIV Associates acquired the Randstad – Atlanta Building, a four-story office building containing approximately 65,000 aggregate rentable square feet, on an approximately 2.9-acre tract of land located in Atlanta, Georgia. The purchase price of the Randstad – Atlanta Building was approximately $6,520,000, including closing costs. The purchase price was funded by equal capital contributions made to Fund XIII-XIV Associates of approximately $3,260,000 by the Partnership and Wells Real Estate Fund XIII, L.P.

The Randstad – Atlanta Building, which was completed in 1985, is leased under a net lease agreement (i.e., operating costs and maintenance costs are paid by the tenants) entirely to Randstad Staffing Services, Inc. (“Randstad”), an affiliate of Randstad Holdings NV (“Randstad Holdings”). Randstad Holdings, the guarantor of the Randstad lease (the “Randstad Lease”), is an international supplier of temporary and contract staffing services. Randstad, which has its corporate headquarters in the Randstad – Atlanta Building, manages the operations of Randstad Holdings in the United States and Canada. Randstad operates in five core areas, including office, industrial, creative, technical and professional services.

The Randstad Lease commenced in 2003 and expires in 2013. The current annual base rent payable under the Randstad Lease is approximately $646,000. Randstad has the right, at its option, to extend the initial term of its lease for two additional five-year periods at 95% of the then-current market rental rate. In addition, Randstad has a right of first refusal to purchase the Randstad – Atlanta Building should Fund XIII-XIV Associates decide to sell the Randstad – Atlanta Building in the future. Fund XIII-XIV Associates, as landlord, is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the roof, plumbing, electrical, heating and air conditioning, exterior walls, doors, windows, corridors and other common areas of the Randstad – Atlanta Building.

The average effective annual rental rate per square foot for the Randstad – Atlanta Building was approximately $11.24 for 2003, the first year of ownership.

Page 7

Table of Contents

There were no material pending legal proceedings or proceedings known to be contemplated by governmental authorities involving the Partnership during the fourth quarter of 2003.

No matters were submitted to a vote of the limited partners during the fourth quarter of 2003.

PART II

As of February 15, 2004, the Partnership had 1,013,161 outstanding Cash Preferred Status Units held by a total of 225 limited partners and 578,504 outstanding Tax Preferred Status Units held by a total of 29 limited partners. The capital contribution per unit is $10.00. There is no established public trading for the Partnership’s limited partnership units, and it is not anticipated that a public trading market for the units will develop. Under the partnership agreement, the General Partners have the right to prohibit transfers of units.

In order for NASD members and their associated persons to participate in the offering and sale of units of the Partnership, the Partnership is required pursuant to NASD Rule 2810(b)(5) to disclose in each annual report distributed to limited partners a per-unit estimated value of the units, the method by which it was developed and the date of the data used to develop the estimated value. In addition, pursuant to Section 15.2 of the partnership agreement and the Partnership’s prospectus, the General Partners are required to prepare annual statements of estimated unit values to assist fiduciaries of retirement plans subject to the annual reporting requirements of ERISA in the preparation of their reports relating to an investment in the Partnership. Pursuant to Section 15.2 of the partnership agreement and the Partnership’s prospectus, during the offering period and for the first three fiscal years following the termination of the offering of units in the Partnership, the estimated value of the units shall be deemed to be $10 per unit for these purposes. The basis for this valuation is the fact that the Partnership is currently engaged in a public offering of its units at the price of $10.00 per unit. However, please note that there is no public trading market for the units nor is one ever expected to develop and there can be no assurance that limited partners could receive $10 per unit if such a market did exist and they sold their units or that they will be able to receive such amount for their units in the future. In addition, the Partnership has not performed an evaluation of the Partnership properties and, therefore, this valuation is not based upon the value of the Partnership properties, nor does it represent the amount limited partners would receive if the Partnership properties were sold and the proceeds distributed to the limited partners in a liquidation of the Partnership, which amount would most likely be less than $10.00 per unit as a result of the fact that, at the time the Partnership is purchasing its properties, the amount of funds available for investment in properties is reduced by the 16% of offering proceeds raised by the Partnership, which are used to pay selling commissions and dealer manager fees, organization and offering expenses and acquisition and advisory fees, as described in more detail in this Annual Report and the Partnership’s prospectus.

After the expiration of this three-year period, the General Partners are required under the partnership agreement to determine an estimated per unit valuation by estimating the amount a holder of Partnership units would receive if the Partnership properties were sold as of the close of the Partnership’s fiscal year at their estimated fair market values and the proceeds from such sales (without reductions for selling expenses and other costs), together with any other funds of the Partnership, were distributed in a liquidation of the Partnership. Such estimated property

Page 8

Table of Contents

values will be based upon annual valuations performed by the General Partners, and no independent property appraisals will be obtained. Accordingly, these estimates, when prepared by the General Partners, should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of the values of the limited partners’ units, what a limited partner might be able to sell his units for, or the fair market value of the Partnership properties, nor will they represent the amount of net proceeds limited partners would receive if the Partnership properties were sold and the proceeds distributed in a liquidation of the Partnership. The valuations to be performed by the General Partners will be estimates only, and will be based a number of assumptions which may not be accurate or complete. In addition, property values are subject to change and could decline after the date of the valuations.

Limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units are entitled to a distribution from Net Cash From Operations, as defined in the partnership agreement, of cash flow, less adequate cash reserves for other obligations of the Partnership for which there is no provision, on a per unit basis until they have received distributions in each fiscal year of the Partnership equal to 10% of their adjusted capital contributions. After this preference is satisfied, the General Partners will receive an amount of Net Cash From Operations equal to 10% of the total amount of Net Cash From Operations distributed. Thereafter, the limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units will receive 90% of Net Cash From Operations and the General Partners will receive 10%. No Net Cash From Operations will be distributed to limited partners holding Tax Preferred Status Units. Holders of Cash Preferred Status Units will, except in limited circumstances, be allocated none of the Partnership’s net loss, depreciation, and amortization deductions. These deductions will be allocated to limited partners holding Tax Preferred Status Units until their capital account balances have been reduced to zero.

Cash available for distribution to the limited partners is distributed on a quarterly basis. Cash distributions made to limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units during 2003 is summarized below:

The fourth quarter 2003 distribution was accrued in 2003 and paid to limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units in February 2004. No distributions have been made to limited partners holding Tax Preferred Status Units or to the General Partners in 2003 or 2002.

Page 9

Table of Contents

The following sets forth a summary of the selected financial data as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002:

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Selected Financial Data presented in Item 6 and our accompanying financial statements and notes thereto.

(a)    Overview

Management believes that the Partnership is currently straddling the fundraising phase and the investing phase. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership owned interests in two properties through interests in an affiliated joint venture and held investor proceeds of approximately $4.0 million available for investment in properties. As of the date of this filing, each of the two properties in which the Partnership owns an interest is fully leased to tenants at the beginning of their respective initial lease terms.

As the Partnership evolves through the life cycle detailed in Item 1, our most significant risks and challenges continue to evolve concurrently. Later as we embark into the holding phase, we will focus resources on managing the Partnership existing portfolio and locating suitable replacement tenants for vacant space as necessary. At such time as we enter the positioning for sale phase, we anticipate that we will focus on re-leasing vacant space and space that may become vacant upon the expiration of our current leases. In doing so, we will seek to maximize returns to the limited partners by negotiating long-term leases at market rental rates while attempting to minimize downtime, re-leasing expenditures, ongoing property level costs and portfolio costs. During the disposition and liquidation phase, our attention will shift to locating suitable acquirers, negotiating purchase-sale contracts that will attempt to maximize the total return to the limited partners, and minimize contingencies and our post-closing involvement with the acquirer.

Page 10

Table of Contents

The Partnership commenced operations on July 24, 2003. Accordingly, gross revenues of the Partnership increased for 2003, as compared to 2002, as the Partnership invested in two income-producing properties through Fund XIII-XIV Associates as further discussed below.

Substantially all of our recurring operating revenues are generated from the operations of the properties in the Partnership’s portfolio. On a quarterly basis, we deduct the expenses related to the recurring operations of the properties and the portfolio from such revenues and assess the amount of the remaining cash flows that will be required to fund known re-leasing costs and other capital improvements. Any residual operating cash flows are considered available for distribution to the limited partners and are generally paid quarterly. As further outlined in section (b) below, we anticipate increases in cash available for operating distributions to limited partners as the Partnership benefits from a full year of operations for the properties acquired in 2003 and to be acquired in 2004 with the remaining investor proceeds.

Industry Factors

Our results continue to be impacted by a number of factors influencing the real estate industry.

General Economic and Real Estate Market Commentary

The U.S. economy appears to be recovering; however, thus far it has been a jobless recovery, and because of this, real estate office fundamentals may not improve until employment growth strengthens. The economy has shown signs of growth recently, as companies have recommenced making investments in new employees. Job growth is the most significant demand driver for office markets. The jobless recovery has resulted in a demand deficit for office space. In general, the real estate office market lags behind the overall economic recovery and, therefore, recovery is not expected until late 2004 or 2005 at the earliest, and then will vary by market.

Overall, real estate market fundamentals are weak; however, capital continues to flow into the asset class. This increased capital drives the prices of many properties upward and investor returns downward. There is a significant pricing differential in underwriting parameters between well-leased assets with credit tenants and those with either existing vacancies or substantial near-term tenant rollover. Properties with long-term leases to strong credit tenants have seen an increase in value.

The office market has significant excess space. Vacancy levels are believed to be at or near their peak. There is some encouraging news, new construction continues to taper off, coming to a complete halt in many markets. As a result of the slow down in new construction and the modest decline in sublease space, net absorption has turned positive, although barely, at year-end. Many industry professionals believe office market fundamentals are bottoming-out; however, a recovery cannot be expected until job growth and corresponding demand for office space increases.

(b)    Results of Operations

Gross Revenues of the Partnership

Gross revenues of the Partnership increased to $31,420 for 2003, as compared to $0 for 2002, as the Partnership commenced operations on July 24, 2003. During the periods presented, the Partnership invested in two income-producing properties through Fund XIII-XIV Associates as further discussed below.

Equity In Income of Joint Venture

Gross Revenues of Joint Venture

Gross revenues of the Joint Venture increased in 2003, as compared to 2002, primarily due to the acquisitions of the Siemens – Orlando Building in October 2003 and Randstad – Atlanta Building in December 2003.

Page 11

Table of Contents

Expenses of Joint Venture

The expenses of the Joint Venture increased in 2003, as compared to 2002, primarily due to the operating costs incurred related to the Siemens – Orlando Building acquired in October 2003 and Randstad – Atlanta Building acquired in December 2003.

As a result of the aforementioned factors, equity in income of Joint Venture was $18,205 and $0 for 2003 and 2002, respectively.

Expenses of the Partnership

Expenses of the Partnership increased to $84,349 for 2003, as compared to $39 for 2002, primarily due to increases in organizational expenses, administrative salaries, and legal and accounting fees related to the growth of the offering and operations as a result of commencing active operations in July 2003.

Net Loss of the Partnership

As a result of the aforementioned factors, net loss of the Partnership was $52,929 for 2003, as compared to $39 for 2002.

(c)    Liquidity and Capital Resources

On May 14, 2003, the Partnership commenced a public offering of up to $45,000,000 of limited partnership units, at $10.00 per unit, pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership commenced active operations on July 24, 2003, upon receiving and accepting subscriptions for 125,000 units. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership had sold 962,441 Cash Preferred Status Units and 568,246 Tax Preferred Status Units, net of conversions, held by a total of 210 and 27 limited partners, respectively, for total limited partner capital contributions of $15,306,870. After payment of $1,259,199 of selling commissions, $447,139 of organizational and offering costs, $521,662 in acquisition and advisory fees and acquisition expense reimbursements, and investing $9,119,653 in Fund XIII-XIV Associates, as of December 31, 2003, the Partnership held net offering proceeds of approximately $4.0 million available for investment in properties.

Cash Flows From Operating Activities

Net cash flows from operating activities were $(67,404) for 2003, as compared to $(39) for 2002. The increase in cash flows used is primarily due to the increase in expenses of the Partnership, as described above, partially offset by interest income earned on investor proceeds during 2003.

Cash Flows From Investing Activities

Net cash from investing activities were $(9,641,316) for 2003, as compared to $0 for 2002, primarily due to: (i) the Partnership’s investment in Fund XIII-XIV Associates for the purchase of the Siemens – Orlando Building and the Randstad – Atlanta Building in 2003, and (ii) payment of acquisition and advisory fees and acquisition expense reimbursements to Wells Capital, pursuant to the prospectus, which are capitalized and recorded as deferred project costs.

Cash Flows From Financing Activities

Net cash flows from financing activities increased to $13,503,167 for 2003, as compared to $600 for 2002, as the Partnership’s offering commenced in 2003.

Page 12

Table of Contents

Distributions

The Partnership made distributions to the limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units of $0.15 per unit for the quarter ended December 31, 2003. Such distributions have been made from net cash from operations and distributions received from the Partnership’s investment in Fund XIII-XIV Associates. No distributions have been made to the limited partners holding Tax Preferred Status Units or to the General Partners.

Capital Resources

The Partnership is an investment vehicle formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning and operating income-producing real properties. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership was holding net offering proceeds of approximately $4.0 million available for investment in such properties. At this time the General Partners are unaware of any specific need requiring capital resources from the Partnership.

(d)    Related-Party Transactions

Offering Expense Reimbursements

The Partnership reimburses Wells Capital for organizational and offering expenses equal to the lesser of actual costs incurred or 3% of the aggregate gross offering proceeds, subject to the overall limitations of the partnership agreement. Organizational and offering expenses include such costs as legal and accounting fees, printing costs, and other offering expenses, but do not include sales or underwriting commissions. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership had paid aggregate fees of $459,206 to Wells Capital, which amounted to 3% of the aggregate gross offering proceeds received to date.

Selling Commissions and Dealer-Managers Fees

The Partnership pays selling commissions and dealer manager fees up to 7% and equal to 2.5%, respectively, of aggregate gross offering proceeds to Wells Investment Securities, Inc., an affiliated and registered securities broker-dealer, and/or other broker-dealers participating in the offering of the Partnership’s limited partner units (“Participating Dealers”). Wells Investment Securities, Inc. may re-allow a portion of its dealer-manager fee to Participating Dealers in the aggregate amount of up to 1.5% of aggregate gross offering proceeds as marketing fees, or to reimburse Participating Dealers for the costs and expenses of representatives of such Participating Dealers of attending educational conferences and seminars. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership had paid aggregate selling commissions of $1,071,481 and dealer-manager fees of $382,672, of which all $1,071,481 of the selling commissions and $214,856 of the dealer-manager fees were re-allowed to Participating Dealers.

Acquisition and Advisory Fees and Acquisition Expense Reimbursements

The Partnership pays Wells Capital for acquisition and advisory services and acquisition expense reimbursements equal to 3.5% of the aggregate gross offering proceeds, subject to certain overall limitations contained in the partnership agreement. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership had paid aggregate fees of $535,740 to Wells Capital, which amounted to 3.5% of the aggregate gross offering proceeds received to date.

Property Management, Leasing, and Asset Management Fees

Wells Management, an affiliate of the General Partners, receives compensation for supervising the management and leasing of the Partnership properties equal to the lesser of (a) fees that would be paid to a comparable outside firm or (b) 4.5% of the gross revenues generally paid over the life of the lease plus a separate competitive fee for

Page 13

Table of Contents

the one-time initial lease-up of newly constructed properties generally paid in conjunction with the receipt of the first month’s rent. In the case of commercial properties which are leased on a long-term (ten or more years) net basis, the maximum property management fee from such leases shall be 1% of the gross revenues generally paid over the life of the leases except for a one-time initial leasing fee of 3% of the gross revenues on each lease payable over the first five full years of the original lease term. Management and leasing fees are not paid directly by the Partnership but by the joint venture entity, which owns the properties. The Partnership’s share of these fees was $8,291 for the year ended December 31, 2003.

Administration Reimbursements

Wells Capital and its affiliates perform certain administrative services for the Partnership, such as accounting and other partnership administration, and incur the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among the various Wells Real Estate Funds based on time spent on each fund by individual administrative personnel. During 2003, the Partnership had paid $10,476 to Wells Capital and its affiliates for reimbursement of such administrative services. See Note 8 to the financial statements included with this report for a summary of the Partnership’s administrative costs.

Conflicts of Interest

The General Partners are also general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds. As such, there may exist conflicts of interest where the General Partners in their capacity as general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds may be in competition with the Partnership in connection with property acquisitions or for tenants in similar geographic markets.

(e)    Inflation

The real estate market has not been affected significantly by inflation in the past three years due to the relatively low inflation rate. However, there are provisions in the majority of tenant leases, which would protect the Partnership from the impact of inflation. These provisions include reimbursement billings for operating expense pass-through charges, real estate tax, and insurance reimbursements on a per-square-foot basis, or in some cases, annual reimbursement of operating expenses above a certain per square foot allowance. However, due to the long-term nature of the leases, the leases may not reset frequently enough to cover inflation.

(f)    Application of Critical Accounting Policies

The Partnership’s accounting policies have been established to conform with GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to use judgment in the application of accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions. These judgments affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. If management’s judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions had been different, it is possible that different accounting policies would have been applied, thus, resulting in a different presentation of the financial statements. Additionally, other companies may utilize different estimates that may impact comparability of the Partnership’s results of operations to those of companies in similar businesses.

Below is a discussion of the accounting policies that management considers to be critical in that they may require complex judgment in their application or require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. Additional discussion of accounting policies that management considers to be significant, including further discussion of the critical accounting policies described below, is presented in Note 1 to the Partnership’s financial statements included in this report.

Page 14

Table of Contents

Investment in Real Estate Assets

The Partnership’s management is required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of its depreciable assets. The Partnership considers the period of future benefit of the asset to determine the appropriate useful lives. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. The estimated useful lives of the Partnership’s assets by class are as follows:

In the event that management uses inappropriate useful lives or methods for depreciation, the Partnership’s net income would be misstated.

Valuation of Real Estate Assets

Management continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets in which the Partnership has an ownership interest, either directly or through investments in joint ventures, may not be recoverable. When indicators of potential impairment are present which indicate that the carrying amounts of real estate assets may not be recoverable, management assesses the recoverability of the real estate assets by determining whether the carrying value of the real estate assets will be recovered through the undiscounted future operating cash flows expected from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition. In the event that such expected undiscounted future cash flows do not exceed the carrying value, management adjusts the real estate assets to the fair value and recognize an impairment loss. Management has determined that there has been no impairment in the carrying value of real estate assets held either directly or indirectly by the Partnership at December 31, 2003.

Projections of expected future cash flows requires management to estimate future market rental income amounts subsequent to the expiration of current lease agreements, property operating expenses, discount rates, the number of months it takes to re-lease the property, and the number of years the property is held for investment. The use of inappropriate assumptions in the future cash flow analysis would result in an incorrect assessment of the property’s future cash flows and fair value, and could result in the overstatement of the carrying value of real estate assets held by the Joint Venture and net income of the Partnership.

Allocation of Purchase Price of Acquired Assets

During 2002, the Partnership adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141, “Business Combination,” (“FAS 141”), and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Intangibles” (“FAS 142”). These standards govern business combinations, asset acquisitions and the accounting for acquired intangibles.

Upon the acquisition of real properties, it is the Partnership’s policy to allocate the purchase price of properties to acquired tangible assets, consisting of land and building, and identified intangible assets and liabilities, consisting of the value of above-market and below-market leases, and the value of in-place leases, based in each case on their fair values.

The fair values of the tangible assets of an acquired property (which includes land and building) is determined by valuing the property as if it were vacant, and the “as-if-vacant” value is then allocated to land and building based

Page 15

Table of Contents

on management’s determination of the relative fair value of these assets. Management determines the as-if-vacant fair value of a property using methods similar to those used by independent appraisers. Factors considered by management in performing these analyses include an estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods considering current market conditions and costs to execute similar leases. In estimating carrying costs, management includes real estate taxes, insurance, and other operating expenses during the expected lease-up periods based on current market demand. Management estimates costs to execute similar leases including leasing commissions, and other related costs.

The fair values of above-market and below-market in-place leases are recorded based on the present value (using an interest rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (ii) management’s estimate of fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, measured over a period equal to the remaining terms of the leases. The above-market and below-market lease values are capitalized as intangible lease assets or liabilities and amortized as an adjustment to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases.

The fair values of in-place leases include direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant, opportunity costs associated with lost rentals which are avoided by acquiring an in-place lease, and tenant relationships. Direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant include commissions, tenant improvements, and other direct costs and are estimated based on management’s consideration of current market costs to execute a similar lease. These direct costs are amortized to expense over the remaining terms of the respective leases. The value of opportunity costs is calculated using the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases over a market absorption period for a similar lease. Customer relationships are valued based on expected renewal of a lease or the likelihood of obtaining a particular tenant for other locations. These lease intangibles are amortized to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases.

Estimates of the fair values of the tangible and intangible assets requires the Partnership to estimate market lease rates, property operating expenses, carrying costs during lease-up periods, discount rates, market absorption periods, and the number of years the property is held for investment. The use of inappropriate estimates would result in an incorrect assessment of the Partnership’s purchase price allocations which could impact the amount of the Partnership’s reported net income.

On March 19, 2004, the General Partners, Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Capital, as well as Wells Investment Securities, Inc., the dealer manager, Wells Management Company, Inc., the property manager, and Wells Real Estate Fund I (“Wells Defendants”) received notice of a putative class action complaint, which was filed in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia on March 12, 2004 (Civil Action File No. 04-A-2791 2). The complaint was filed by James Hendry, Karen Beneda, Robert Beneda, and William Mullin, as plaintiffs, purportedly on behalf of all limited partners holding Class B units of Wells Real Estate Fund I (“Wells Fund I’’) as of January 15, 2003. The complaint alleges, among other things, that (1) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, Wells Investment Securities, Inc. and Wells Fund I negligently and/or fraudulently made false statements and/or made material omissions in connection with the initial sale of the Class B units to investors of Wells Fund I by making false statements or omissions in the Wells Fund I sales literature relating to the distribution of net sale proceeds to holders of Class B units; (2) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital and Wells Fund I negligently and/or fraudulently misrepresented and/or concealed disclosure of, among other things, alleged discrepancies between such statements and the allocations in the partnership agreement for a period of time in order to raise money for future syndications and to delay such investors from taking any legal, equitable or other action to protect their investments in Wells Fund I; and (3) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital and Wells Fund I breached their fiduciary duties

Page 16

Table of Contents

to the limited partners. The plaintiffs seek, among other remedies, the following: rescission of all class members’ purchases of Class B units and an order for a full refund of all money paid for such units together with interest; judgment against the Wells Defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount to be proven at trial; punitive damages; judicial dissolution of Wells Fund I and the appointment of a receiver to wind up and terminate the partnership; and an award to plaintiffs of their attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses. It is too early to predict what impact this matter may have on the General Partners of the Partnership.

Since the Partnership does not borrow any money or make any foreign investments, it is not subject to risks relating to interest rate or foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations.

The financial statements of the Registrant and supplementary data are detailed under Item 15 (a) and filed as part of the report on the pages indicated.

There were no disagreements with the Partnership’s independent public accountants during the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002.

The Partnership carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management of Wells Capital, the corporate General Partner of the Partnership, including the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Based upon that evaluation, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

There were no significant changes in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting during the Partnership’s fourth fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

PART III

Wells Capital

Wells Capital was formed in April 1984. The executive offices of Wells Capital are located at 6200 The Corners Parkway, Norcross, Georgia 30092. Leo F. Wells, III is the sole Director and the President of Wells Capital. Wells Capital was organized under the Georgia Business Corporation Code, and is primarily in the business of serving as general partner or as an affiliate to the general partner in affiliated public limited partnerships (“Wells Real Estate Funds”) and as the advisor to the Wells Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. and Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. (“Wells REITs”), each a Maryland corporation which qualifies as a real estate investment trust. In these capacities, Wells Capital performs certain services for the Wells Real Estate Funds and the Wells REITs, including presenting, structuring, and acquiring real estate investment opportunities, entering into leases and service contracts on acquired properties, arranging for and completing the disposition of properties, and providing other services such as accounting and administrative functions.

Page 17

Table of Contents

Leo F. Wells, III

Mr. Wells, who serves as one of our General Partners, is the President, Treasurer, and sole director of Wells Capital, which is the corporate general partner of our other General Partner. He is also the sole stockholder, President, and sole director of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc., the parent corporation of Wells Capital, Wells Management, Wells Investment Securities, Inc. (“Wells Investment Securities”), and Wells & Associates, Inc., a real estate brokerage and investment company formed in 1976 and incorporated in 1978, for which Mr. Wells serves as principal broker. He is also the President, Treasurer, and sole director of:

Mr. Wells is the President and a director of Wells Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. and Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc., which are both real estate investment trusts formed under Maryland law.

Mr. Wells was a real estate salesman and property manager from 1970 to 1973 for Roy D. Warren & Company, an Atlanta-based real estate company, and he was associated from 1973 to 1976 with Sax Gaskin Real Estate Company. From 1980 to February 1985 he served as Vice President of Hill-Johnson, Inc., a Georgia corporation engaged in the construction business. Mr. Wells holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in economics from the University of Georgia. Mr. Wells is a member of the Financial Planning Association (FPA).

On August 26, 2003, Mr. Wells and Wells Investment Securities entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) with the NASD relating to alleged rule violations. The AWC set forth the NASD’s findings that Wells Investment Securities and Mr. Wells had violated conduct rules relating to the provision of non-cash compensation of more than $100 to associated persons of NASD member firms in connection with their attendance at the annual educational and due diligence conferences sponsored by Wells Investment Securities in 2001 and 2002. Without admitting or denying the allegations and findings against them, Wells Investment Securities and Mr. Wells consented in the AWC to various findings by the NASD which are summarized in the following paragraph:

In 2001 and 2002, Wells Investment Securities sponsored conferences attended by registered representatives who sold its real estate investment products. Wells Investment Securities also paid for certain expenses of guests of the registered representatives who attended the conferences. In 2001, Wells Investment Securities paid the costs of travel to the conference and meals for many of the guests, and paid the costs of playing golf for some of the registered representatives and their guests. Wells Investment Securities later invoiced registered representatives for the cost of golf and for travel expenses of guests, but was not fully reimbursed for such. In 2002, Wells Investment Securities paid for meals for the guests. Wells Investment Securities also conditioned most of the 2001 conference invitations on attainment by the registered representatives of a predetermined sales goal for Wells Investment Securities products. This conduct violated the prohibitions against payment and receipt of non-cash compensation in connection with the sales of these products contained in NASD’s Conduct Rules 2710, 2810, and 3060. In addition, Wells Investment Securities and Mr. Wells failed to adhere to all of the terms of their written undertaking made in March 2001 not to engage in the conduct described above, and thereby engaged in conduct that was inconsistent with high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade in violation of NASD Conduct Rule 2110.

Page 18

Table of Contents

Wells Investment Securities consented to a censure and Mr. Wells consented to suspension from acting in a principal capacity with an NASD member firm for one year. Wells Investment Securities and Mr. Wells also agreed to the imposition of a joint and several fine in the amount of $150,000. Although he is temporarily prohibited from acting in a principal capacity with Wells Investment Securities, Mr. Wells continues to engage in selling efforts and other non-principal activities on behalf of Wells Investment Securities.

Financial Oversight Committee

The Partnership does not have a board of directors or an audit committee. Accordingly, as the corporate General Partner of the Partnership, Wells Capital has established a Financial Oversight Committee consisting of Leo F. Wells, III, as the Principal Executive Officer; Douglas P. Williams, as the Principal Financial Officer; and Randall D. Fretz, as the Chief of Staff, of the corporate General Partner. The Financial Oversight Committee serves the equivalent function of an audit committee for, among others, the following purposes: appointment, compensation, review and oversight of the work of our independent public accountants, and establishing and enforcing the code of ethics. However, since the Partnership and corporate General Partner do not have an audit committee and the Financial Oversight Committee is not independent of the Partnership or the General Partners, the Partnership does not have an “audit committee financial expert.”

Code of Ethics

The Financial Oversight Committee has adopted a code of ethics applicable to our corporate General Partner’s Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, as well as the principal accounting officer, controller or other employees of our corporate General Partner performing similar functions on behalf of the Partnership, if any. You may obtain a copy of this code of ethics, without charge, upon request by calling our Investor Services Department at (800) 557-4830 or (770) 243-8282.

The following table summarizes the compensation and fees (including reimbursement of expenses) paid to the General Partners and their affiliates during the year ended December 31, 2003.

Page 19

Table of Contents

ITEM 12.    SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT.

No limited partner is known by the Partnership to own beneficially more than 5% of the outstanding units of the Partnership.

Set forth below is the security ownership of management as of February 15, 2004.

No arrangements exist which would, upon operation, result in a change in control of the Partnership.

ITEM 13.    CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS.

The compensation and fees paid or to be paid by the Partnership to the General Partners and their affiliates in connection with the operation of the Partnership are as follows:

Interest in Partnership Cash Flow and Net Sales Proceeds

The General Partners will receive a subordinated participation in net cash flow from operations equal to 10% of net cash flow after the limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units have received preferential distributions equal to 10% of their adjusted capital accounts in each fiscal year. The General Partners will also receive a subordinated participation in net sales proceeds and net financing proceeds equal to 20% of residual proceeds available for distribution after limited partners holding Cash Preferred Status Units have received a return of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 10% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions and limited partners holding Tax Preferred Units have received a return of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 15% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions; provided, however, that in no event shall the General Partners receive in the aggregate in excess of 15% of net sales proceeds and net financing proceeds remaining after payments to limited partners from such proceeds of amounts equal to the sum of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 6% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions. The General Partners did not receive any distributions of net cash flow from operations or net sales proceeds for the year ended December 31, 2003.

Property Management and Leasing Fees – Incurred by the Joint Venture

Wells Management, an affiliate of the General Partners, receives compensation for supervising the management and leasing of the Partnership properties equal to the lesser of (a) fees that would be paid to a comparable outside firm or (b) 4.5% of the gross revenues generally paid over the life of the lease plus a separate competitive fee for the one-time initial lease-up of newly constructed properties generally paid in conjunction with the receipt of the first month’s rent. In the case of commercial properties which are leased on a long-term (ten or more years) net basis, the maximum property management fee from such leases shall be 1% of the gross revenues generally paid over the life of the leases except for a one-time initial leasing fee of 3% of the gross revenues on each lease payable over the first five full years of the original lease term. Wells Management has received a total of $8,060 in property management and leasing fee compensation for services rendered during the year ended December 31, 2003.

Real Estate Commissions

In connection with the sale of Partnership properties, the General Partners or their affiliates may receive commissions not exceeding the lesser of (a) 50% of the commissions customarily charged by other brokers in arm’s-length transactions involving comparable properties in the same geographic area or (b) 3% of the gross

Page 20

Table of Contents

sales price of the property, and provided that payments of such commissions will be made only after limited partners have received prior distributions totaling 100% of their capital contributions plus a 6% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions. The General Partners or their affiliates have not received any real estate commissions in 2003.

Acquisition and Advisory Fees and Expenses

The Partnership pays Acquisition and Advisory Fees and Acquisition Expenses to Wells Capital for acquisition and advisory services performed on the Partnership’s behalf. These payments, as provided by the partnership agreement, are equal to 3.5% of the limited partners’ capital contributions. Acquisition and Advisory Fees and Acquisition Expenses paid as of December 31, 2003, amounted to $535,740 and represented approximately 3.5% of the limited partners’ capital contributions.

Organizational and Offering Expenses

Wells Capital pays all the organization and offering expenses for the Partnership. Wells Capital may be reimbursed by the Partnership to the extent that such organization and offering expenses do not exceed 3% of total limited partners’ capital contributions. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership had reimbursed Wells Capital for $459,206 in organization and offering expenses, which amounted to approximately 3% of limited partners’ capital contributions.

Expense Reimbursements

See Note 8 to the Partnership’s financial statements included with this report for a description of the administrative costs and reimbursements made to the General Partners and their affiliates during the year ended December 31, 2003.

ITEM 14.    PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES.

Preapproval Policies and Procedures

The Financial Oversight Committee preapproves all auditing and permissible non-auditing services provided by our independent public accountants. The approval may be given as part of the Financial Oversight Committee’s approval of the scope of the engagement of our independent public accountants or on an individual basis. The preapproval of certain audit-related services and certain non-auditing services not exceeding enumerated dollar limits may be delegated to one or more of the Financial Oversight Committee’s members, but the member to whom such authority is delegated shall report any preapproval decisions to the full Financial Oversight Committee. Our independent public accountants may not be retained to perform the non-auditing services specified in Section 10A(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Fees Paid to the Independent Public Accountants

As indicated in Item 9 above, we engaged Ernst & Young to be our independent public accountants on July 3, 2002. The aggregate fees billed to the Partnership for professional accounting services, including the audit of the Partnership’s annual financial statements by Ernst & Young for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, are set forth in the table below.

Page 21

Table of Contents

For purposes of the preceding table, the professional fees are classified as follows:

Since May 6, 2003, the effective date of the SEC Rules requiring audit committees to approve all services provided by independent public accountants, 100% of the services performed by Ernst & Young described above under the captions “Audit Fees,” “Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees,” and “All Other Fees” were approved in advance by a member of the Financial Oversight Committee.

ITEM 15.    EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES, AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.

Page 22

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Page 23

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

TO

2003 FORM 10-K

OF

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

The following documents are filed as exhibits to this report. Those exhibits previously filed and incorporated herein by reference are identified below by an asterisk. For each such asterisked exhibit, there is shown below the description of the previous filing. Exhibits which are not required for this report are omitted.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO BE FURNISHED WITH REPORTS FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15(d) OF THE ACT BY REGISTRANTS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE ACT.

No annual report or proxy material relating to an annual or other meeting of security holders has been sent to security holders.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page F-1

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Partners

Wells Real Estate Fund XIV, L.P.

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Wells Real Estate Fund XIV, L.P. (a Georgia public limited partnership) as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related statements of loss, partners’ capital, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2003 and the period from October 25, 2002 (Inception) through December 31, 2002. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Wells Real Estate Fund XIV, L.P. at December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2003 and the period from October 25, 2002 (Inception) through December 31, 2002 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

/s/    Ernst & Young LLP

Atlanta, Georgia

February 18, 2004

Page F-2

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

BALANCE SHEETS

DECEMBER 31, 2003 AND 2002

See accompanying notes.

Page F-3

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

STATEMENTS OF LOSS

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 AND THE PERIOD FROM

OCTOBER 25, 2002 (INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2002

See accompanying notes.

Page F-4

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 AND THE PERIOD FROM

OCTOBER 25, 2002 (INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2002

See accompanying notes.

Page F-5

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 AND THE PERIOD FROM

OCTOBER 25, 2002 (INCEPTION) THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2002

See accompanying notes.

Page F-6

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2003 AND 2002

Organization and Business

Wells Real Estate Fund XIV, L.P. (or, the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”), a Georgia corporation, serving as its general partners (the “General Partners”). The Partnership was formed on October 25, 2002 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and managing income producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription for units, the Limited Partners must elect whether to have their units treated as Cash Preferred Status Units or Tax Preferred Status Units. Thereafter, Limited Partners have the right to change their prior elections to have some or all of their units treated as Cash Preferred Status Units or Tax Preferred Status Units one time during each quarterly accounting period. Limited Partners may vote to, among other things: (a) amend the Partnership agreement, subject to certain limitations; (b) change the business purpose or investment objectives of the Partnership; (c) add or remove a general partner; (d) elect a new general partner; (e) dissolve the Partnership; and (f) approve a sale involving all or substantially all of the Partnership’s assets, subject to certain limitations. The majority vote on any of the described matters will bind the Partnership, without the concurrence of the General Partners. Each limited partnership unit has equal voting rights, regardless of which class of unit is selected.

On October 25, 2002, the Partnership was organized under the laws of the state of Georgia upon accepting initial contributions from the General Partners and Original Limited Partner of $500 and $100, respectively. On May 14, 2003, the Partnership commenced an offering of up to $45,000,000 of Cash Preferred or Tax Preferred limited partnership units ($10.00 per unit) pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership commenced active operations upon receiving and accepting subscriptions for 125,000 units on July 24, 2003. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership accepted subscriptions for approximately 962,441 Cash Preferred units and 568,246 Tax Preferred units for total Limited Partner capital contributions of $15,306,870. Pursuant to the terms of the partnership agreement, the Original Partner’s interest in the Partnership was redeemed for $100 upon the admission of additional limited partners following commencement of operations.

During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following two properties through the affiliated joint venture listed below (the “Joint Venture”):

Page F-7

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

Use of Estimates

The preparation of the Partnership’s financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Partnership considers all highly liquid investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents include cash and short-term investments. Short-term investments are stated at cost, which approximates fair value, and consist of investments in money market accounts.

Investment in Joint Venture

The Partnership does not have control over the operations of the Joint Venture; however, it does exercise significant influence. Accordingly, the Partnership’s investment in the Joint Venture is recorded using the equity method of accounting, whereby original investments are recorded at cost and subsequently adjusted for contributions, distributions and net income (loss) attributable to the Partnership. Pursuant to the terms of the Joint Venture agreement, all income and distributions are allocated to joint venture partners in accordance with their respective ownership interests. Distributions of net cash from operations are distributed to the joint venture partners on a quarterly basis.

Deferred Project Costs

The Partnership pays certain fees to Wells Capital related to the acquisition of properties. Such fees are capitalized to the cost of properties, included in the capitalized assets of the Joint Venture, and depreciated on the same basis and over the respective useful lives of the related assets. Deferred project costs represent fees paid, which have not yet been invested and allocated to properties.

Income Taxes

The Partnership is not subject to federal or state income taxes; therefore, none have been provided for in the accompanying financial statements. The partners are required to include their respective shares of profits and losses in their individual income tax returns.

Distributions of Net Cash From Operations

Cash available for distribution, as defined by the partnership agreement, will be distributed to the limited partners on a quarterly basis. In accordance with the partnership agreement, distributions are paid first to limited partners holding Cash Preferred units until they have received a 10% per annum return on their net capital contributions, as defined. Then, such distributions are paid to the General Partners until they have received 10% of the total amount distributed with respect to the fiscal year. Any remaining cash available for distribution is split 90% to the limited partners holding Cash Preferred units and 10% to the General Partners. No operating cash distributions will be made to the limited partners holding Tax Preferred units.

Page F-8

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

Distribution of Sale Proceeds

Upon the sale of properties, the net sale proceeds will be distributed in the following order:

Allocation of Net Income, Net Loss, and Gain on Sale

Net income is defined as net income recognized by the Partnership, excluding deductions for depreciation and amortization. Net income, as defined, of the Partnership will be allocated each year in the same proportion that net cash from operations is distributed to the partners. To the extent the Partnership’s net income in any year exceeds net cash from operations, it will be allocated 99% to the limited partners holding Cash Preferred units and 1% to the General Partners.

Net loss, depreciation, and amortization deductions for each fiscal year will be allocated as follows: (a) 99% to the limited partners holding Tax Preferred units and 1% to the General Partners until their capital accounts are reduced to zero; (b) then to any partner having a positive balance in his capital account in an amount not to exceed such positive balance; and (c) thereafter to the General Partners.

Gain on the sale or exchange of the Partnership’s properties will be allocated generally in the same manner that the net proceeds from such sale are distributed to partners after the following allocations are made, if applicable: (a) allocations made pursuant to the qualified income offset provisions of the Partnership agreement; (b) allocations to partners having negative capital accounts until all negative capital accounts have been restored to zero; and (c) allocations to limited partners holding Tax Preferred units in amounts equal to the deductions for depreciation and amortization previously allocated to them with respect to the specific property sold, but not in excess of the amount of gain on sale recognized by the Partnership with respect to the sale of such property.

Page F-9

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Business Combinations / Goodwill and Intangibles

On January 1, 2002, the Partnership adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141, “Business Combinations” (“FAS 141”), and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Intangibles” (“FAS 142”). These standards govern business combinations, asset acquisitions and the accounting for acquired intangibles.

Upon the acquisition of real properties, it is the Partnership’s policy to allocate the purchase price of properties to acquired tangible assets, consisting of land and building, and identified intangible assets and liabilities, consisting of the value of above-market and below-market leases, and the value of in-place leases, based in each case on their fair values.

The fair values of the tangible assets of an acquired property (which includes land and building) are determined by valuing the property as if it were vacant, and the “as-if-vacant” value is then allocated to land and building based on management’s determination of the relative fair value of these assets. Management determines the as-if-vacant fair value of a property using methods similar to those used by independent appraisers. Factors considered by management in performing these analyses include an estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods considering current market conditions and costs to execute similar leases. In estimating carrying costs, management includes real estate taxes, insurance, and other operating expenses during the expected lease-up periods based on current market demand. Management estimates costs to execute similar leases including leasing commissions, and other related costs.

The fair values of above-market and below-market in-place leases are recorded based on the present value (using an interest rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (ii) management’s estimate of fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, measured over a period equal to the remaining terms of the leases. The above-market and below-market lease values are capitalized as lease intangible assets or liabilities and amortized as an adjustment to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases.

The fair values of in-place leases include direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant, opportunity costs associated with lost rentals which are avoided by acquiring an in-place lease, and tenant relationships. Direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant include commissions, tenant improvements and other direct costs and are estimated based on management’s consideration of current market costs to execute a similar lease. These direct costs are amortized to expense over the remaining terms of the respective leases. The value of opportunity costs is calculated using the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases over a market absorption period for a similar lease. Customer relationships are valued based on expected renewal of a lease or the likelihood of obtaining a particular tenant for other locations. These lease intangibles are amortized to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases.

Variable Interest Entities

In January 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Interpretation No. 46 (FIN 46), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities,” which clarifies the application of Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB) No. 51, “Consolidated Financial Statements,” relating to consolidation of certain entities. FIN 46 requires the identification of the Partnership’s participation in variable interest entities (“VIEs”), which are defined as entities with a level of invested equity that is not sufficient to fund future activities to permit them to operate on a stand-alone basis, or whose equity holders lack certain characteristics of a controlling financial interest. For entities identified as VIEs, FIN 46 sets forth a model to evaluate potential consolidation based on an assessment of which party to the VIE, if any, bears a majority of the exposure to

Page F-10

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

its expected losses, or stands to gain from a majority of its expected returns. FIN 46 is effective for all new VIEs created or acquired after January 31, 2003. For VIEs created or acquired prior to February 1, 2003, the Partnership has adopted the provisions of FIN 46 commencing on June 15, 2003. FIN 46 also sets forth certain disclosures regarding interests in VIEs that are deemed significant, even if consolidation is not required. As the Joint Venture does not fall under the definition of VIEs provided above, the adoption of FIN 46 has not resulted in the consolidation of any previously unconsolidated entities.

The Partnership pays a percentage of limited partner contributions to Wells Capital for acquisition and advisory services and as a reimbursement for acquisition expenses. These payments, as stipulated by the partnership agreement, are equal to 3.5% of limited partner contributions, subject to certain overall limitations contained in the partnership agreement. Aggregate fees paid through December 31, 2003 were $535,740 and amounted to 3.5% of limited partners’ contributions received. These fees are allocated to specific properties as they are purchased or developed and are included in the capitalized assets of the Joint Venture. Deferred project costs at December 31, 2003 represent fees not yet allocated to specific properties.

As of December 31, 2003, Wells Capital incurred offering expenses on behalf of the Partnership in the aggregate amount of $1,103,372, of which the Partnership has reimbursed Wells Capital for $459,206, approximately 3% of aggregate gross offering proceeds. Offering costs, to the extent they exceed 3% of gross offering proceeds, will be paid by Wells Capital and not by the Partnership. Offering costs include such costs as legal and accounting fees, printing costs, and other offering expenses, but do not include sales or underwriting commissions.

Due from Joint Venture at December 31, 2003 represents the Partnership’s share of the cash to be distributed from the Joint Venture for the fourth quarter of 2003.

The Partnership entered into a property management, leasing and asset management agreement with Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners. In consideration for the management and leasing of the Partnership’s properties, the Joint Venture pays Wells Management property management, leasing and asset management fees equal to the lesser of (a) fees that would be paid to a comparable outside firm or (b) 4.5% of the gross revenues generally paid over the life of the lease plus a separate competitive fee for the one-time initial lease-up of newly constructed properties generally paid in conjunction with the receipt of the first month’s rent. In the case of commercial properties which are leased on a long-term net basis (ten or more years), the maximum property management fee from such leases shall be 1% of the gross revenues generally paid over the life of the leases except for a one-time initial leasing fee of 3% of the gross revenues on each lease payable over the first five full years of the original lease term. The Partnership’s share of management and leasing fees and lease acquisition costs incurred through the Joint Venture was $8,291 for the year ended December 31, 2003, which is payable to Wells Management.

Wells Capital performs certain administrative services for the Partnership, such as accounting and other partnership administration, and incurs the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among the various Wells Real Estate Funds based on estimates of the amount of time dedicated to each fund by individual administrative personnel. In the opinion of management, this allocation is a reasonable estimation of such expenses. During 2003, the Partnership reimbursed $10,476 to Wells Capital and its affiliates for such administrative services.

Page F-11

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND XIV, L.P.

                                                                       (A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)                                                                       

The General Partners are also general partners in other Wells Real Estate Funds. As such, there may exist conflicts of interest where the General Partners in the capacity as general partners for other Wells Real Estate Funds may be in competition with the Partnership for tenants in similar geographic markets.

Fund XIII-XIV Associates

On August 20, 2003, Fund XIII-XIV Associates was formed for the purpose of acquiring, developing, operating, and selling real properties. On October 30, 2003, Fund XIII-XIV Associates purchased two single-story office buildings comprised of 82,000 square feet, known as the Siemens – Orlando Building located in Orlando, Florida. On December 19, 2003, Fund XIII-XIV Associates purchased a 64,574-square-foot, four-story office building, known as the Randstad Atlanta Building located in Atlanta, Georgia.

The Partnership’s investment and percentage ownership in the Joint Venture at December 31, 2003 is summarized as follows:

The following is a roll-forward of the Partnership’s investment in the Joint Venture for the year ended December 31, 2003: