10QSB

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

Form 10-QSB

(Mark One)

[X]

QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007

[ ]

TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT

For the transition period from __________ to __________

Commission file number 0-10884

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

(Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

   South Carolina

57-0721760

(State or other jurisdiction of

   (I.R.S. Employer

 incorporation or organization)

  Identification No.)

55 Beattie Place, P.O. Box 1089

Greenville, South Carolina  29602

(Address of principal executive offices)

(864) 239-1000

(Issuer's telephone number)

Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 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 ___

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of Exchange Act).   Yes      No _X_

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET

(Unaudited)

(in thousands, except unit data)

September 30, 2007

Assets
Cash and cash equivalents		$    161
Receivables and deposits		780
Other assets		1,223
Investment property:
Land	$  1,883
Buildings and related personal property	75,807
	77,690
Less accumulated depreciation	(38,900)	38,790
		$ 40,954
Liabilities and Partners' Capital (Deficiency)
Liabilities
Accounts payable		$  1,083
Tenant security deposit liabilities		235
Accrued property taxes		498
Other liabilities		443
Due to affiliates (Note B)		12,338
Mortgage note payable		40,000
Partners' Capital (Deficiency)
General partners	$     71
Limited partners (49,995 units issued and
outstanding)	(13,714)	(13,643)
		$ 40,954

See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(Unaudited)

(in thousands, except per unit data)

	Three Months Ended		Nine Months Ended
	September 30,		September 30,
	2007	2006	2007	2006
Revenues:
Rental income	$ 2,113	$ 1,686	$  5,677	$ 4,428
Other income	216	170	532	492
Total revenues	2,329	1,856	6,209	4,920
Expenses:
Operating	1,676	1,057	4,329	3,009
General and administrative	54	62	195	213
Depreciation	1,636	1,283	4,447	3,162
Interest	777	503	2,019	1,377
Property taxes	158	176	446	493
Total expenses	4,301	3,081	11,436	8,254
Loss from continuing operations	(1,972)	(1,225)	(5,227)	(3,334)
Loss from discontinued operations	--	(8)	--	(1,643)
Gain on sale of discontinued
operations	--	--	--	9,319
Net (loss) income	$(1,972)	$(1,233)	$ (5,227)	$ 4,342
Net (loss) income allocated to
general partners	$   (20)	$   (13)	$    (52)	$    43
Net (loss) income allocated to
limited partners	(1,952)	(1,220)	(5,175)	4,299
	$(1,972)	$(1,233)	$ (5,227)	$ 4,342
Net (loss) income per limited
partnership unit:
Loss from continuing operations	$(39.04)	$(24.25)	$(103.51)	$(66.02)
Loss from discontinued
operations	--	(0.15)	--	(32.53)
Gain on sale of discontinued
operations	--	--	--	184.54
	$(39.04)	$(24.40)	$(103.51)	$ 85.99

See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' CAPITAL (DEFICIENCY)

(Unaudited)

(in thousands, except unit data)

	Limited
	Partnership	General	Limited
	Units	Partners	Partners	Total
Original capital contributions	50,000	$    2	$ 50,000	$ 50,002
Partners' capital (deficiency)
at December 31, 2006	49,995	$  123	$  (8,539)	$ (8,416)
Net loss for the nine months
ended September 30, 2007	--	(52)	(5,175)	(5,227)
Partners' capital (deficiency)
at September 30, 2007	49,995	$    71	$(13,714)	$(13,643)

See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

(in thousands)

	Nine Months Ended
	September 30,
	2007	2006
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net (loss) income	$(5,227)	$ 4,342
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation	4,447	3,252
Bad debt expense	131	49
Loss on early extinguishment of debt	--	1,601
Amortization of loan costs	91	95
Gain on sale of discontinued operations	--	(9,319)
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits	(291)	(105)
Other assets	(392)	(173)
Accounts payable	112	(23)
Tenant security deposit liabilities	45	63
Accrued property taxes	498	565
Other liabilities	18	(58)
Due to affiliates	751	8
Net cash provided by operating activities	183	297
Cash flows from investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements	(8,566)	(11,928)
Net proceeds from sale of property	--	12,629
Net cash (used in) provided by investing
activities	(8,566)	701
Cash flows from financing activities:
Repayment of mortgage note payable	--	(7,634)
Payments on mortgage notes payable	--	(62)
Advances from affiliates	8,431	956
Net cash provided by (used in) financing
activities	8,431	(6,740)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	48	(5,742)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period	113	5,911
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$   161	$   169
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest, net of capitalized interest	$ 1,315	$ 1,452
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity:
Property improvements and replacements in accounts
payable	$   751	$   996

Included in property improvements and replacements for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006 are approximately $1,411,000 and $2,215,000, respectively, of property improvements and replacements, which were included in accounts payable at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Unaudited)

Note A - Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Shelter Properties IV (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-QSB and Item 310 (b) of Regulation S-B. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of Shelter Realty IV Corporation (the "Corporate General Partner"), all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2007 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial st atements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. The Corporate General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2006 reflects the operations of Quail Run Apartments as loss from discontinued operations due to its sale on March 31, 2006 (see Note C).  

Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2006 balances in order to conform to the 2007 presentation.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”. SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants in the market in which the reporting entity transacts. SFAS No. 157 applies whenever other standards require assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value and does not expand the use of fair value in any new circumstances. SFAS No. 157 establishes a hierarchy that prioritizes the information used in developing fair value estimates. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and the lowest priority to unobservable data, such as the reporting entity’s own data. SFAS No. 157 requires fair value measurements to be disclosed by level within the fair value hierarchy. SFAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Partnership does not anticipate that the adoption of SFAS No. 157 will have a material effect on the Partnership’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities”. SFAS No. 159 permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value. The objective is to improve financial reporting by providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between entities that choose different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Partnership has not yet determined whether it will elect the fair value option for any of its financ ial instruments.

In June 2007, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“the AICPA”) issued Statement of Position No. 07-1, “Clarification of the Scope of the Audit and Accounting Guide Investment Companies and Accounting by Parent Companies and Equity Method Investors for Investments in Investment Companies” ("SOP 07-1").  SOP 07-1 provides guidance for determining whether the accounting principles of the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide “Investment Companies” are required to be applied to an entity by clarifying the definition of an investment company and, whether investment company accounting should be retained by a parent company upon consolidation of an investment company subsidiary, or by an investor in the application of the equity method of accounting to an investment company investee.  SOP 07-1 applies to reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2007;  however, the FASB has d ecided to issue an exposure draft that would indefinitely delay the effective date of SOP 07-1 until the FASB can reassess the provisions of SOP 07-1. The Partnership is currently evaluating the impact, if any, that adoption of SOP 07-1 may have on its consolidated financial statements in the period of adoption.

Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties

The Partnership has no employees and depends on the Corporate General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides for certain payments to affiliates for services and reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.  

Affiliates of the Corporate General Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from the Partnership's properties as compensation for providing property management services. During the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, the Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $300,000 and $264,000, respectively, which are included in operating expenses and loss from discontinued operations.

An affiliate of the Corporate General Partner charged the Partnership for reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $396,000 and $168,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses, gain from sale of discontinued operations and investment property.  The portion of these reimbursements included in gain from sale of discontinued operations and investment property for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006 are construction management services provided by an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner of approximately $256,000 and $20,000, respectively. At September 30, 2007, the Partnership owed approximately $229,000 for accountable administrative expenses, which is included in due to affiliates on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, the Corporate General Partner is entitled to a commission of up to 1% for its assistance in the sale of its properties.  Payment of such commission is subordinate to the limited partners receiving a cumulative 7% return on their investment and their original capital contributions.  In connection with the sale of Countrywood Village during 2000, the Partnership accrued a fee of approximately $178,000.  During the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Corporate General Partner determined that the limited partners would not receive both their original capital contribution and applicable cumulative return with a future property sale, financing or refinancing. Therefore, the Corporate General Partner reversed the real estate commission previously accrued associated with the sale of Countrywood Village, which is included in gain from sale of discontinued operations for the nine months ended Septem ber 30, 2006.

Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner advanced the Partnership approximately $8,431,000 and $956,000, respectively, to fund redevelopment (see Note D) and operations at Baymeadows Apartments. Interest is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (9.75% at September 30, 2007) and interest expense was approximately $602,000 and $9,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.  At September 30, 2007 the total advances and accrued interest due to the Corporate General Partner was approximately $12,109,000 and is included in due to affiliates on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. Subsequent to September 30, 2007, an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner advanced approximately $477,000 to the Partnership to fund redevelopment and operating costs at Baymeadows Apartments.

The Partnership insures its property up to certain limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property casualty, general liability and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the Corporate General Partner.  During the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $371,000 and $305,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.

Note C – Sale of Discontinued Operations

On March 31, 2006, the Partnership sold Quail Run Apartments to a third party, for net proceeds of approximately $12,629,000 after a prepayment penalty owed by the Partnership and payment of closing costs.  The Partnership used approximately $7,634,000 of the net proceeds to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. The Partnership realized a gain of approximately $9,141,000 during the nine months ended September 30, 2006 as a result of the sale. In addition, during the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Partnership recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $1,601,000 as a result of unamortized loan costs written off and a prepayment penalty.  This amount is included in loss from discontinued operations. The property’s operations, loss of approximately $42,000 which includes revenues of approximately $635,000, is included in loss from discontinued operations for the nine months ended September 30, 200 6. During the three months ended September 30, 2006, additional operating costs related to Quail Run Apartments in excess of accruals established at March 31, 2006 were incurred.  These costs of approximately $8,000 are included in loss from discontinued operations for the three months ended September 30, 2006.

Note D – Redevelopment

Baymeadows Apartments is currently under redevelopment in order for the property to remain competitive in the Jacksonville area.  Based on current redevelopment plans, the Corporate General Partner anticipates the redevelopment to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2007 at a total estimated cost of approximately $33,292,000, of which approximately $32,306,000 was completed as of September 30, 2007. The Partnership completed approximately $6,733,000 and $10,286,000 in costs related to the redevelopment during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Included in these construction costs are capitalized interest costs of approximately $146,000 and $187,000, capitalized property tax expense of approximately $52,000 and $72,000, and other construction period operating costs of approximately $20,000 and $25,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The project is being funded from operations and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner.

An additional project, which would add 288 new apartment units at the property, is planned for the property at a total estimated cost of approximately $26,953,000, of which approximately $254,000 was expended during 2005. The project to add the 288 new units is currently on hold as the Corporate General Partner has been informed by the city of Jacksonville that it will not allow permits for new units in the area until litigation that is unrelated to the Partnership and Baymeadows Apartments is resolved. It is expected that the new construction will be funded by operating cash flow and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner.

Note E - Contingencies

In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Corporate General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Corporate General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. On January 28, 2002, the trial court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint.  Plaintiffs took an appeal from this order.

On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. On June 13, 2003, the court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an appeal (the “Appeal”) seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the court’s use of a referee and its order requiring Objector to pay those fees.

On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.  With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial court’s order and remanded to the trial court for further findings on the basis that the “state of the record is insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review”.  The matter was transferred back to the trial court on June 21, 2005.  With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. With respect to the related Heller appeal, on July 28, 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s order striking the first amended complaint.

On August 18, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a motion to disqualify the trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for cause on October 17, 2005, both of which were ultimately denied and/or struck by the trial court.  On or about October 13, 2005 Objector filed a motion to intervene and on or about October 19, 2005 filed both a motion to take discovery relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative representatives and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement.  On November 14, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Further Findings pursuant to the remand ordered by the Court of Appeals. Defendants joined in that motion.  On February 3, 2006, the Court held a hearing on the various matters pending before it and ordered additional briefing from the parties and Objector. On June 30, 2006, the trial court entered an order confirming its approval of the class act ion settlement and entering judgment thereto after the Court of Appeals had remanded the matter for further findings.  The substantive terms of the settlement agreement remain unchanged.  The trial court also entered supplemental orders on July 1, 2006, denying Objector’s Motion to File a Complaint in Intervention, Objector’s Motion for Leave of Discovery and Objector’s Motion to Dissolve the Anti-Suit Injunction.  Notice of Entry of Judgment was served on July 10, 2006. On August 31, 2006, the Objector filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court’s June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2006 orders. On December 14, 2006, Objector filed his Appellant’s Brief. The Partnership and its affiliates, as well as counsel for the Settlement Class, both filed Respondents’ Briefs on May 17, 2007.  Objector filed his response on August 3, 2007.  No hearing date has yet been scheduled.

The Corporate General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership’s overall operations.

The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation matters involving it or its investment property that are not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.

Environmental

Various Federal, state and local laws subject property owners or operators to liability for management, and the costs of removal or remediation, of certain hazardous substances present on a property. Such laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release or presence of the hazardous substances. The presence of, or the failure to manage or remedy properly, hazardous substances may adversely affect occupancy at affected apartment communities and the ability to sell or finance affected properties. In addition to the costs associated with investigation and remediation actions brought by government agencies and potential fines or penalties imposed by such agencies in connection therewith, the presence of hazardous substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs for personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities. Various laws also impose liability for the cost of removal, remediation or disposal of hazardous substances through a licensed disposal or treatment facility. Anyone who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances is potentially liable under such laws. These laws often impose liability whether or not the person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal facility. In connection with the ownership, operation and management of its property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property.  

Mold

The Partnership is aware of lawsuits against owners and managers of multifamily properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial monetary judgments or settlements.  The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property damage loss claims arising from the presence of mold and for personal injury claims related to mold exposure.  Affiliates of the Corporate General Partner have implemented policies, procedures, third-party audits and training and the Corporate General Partner believes that these measures will prevent or eliminate mold exposure and will minimize the effects that mold may have on residents.  To date, the Partnership has not incurred any material costs or liabilities relating to claims of mold exposure or to abate mold conditions.  Because the law regarding mold is unsettled and subject to change the Corporate Gene ral Partner can make no assurance that liabilities resulting from the presence of or exposure to mold will not have a material adverse effect on the Partnership’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

ITEM 2.

MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION

The matters discussed in this report contain certain forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance and the effect of government regulations. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a variety of risks and factors including, without limitation: national and local economic conditions; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Registrant and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the Registrant operates; financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest; real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and the general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such markets; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting and defending cla ims and any adverse outcomes, and possible environmental liabilities. Readers should carefully review the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Partnership's investment property consists of one apartment complex. The following table sets forth the average occupancy of the property for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006:

	Average
	Occupancy
Property	2007	2006
Baymeadows Apartments (1)
Jacksonville, Florida	80%	67%

(1)

The increase in occupancy is due to the current redevelopment of the property being substantially complete, resulting in more units available for rent. At September 30, 2007 all of the units were available for rent.

The Partnership’s financial results depend upon a number of factors including the ability to attract and maintain tenants at the investment property, interest rates on mortgage loans, costs incurred to operate the investment property, general economic conditions and weather. As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the Corporate General Partner monitors the rental market environment of its investment property to assess the feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of this plan, the Corporate General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from the burden of inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and maintaining a high overall occupancy level. However, the Corporate General Partner may use rental concessions and rental rate reductions to offset softening market conditions; accordingly, there is no guarant ee that the Corporate General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. Further, a number of factors that are outside the control of the Partnership such as the local economic climate and weather can adversely or positively affect the Partnership’s financial results.

Results of Operations

The Partnership’s net loss for the three months ended September 30, 2007 was approximately $1,972,000, compared to net loss of approximately $1,233,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2006. The Partnership’s net loss for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was approximately $5,227,000, compared to net income of approximately $4,342,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2006.

On March 31, 2006, the Partnership sold Quail Run Apartments to a third party, for net proceeds of approximately $12,629,000 after a prepayment penalty owed by the Partnership and payment of closing costs.  The Partnership used approximately $7,634,000 of the net proceeds to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. The Partnership realized a gain of approximately $9,141,000 during the nine months ended September 30, 2006 as a result of the sale. In addition, during the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Partnership recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $1,601,000 as a result of unamortized loan costs written off and a prepayment penalty.  This amount is included in loss from discontinued operations. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” the accompanying consolidated statemen t of operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 reflects the operations of Quail Run Apartments as loss from discontinued operations due to its sale on March 31, 2006. The property’s operations, loss of approximately $42,000 which includes revenues of approximately $635,000, is included in loss from discontinued operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2006. During the three months ended September 30, 2006, additional operating costs related to Quail Run Apartments in excess of accruals established at March 31, 2006 were incurred.  These costs of approximately $8,000 are included in loss from discontinued operations for the three months ended September 30, 2006.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Corporate General Partner determined that the limited partners would not receive both their original capital contribution and applicable cumulative return with a future property sale, financing or refinancing.  Therefore, the Corporate General Partner reversed the real estate commission of approximately $178,000 previously accrued associated with the sale of Countrywood Village in 2000, which is included in gain from sale of discontinued operations.

Excluding the discontinued operations and the gain on sale of discontinued operations, the Partnership realized losses from continuing operations of approximately $1,972,000 and $5,227,000 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 compared to losses of approximately $1,225,000 and $3,334,000 for the corresponding periods in 2006.  The increase in loss from continuing operations for both the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 is due to an increase in total expenses, partially offset by an increase in total revenues. Total expenses increased for both periods due to increases in operating, depreciation, and interest expenses, partially offset by decreases in property tax and general and administrative expenses. Operating expense increased due to increases in property, administrative, insurance, property management fees, and maintenance expenses. Property expense increased due to increases in salaries and related benefits and commissions and incentives at Baymeadows Apartments. Administrative expense increased due to an increase in contract common area cleaning at Baymeadows Apartments, personnel costs and costs associated with screening new tenants.  Insurance expense increased due to an increase in hazard insurance premiums at Baymeadows Apartments.  Property management fees increased at Baymeadows Apartments as a result of an increase in rental income on which such fee is based. Maintenance expense increased due to an increase in contract services at Baymeadows Apartments. Depreciation expense increased due to property improvements and replacements placed into service during the past twelve months which are now being depreciated.  Interest expense increased due to an increase in interest on advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner and a reduction in capitalized interest associated with the redevelopment at Baymeadows Apartments.  Property tax expense decreased due to a decrease in the tax rate at Baymeadows Apartments.

General and administrative expenses decreased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 primarily due to a decrease in the cost of services included in the management reimbursements charged by the Corporate General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement. Also included in general and administrative expenses are costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement.

Total revenues increased for both periods due to an increase in both rental income and other income.  Rental income increased due to increases in occupancy and the average rental rate at Baymeadows Apartments.  Other income increased due to an increase in cleaning and damage fees and tenant utility reimbursements partially offset by a decrease in interest income due to lower cash balances maintained in interest bearing accounts.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At September 30, 2007, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $161,000, compared to approximately $169,000 at September 30, 2006. Cash and cash equivalents increased approximately $48,000 from December 31, 2006, due to approximately $8,431,000 and $183,000 of cash provided by financing and operating activities, respectively, partially offset by approximately $8,566,000 of cash used in investing activities. Cash provided by financing activities consisted of advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements. The Partnership invests its working capital reserves in interest bearing accounts.

Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner advanced the Partnership approximately $8,431,000 and $956,000, respectively, to fund redevelopment and operations at Baymeadows Apartments. Interest is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (9.75% at September 30, 2007) and interest expense was approximately $602,000 and $9,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.  At September 30, 2007 the total advances and accrued interest due to the Corporate General Partner was approximately $12,109,000 and is included in due to affiliates. Subsequent to September 30, 2007, an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner advanced approximately $477,000 to the Partnership to fund redevelopment and operating costs at Baymeadows Apartments.

The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital expenditures required at the investment property to adequately maintain the physical assets and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal, state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. The Corporate General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance.  For example, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests additional compliance measures with regard to governance, disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these changes, the Partnership expects that it will incur higher expenses related to compliance.  The Partnership currently expects to budget approximately $986,000 during the fourth quarter of 2007 related to the redevelopment project at Baymeadows Apartments.  While the Partnership has no other material comm itments for property improvements and replacements, certain routine capital expenditures are anticipated during 2007.  Such capital expenditures will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as anticipated cash flow generated by the property and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner.  Capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations or advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner.  To the extent that capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.

Baymeadows Apartments: During the nine months ended September 30, 2007, the Partnership completed approximately $6,733,000 of capital improvements at Baymeadows Apartments arising from the redevelopment of the property, which includes capitalization of construction period interest costs of approximately $146,000, capitalized property tax expense of approximately $52,000 and other construction period operating costs of approximately $20,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2007. Additional capital improvements of approximately $1,173,000 were also completed which consisted primarily of major landscaping, furniture, water heater, and air conditioning upgrades, and building improvements. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner. The Partnership regularly evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property.  The property is currently undergoing a redev elopment project in order to become more competitive with other properties in the area in an effort to increase occupancy at the property. Based on current redevelopment plans, the Corporate General Partner anticipates the redevelopment to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2007 at a total estimated cost of approximately $33,292,000 of which approximately $32,306,000 was completed as of September 30, 2007.  The project is being funded by Partnership reserves and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner. An additional project, which would add 288 new apartment units at the property, is planned for the property at a total estimated cost of approximately $26,953,000, of which approximately $254,000 was completed during 2005. The project to add 288 new units is currently on hold as the Corporate General Partner has been informed by the city of Jacksonville that it will not allow permits for new units in the area until litigation that is unrelated to the Partnership and Baymeadows Apart ments is resolved. The balance of the costs associated with the redevelopment are expected to be funded from operating cash flow and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner. In addition to the redevelopment project and the new construction, certain routine capital expenditures are anticipated during 2007. Such capital expenditures will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as anticipated cash flow generated by the property.

The Partnership’s assets are thought to be generally sufficient for any near-term needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage indebtedness of approximately $40,000,000 encumbering Baymeadows Apartments requires monthly payments of interest only until September 2007. From October 2007 until its maturity of September 2012, the mortgage requires monthly payments of principal and interest. At maturity, a balloon payment of approximately $33,756,000 is due. The Corporate General Partner will attempt to refinance such indebtedness and/or sell the property prior to such maturity date. If the property cannot be refinanced and/or sold for a sufficient amount the Partnership will risk losing the property to foreclosure.

The Partnership made no distributions during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of cash generated from operations and the timing of the debt maturity, property sale, and/or refinancing. The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. Given the substantial redevelopment project ongoing at Baymeadows Apartments and the amounts owed to affiliates, it is not expected that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after required capital expenditures, to permit any distributions to its partners in 2007 or subsequent periods.

The Partnership Agreement provides for partners to receive distributions from the net proceeds of the sales of properties, the net proceeds from refinancings and net cash from operations as those terms are defined in the Partnership Agreement. The Partnership Agreement requires that the limited partners be furnished with a statement of Net Cash from Operations as such term is defined in the Partnership Agreement. Net Cash from Operations should not be considered an alternative to net (loss)income as an indicator of the Partnership's operating performance or to cash flows as a measure of liquidity. Below is a reconciliation of net cashused inoperating activities as disclosed in the consolidated statements of cash flows included in “Item 1. Financial Statements” to Net Cash from Operations as defined in the Partnership Agreement.

	For the Nine months ended
	September 30,
	2007	2006
	(in thousands)
Net cash provided by operating activities	$   183	$    297
Payments on mortgage note payable	--	(62)
Property improvements and replacements	(8,566)	(11,928)
Changes in reserves for net operating
liabilities	(872)	(326)
Net cash used in operations	$(9,255)	$(12,019)

Other

In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 36,645 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 73.30% of the outstanding Units at September 30, 2007. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates. It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will acquire additional Units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P., the operating partnership of AIMCO, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Corporate General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 73.30% of the outstanding Un its, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all such voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Corporate General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Corporate General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Corporate General Partner, as corporate general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Corporate General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, which require the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions. The Partnership believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity.

Impairment of Long-Lived Asset

Investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation, unless the carrying amount of the asset is not recoverable.  If events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the property may not be recoverable, the Partnership will make an assessment of its recoverability by comparing the carrying amount to the Partnership’s estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows, excluding interest charges, of the property.   If the carrying amount exceeds the aggregate undiscounted future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the estimated fair value of the property.

Real property investment is subject to varying degrees of risk.  Several factors may adversely affect the economic performance and value of the Partnership’s investment property.  These factors include, but are not limited to, general economic climate; competition from other apartment communities and other housing options; local conditions, such as loss of jobs or an increase in the supply of apartments that might adversely affect apartment occupancy or rental rates; changes in governmental regulations and the related cost of compliance; increases in operating costs (including real estate taxes) due to inflation and other factors, which may not be offset by increased rents; and changes in tax laws and housing laws, including the enactment of rent control laws or other laws regulating multi-family housing.  Any adverse changes in these factors could cause impairment of the Partnership’s asset.

Capitalized Costs Related to Redevelopment and Construction Projects

The Partnership capitalizes costs incurred in connection with capital expenditure activities, including redevelopment and construction projects. Costs including interest, property taxes and operating costs associated with redevelopment and construction projects are capitalized during periods in which redevelopment and construction projects are in progress in accordance with SFAS No. 34, “Capitalization of Interest Costs” and SFAS No. 67, “Accounting for Costs and the Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Properties”. Included in these capitalized costs are payroll costs associated with time spent by site employees in connection with the planning, execution and control of all capital expenditure activities at the property level.  

Revenue Recognition

The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.  The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Rental income attributable to leases, net of any concessions, is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease.  The Partnership evaluates all accounts receivable from residents and establishes an allowance, after the application of security deposits, for accounts greater than 30 days past due on current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants.

ITEM 3.

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

(a)

Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Partnership’s management, with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Corporate General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Corporate General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Partnership’s disclosure con trols and procedures are effective.

(b)

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There have not been any changes in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Corporate General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Corporate General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. On January 28, 2002, the trial court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint.  Plaintiffs took an appeal from this order.

On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. On June 13, 2003, the court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an appeal (the “Appeal”) seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the court’s use of a referee and its order requiring Objector to pay those fees.

On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.  With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial court’s order and remanded to the trial court for further findings on the basis that the “state of the record is insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review”.  The matter was transferred back to the trial court on June 21, 2005.  With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. With respect to the related Heller appeal, on July 28, 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s order striking the first amended complaint.

On August 18, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a motion to disqualify the trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for cause on October 17, 2005, both of which were ultimately denied and/or struck by the trial court.  On or about October 13, 2005 Objector filed a motion to intervene and on or about October 19, 2005 filed both a motion to take discovery relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative representatives and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement.  On November 14, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Further Findings pursuant to the remand ordered by the Court of Appeals. Defendants joined in that motion.  On February 3, 2006, the Court held a hearing on the various matters pending before it and ordered additional briefing from the parties and Objector. On June 30, 2006, the trial court entered an order confirming its approval of the class act ion settlement and entering judgment thereto after the Court of Appeals had remanded the matter for further findings.  The substantive terms of the settlement agreement remain unchanged.  The trial court also entered supplemental orders on July 1, 2006, denying Objector’s Motion to File a Complaint in Intervention, Objector’s Motion for Leave of Discovery and Objector’s Motion to Dissolve the Anti-Suit Injunction.  Notice of Entry of Judgment was served on July 10, 2006. On August 31, 2006, the Objector filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court’s June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2006 orders. On December 14, 2006, Objector filed his Appellant’s Brief. The Partnership and its affiliates, as well as counsel for the Settlement Class, both filed Respondents’ Briefs on May 17, 2007.  Objector filed his response on August 3, 2007.  No hearing date has yet been scheduled.

The Corporate General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership’s overall operations.

ITEM 5.

OTHER INFORMATION

None.

ITEM 6.

EXHIBITS

See Exhibit Index.

SIGNATURES

In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

	SHELTER PROPERTIES IV
	By:   Shelter Realty IV Corporation
	Corporate General Partner
Date: November 13, 2007	By:   /s/Martha L. Long
	Martha L. Long
	Senior Vice President
Date: November 13, 2007	By:   /s/Stephen B. Waters
	Stephen B. Waters
	Vice President

SHELTER PROPERTIES IV

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit

Description of Exhibit

 3

See Exhibit 4(a)

 4

(a)

Amended and Restated Certificate and Agreement of Limited Partnership (included as Exhibit A to the Prospectus of Registrant dated June 8, 1982 contained in Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 2-77217, of Registrant filed June 8, 1982 (the "Prospectus") and incorporated herein by reference).

(b)

Subscription Agreement and Signature Page (included as Exhibit 8 to the Prospectus and incorporated herein by reference).

10(i)

Contracts related to acquisition of property:

(a)

Real Estate Sales Agreement dated May 5, 1982, First Modification to Real Estate Agreement dated June 18, 1982 (filed as Exhibit 12(b) to Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 2-77217 of Registrant filed June 8, 1982 and incorporated herein by reference) and Second Modification to Real Estate Sales Agreement dated September 30, 1982 between Baymeadows Associates and U.S. Shelter Corporation to purchase Baymeadows Apartments (filed as Exhibit 10(a) to Form 10-K of Registrant dated January 26, 1983 and incorporated herein by reference).

10(iii)

Contracts related to refinancing of debt:

(n)

Additional Mortgage Note, dated August 22, 2005 between Shelter Properties IV, L.P., a South Carolina limited partnership and Allstate Life Insurance Company, an Illinois corporation for Baymeadows Apartments (Filed as Exhibit 10(n) to Current Report on Form 8-K of Registrant dated August 22, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).

(o)

Modification, Restatement and Consolidation of Notes dated August 22, 2005 between Shelter Properties IV, L.P. and Allstate Life Insurance Company (Filed as Exhibit 10(o) to Current Report on Form 8-K of Registrant dated August 22, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).

(p)

Second Consolidated, Amended and Restated Multifamily Mortgage, Assignment of Rents and Security Agreement, dated August 22, 2005, between Shelter Properties IV, L.P. and Allstate Life Insurance Company (Filed as Exhibit 10(p) to Current Report on Form 8-K of Registrant dated August 22, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).

(q)

Nonrecourse Exception Indemnity Agreement dated August 22, 2005 by AIMCO Properties, L.P., for the benefit of Allstate Life Insurance Company (Filed as Exhibit 10(q) to Current Report on Form 8-K of Registrant dated August 22, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference).

10(iv)(a)

Purchase and Sale Contract between Quail Run IV Limited Partnership, a South Carolina limited partnership, and the affiliated Selling Partnerships and The Bethany Group, LLC, a California limited liability company, dated November 2, 2005, incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 2, 2005 and filed November 8, 2005.

     (b)

Second Amendment to Purchase and Sale Contract between Quail Run IV Limited Partnership, a South Carolina limited partnership, and the affiliated Selling Partnerships and The Bethany Group, LLC, a California limited liability company, dated February 9, 2006, incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 9, 2006 and filed February 15, 2006.  

31.1

Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2

Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1

Certification of the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

EX-31

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Martha L. Long, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Shelter Properties IV;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  November 13, 2007

/s/Martha L. Long

Martha L. Long

Senior Vice President of Shelter Realty IV Corporation, equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership

EX-31

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Stephen B. Waters, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Shelter Properties IV;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  November 13, 2007

/s/Stephen B. Waters

Stephen B. Waters

Vice President of Shelter Realty IV Corporation, equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership

EX-32

Exhibit 32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Shelter Properties IV (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

      /s/Martha L. Long

Name: Martha L. Long

Date: November 13, 2007

      /s/Stephen B. Waters

Name: Stephen B. Waters

Date: November 13, 2007

This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.