Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Shadowfax
ParticipantNOT GIVING LEGAL ADVICE, but…..
Most of what people have posted on here is correct. If you own more than just your own home in real estate–especially an investment property–you’d do well to put it in an LLC. LLCs are like corporations but with less “maintenance” and single-member LLCs are pretty easy and simple to form. They are designed to give the liability protection of a corporation but the tax treatment of a partnership. Nolo is a great do it yourself source, but if you are getting into large investment amounts, you should heed the advice to use a lawyer.
If you are investing with others, a lawyer will be essential as there are very tricky provisions that will need to be carefully thought out for tax purposes. Typically you form an LLC, get the loan (typically with personal guarantees from the members). You can also deed property you already own into an LLC but you’ll probably need to get consent of the bank for any already outstanding loans.
LLCs require very little record keeping (unlike corporations), there is no “corporate veil” aspect, and the taxation is flow-through. Single member LLCs can elect to be “disregarded entities” and piggyback on the individual. Nor do you have to have any actual employees–so you don’t have to pay payroll unless you do actually hire people through the business. Be careful in this area as well as “independent contractors” who look, smell and sound like employees will be deemed so and then you will have to treat them as such.
CA will soak you for $800 a year and you will still want to get insurance, etc for the property.
The benefit of having an LLC own the property is that any claims are limited to the investment and profits of the LLC. If that amounts to $50K,then that is all the plaintiff gets. They can’t go after your personal assets. Some investors even put each investment property into its own, separate LLC so that the liabilities of one property cannot be levied against the other(s).Obviously there are lots of things to consider, so consult a lawyer if your situation warrants it.
Good luck!
ParticipantNOT GIVING LEGAL ADVICE, but…..
Most of what people have posted on here is correct. If you own more than just your own home in real estate–especially an investment property–you’d do well to put it in an LLC. LLCs are like corporations but with less “maintenance” and single-member LLCs are pretty easy and simple to form. They are designed to give the liability protection of a corporation but the tax treatment of a partnership. Nolo is a great do it yourself source, but if you are getting into large investment amounts, you should heed the advice to use a lawyer.
If you are investing with others, a lawyer will be essential as there are very tricky provisions that will need to be carefully thought out for tax purposes. Typically you form an LLC, get the loan (typically with personal guarantees from the members). You can also deed property you already own into an LLC but you’ll probably need to get consent of the bank for any already outstanding loans.
LLCs require very little record keeping (unlike corporations), there is no “corporate veil” aspect, and the taxation is flow-through. Single member LLCs can elect to be “disregarded entities” and piggyback on the individual. Nor do you have to have any actual employees–so you don’t have to pay payroll unless you do actually hire people through the business. Be careful in this area as well as “independent contractors” who look, smell and sound like employees will be deemed so and then you will have to treat them as such.
CA will soak you for $800 a year and you will still want to get insurance, etc for the property.
The benefit of having an LLC own the property is that any claims are limited to the investment and profits of the LLC. If that amounts to $50K,then that is all the plaintiff gets. They can’t go after your personal assets. Some investors even put each investment property into its own, separate LLC so that the liabilities of one property cannot be levied against the other(s).Obviously there are lots of things to consider, so consult a lawyer if your situation warrants it.
Good luck!
ParticipantNOT GIVING LEGAL ADVICE, but…..
Most of what people have posted on here is correct. If you own more than just your own home in real estate–especially an investment property–you’d do well to put it in an LLC. LLCs are like corporations but with less “maintenance” and single-member LLCs are pretty easy and simple to form. They are designed to give the liability protection of a corporation but the tax treatment of a partnership. Nolo is a great do it yourself source, but if you are getting into large investment amounts, you should heed the advice to use a lawyer.
If you are investing with others, a lawyer will be essential as there are very tricky provisions that will need to be carefully thought out for tax purposes. Typically you form an LLC, get the loan (typically with personal guarantees from the members). You can also deed property you already own into an LLC but you’ll probably need to get consent of the bank for any already outstanding loans.
LLCs require very little record keeping (unlike corporations), there is no “corporate veil” aspect, and the taxation is flow-through. Single member LLCs can elect to be “disregarded entities” and piggyback on the individual. Nor do you have to have any actual employees–so you don’t have to pay payroll unless you do actually hire people through the business. Be careful in this area as well as “independent contractors” who look, smell and sound like employees will be deemed so and then you will have to treat them as such.
CA will soak you for $800 a year and you will still want to get insurance, etc for the property.
The benefit of having an LLC own the property is that any claims are limited to the investment and profits of the LLC. If that amounts to $50K,then that is all the plaintiff gets. They can’t go after your personal assets. Some investors even put each investment property into its own, separate LLC so that the liabilities of one property cannot be levied against the other(s).Obviously there are lots of things to consider, so consult a lawyer if your situation warrants it.
Good luck!
Participant[quote=Casca]
Stanley Kurtz has reconstructed Bobama’s lost statehouse years from his local media archives. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp
Surprise, surprise, surprise, guess what he’s found.[/quote]Of course that’s what a “Neo-Conservative” paper would look for in examining Obama’s background. Here’s the Standard’s own assessment of its “objectiveness” in news reporting (from Wikipedia):
In an interview with senior Standard writer Matt Labash published by JournalismJobs.com in May 2003, Labash was asked why conservative media outlets had enjoyed recent popularity. Labash responded, somewhat jocularly:[1]
“ Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it’s true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it actually.”
Not much credibility there…
Participant[quote=Casca]
Stanley Kurtz has reconstructed Bobama’s lost statehouse years from his local media archives. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp
Surprise, surprise, surprise, guess what he’s found.[/quote]Of course that’s what a “Neo-Conservative” paper would look for in examining Obama’s background. Here’s the Standard’s own assessment of its “objectiveness” in news reporting (from Wikipedia):
In an interview with senior Standard writer Matt Labash published by JournalismJobs.com in May 2003, Labash was asked why conservative media outlets had enjoyed recent popularity. Labash responded, somewhat jocularly:[1]
“ Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it’s true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it actually.”
Not much credibility there…
Participant[quote=Casca]
Stanley Kurtz has reconstructed Bobama’s lost statehouse years from his local media archives. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp
Surprise, surprise, surprise, guess what he’s found.[/quote]Of course that’s what a “Neo-Conservative” paper would look for in examining Obama’s background. Here’s the Standard’s own assessment of its “objectiveness” in news reporting (from Wikipedia):
In an interview with senior Standard writer Matt Labash published by JournalismJobs.com in May 2003, Labash was asked why conservative media outlets had enjoyed recent popularity. Labash responded, somewhat jocularly:[1]
“ Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it’s true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it actually.”
Not much credibility there…
Participant[quote=Casca]
Stanley Kurtz has reconstructed Bobama’s lost statehouse years from his local media archives. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp
Surprise, surprise, surprise, guess what he’s found.[/quote]Of course that’s what a “Neo-Conservative” paper would look for in examining Obama’s background. Here’s the Standard’s own assessment of its “objectiveness” in news reporting (from Wikipedia):
In an interview with senior Standard writer Matt Labash published by JournalismJobs.com in May 2003, Labash was asked why conservative media outlets had enjoyed recent popularity. Labash responded, somewhat jocularly:[1]
“ Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it’s true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it actually.”
Not much credibility there…
Participant[quote=Casca]
Stanley Kurtz has reconstructed Bobama’s lost statehouse years from his local media archives. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp
Surprise, surprise, surprise, guess what he’s found.[/quote]Of course that’s what a “Neo-Conservative” paper would look for in examining Obama’s background. Here’s the Standard’s own assessment of its “objectiveness” in news reporting (from Wikipedia):
In an interview with senior Standard writer Matt Labash published by JournalismJobs.com in May 2003, Labash was asked why conservative media outlets had enjoyed recent popularity. Labash responded, somewhat jocularly:[1]
“ Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it’s true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it actually.”
Not much credibility there…
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor]The sheer poetic irony of your butt cancer aside, I do have a few questions based on your post.[/quote]
HA–that is too funny!
While I don’t subscribe to the censorship option, I do wish there was an ignore feature. I am checking out of the baiting by Costco. Too much inflammation–I guess they didn’t cut it all out of your ass.
I’d rather discuss things with people who can debate reasonably (even John is more appealing, and he’s a little on the wacko side) but at least he is civil about it! And good for a laugh! I am tired of watching Costco insult people and inflict his bitterness on the group. Buh-bye.
AFF/Rus: What is the implied discussion in Marquez et al. I’ve read translations of 100 Years of Solitude and Love…Cholera (and can read enough Spanish to glean the gist of the posts) but have never been to Latin America. What are your thoughts? “Spasibo!”
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor]The sheer poetic irony of your butt cancer aside, I do have a few questions based on your post.[/quote]
HA–that is too funny!
While I don’t subscribe to the censorship option, I do wish there was an ignore feature. I am checking out of the baiting by Costco. Too much inflammation–I guess they didn’t cut it all out of your ass.
I’d rather discuss things with people who can debate reasonably (even John is more appealing, and he’s a little on the wacko side) but at least he is civil about it! And good for a laugh! I am tired of watching Costco insult people and inflict his bitterness on the group. Buh-bye.
AFF/Rus: What is the implied discussion in Marquez et al. I’ve read translations of 100 Years of Solitude and Love…Cholera (and can read enough Spanish to glean the gist of the posts) but have never been to Latin America. What are your thoughts? “Spasibo!”
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor]The sheer poetic irony of your butt cancer aside, I do have a few questions based on your post.[/quote]
HA–that is too funny!
While I don’t subscribe to the censorship option, I do wish there was an ignore feature. I am checking out of the baiting by Costco. Too much inflammation–I guess they didn’t cut it all out of your ass.
I’d rather discuss things with people who can debate reasonably (even John is more appealing, and he’s a little on the wacko side) but at least he is civil about it! And good for a laugh! I am tired of watching Costco insult people and inflict his bitterness on the group. Buh-bye.
AFF/Rus: What is the implied discussion in Marquez et al. I’ve read translations of 100 Years of Solitude and Love…Cholera (and can read enough Spanish to glean the gist of the posts) but have never been to Latin America. What are your thoughts? “Spasibo!”
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor]The sheer poetic irony of your butt cancer aside, I do have a few questions based on your post.[/quote]
HA–that is too funny!
While I don’t subscribe to the censorship option, I do wish there was an ignore feature. I am checking out of the baiting by Costco. Too much inflammation–I guess they didn’t cut it all out of your ass.
I’d rather discuss things with people who can debate reasonably (even John is more appealing, and he’s a little on the wacko side) but at least he is civil about it! And good for a laugh! I am tired of watching Costco insult people and inflict his bitterness on the group. Buh-bye.
AFF/Rus: What is the implied discussion in Marquez et al. I’ve read translations of 100 Years of Solitude and Love…Cholera (and can read enough Spanish to glean the gist of the posts) but have never been to Latin America. What are your thoughts? “Spasibo!”
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor]The sheer poetic irony of your butt cancer aside, I do have a few questions based on your post.[/quote]
HA–that is too funny!
While I don’t subscribe to the censorship option, I do wish there was an ignore feature. I am checking out of the baiting by Costco. Too much inflammation–I guess they didn’t cut it all out of your ass.
I’d rather discuss things with people who can debate reasonably (even John is more appealing, and he’s a little on the wacko side) but at least he is civil about it! And good for a laugh! I am tired of watching Costco insult people and inflict his bitterness on the group. Buh-bye.
AFF/Rus: What is the implied discussion in Marquez et al. I’ve read translations of 100 Years of Solitude and Love…Cholera (and can read enough Spanish to glean the gist of the posts) but have never been to Latin America. What are your thoughts? “Spasibo!”
Participant[quote=Bugs]By the way, I still get a chuckle every time the term “poo-poo head” makes it’s way into a Pigg’s post. It’s an inside joke that our more recent members might not quite appreciate. [/quote]
Please enlighten us.
But be warned, my 4-year-old is very fond of this moniker. -
AuthorPosts
