All Forum Posts by: Dan Kennerson

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:

Quote from @Dan Kennerson:

And that is everyone's right. But then you must be prepared and willing to pay increased rents....that's the whole point.

And continue to fight poorly thought out legislation. 

I'm in a good position, rising rents doesn't affect me, at least at present. But I feel for the people around me when a studio in my tiny little town outside of Sac is $1100-1200/mo. 

Quote from @Alexa K.:

 The free market, in my opinion and experience, is not always the best arbiter. In my particular area, rent for a 3 bedroom SFH in a C or B- neighborhood has gone from ~$550/mo to ~950/mo in the span of a bit over a year. .....

in my area, is the influx of investors -- particularly out of state investors -- who are ....

c) I'm in favor of capped rent increases under certain criteria, and also making federally-backed mortgages unavailable for investment purposes. ... I also do like the idea of giving homeowners first choice over investors when it comes to purchasing opportunities on the market

 To point 1- the free market would say allowing the building of more housing will allow competition in rent prices, buying prices, and all other important metrics to stagnating real estate investment in comparison to individual home ownership. but they create so much BS around building (specifically referring to CA, where I'm located) that they have manufactured the crisis these actions would be designed to counter. Judging the free market on what we are witnessing presently is akin, in my opinion, to judging a fish on it's ability to climb a tree. 

It's true there's abundant real estate across the US, and to your second point, Geographic arbitrage is a very real thing for both the investor and individual. that wouldn't be such a driving force in Austin, Denver, etc if it weren't for the heavy-handedness of San Francisco, Los angeles, Etc. IMO. 

to your third point, I would suggest that's discriminatory. a buyer is a buyer in the free market, and the government creating issues for those that wish to benefit the buyers (builders) should not be the burden of the investor. Regulation only helps stagnate the small businesses of the world, blackrock can still push through whatever they want, and what they want is stagnation in inventory because it benefits them. 

If my previous comment came off as harsh, no offense was intended, but just a fun jab. downsides of written mediums, you can't hear me chuckle when I'm typing. 

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:

The answer there is to vote with our feet...move to areas with positive, pro-people zoning and let the cities with anti people zoning commissions go to rot...

 some of us are unwilling to cede the beautiful places we grew up in to the hordes. 

Quote from @Alexa K.:

Especially after having seen how rents have skyrocketed over the last year or so in areas where there's no real rhyme or reason for it...

Yeah, what is inflation anyway. How much is that new AC unit again?

Also have to say this is my new favorite thread. Very interesting to see the mix of those balancing professionality with political topics and those that have stopped caring. 

All of these folks sound great but I'd really just love to hear Pace Morby talk for another 10 hours. 

Edit: Jocko would be fantastic too.

I would suggest hitting up a local RE meetup. Dallas should be plenty big enough to have a few. Mingle a little, talk to people, get a feel for the terrain. 

I would also suggest at least getting your husband on board with you doing some RE investing. Nothing starts arguments like money. 

Quote from @Dmitriy Fomichenko:

@Dan Kennerson,

You can use Roth IRA LLC to make real estate investments, you will have full control. Qualified distributions will be tax free.

You are not allowed to use your IRA to invest in your own company, it would be considered a "prohibited transaction". 

 From your article:

"...but you can bypass the custodian by creating special purpose, single-member LLC which is owned by your IRA and managed by you. IRA invests into this LLC by purchasing 100% of the LLC units..."

This is precisely what I was thinking- My IRA owns the company, the company makes investments.

Is this article still accurate? If so, is the LLC limited in not dealing with me as a prohibited person?

Apologies @Joshua D., I've completely hijacked your thread. 

Is this only a real estate thing? I know the Roth IRA is used to invest in companies that are started by the owner of the IRA, or at least they were. It's Peter Theil's playbook after all.

Interesting point on the financing, I'll have to give that some extra thought as well, although I think the tax advantages will likely outweigh the downsides. 

As far as the depreciation, basis, etc, My thinking is that the LLC will receive those and pass them through to the IRA, which as an entity should not be subject to capital gains or income tax, if my understanding is correct. 

I am more convinced than ever that I need to consult a tax attorney. 

Thanks for the article, I'll check it out.