Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 54%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$69 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

Account Closed has started 13 posts and replied 44 times.

Post: TO ALL CALIFORNIA EXISTING AND PROSPECTIVE PROPERTY OWNERS!

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
I feel like I've seen a few other forum posts on the same subject. It may be beneficial to tag some California cities/areas, and set off keyword alerts: San Diego Orange County Los Angeles Riverside Bakersfield Fresno Bay Area Oakland San Francisco San Jose Stockton Sacramento If I broke a forum rule by spamming these cities/areas, I apologize in advance. Just trying to help spread the word. If not, maybe tag some smaller cities as well. -Taylor

Post: GOP Tax Plan - IRS Section 121 update?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Just a general update, but I read a report that the final bill made no changes to IRS Section 121! Therefore, you can still be excluded from capital gains tax (up to 250K for individuals/500K for married couples) if you've lived in your primary residence for 2 years (consecutively) of the last 5 years! It was not changed to 5 of 8 years. The live n' flip isn't dead! I was very happy to read this today and just wanted to share! Cheers everyone, Taylor

Post: California RE License for direct mail marketing/cold calling?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Karen Margrave thanks for the feedback and suggestion! Presenting yourself as a "buyer" is a great idea. I'm sure that's received far better on an initial cold call. Obviously disclosing that you're an agent is a must, but definitely not the way I'd want to start a conversation on a cold call. Thanks again for the input, -Taylor

Post: California RE License for direct mail marketing/cold calling?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Etienne Martel see comment above! I'm not sure why, but my tags don't always stick while using the mobile app. -Taylor

Post: California RE License for direct mail marketing/cold calling?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Etienne Martel Thanks for all the input! You make some valid points about the benefits of having a license. I would definitely like to connect and speak further! I'll be in touch. Thanks, -Taylor

Post: California RE License for direct mail marketing/cold calling?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Etienne Martel Thanks for the reply! I guess I didn't really consider the comfort an owner may receive from dealing with an agent. However, I feel like some owners aren't pro agent either. Sounds like there's some give or take. Which, is I was taking a look at your bio. Are you doing any direct mail marketing, or cold calling in California? If so, how's the response rate?

Post: California RE License for direct mail marketing/cold calling?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
For those of you doing direct mail marketing, or cold calling from lists in California - Do you have a CA Real Estate License? If so, why? And do you find it beneficial? If not, please give me some input as to why it isn't necessary. Thanks in advance! Taylor

Post: GOP Tax Plan - IRS Section 121 update?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Jay Hinrichs in your post above, you mentioned turning your primary residence into a rental and later 1031 exchanging it to defer the capital gains hit. For someone like me, starting out with their first property (live and flip), would you recommend doing the same since the Section 121 exemption will likely be changed? Round numbers... 360K ARV - 255 purchase price = 105K -22K (realtor fees @6%) = 83K - 15K (rehab) = 68K profit Pay Uncle Sam and move on, or rent the property for a short time and then 1031 it? Essentially all my cash will be in this deal. Also, in your opinion, is it beneficial for an investor who is just staring out to have a RE License? I know this is the age old debate, but would love to hear your take. I'll be staying investing in California, and do not intend to look elsewhere at this time. Thanks in advance, Taylor

Post: GOP Tax Plan - IRS Section 121 update?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
Matt R. It's a major bummer for the live in flip game indeed! I'm completing a live in flip that hits 2 years in April.... very unfortunate. I'm still going to net a solid profit, but it looks like it's time to change my current strategy.

Post: GOP Tax Plan - IRS Section 121 update?

Account ClosedPosted
  • United States
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 28
@Russell Brazil thank you! Are you aware of when the House will be voting on the bill? I know the Senate passed it over the weekend.