31 March 2019 | 5 replies
I know there is a rule about no more than 5 unrelated people living in the house but I'm not sure how to interpret this.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fe89a/fe89a97755fd06e2fe062e21bba587cd43cba3b7" alt=""
23 April 2019 | 5 replies
I found it in this article which covers a LOT: https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2017/mar/navi...I am particularly interested in interpretation of "unless the taxpayer is directly involved in the day-to-day management of the business."
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/70eac/70eac8403f91d48488e27c5ab45568cca627a3b1" alt=""
27 September 2013 | 3 replies
During the course of their career, Loan Officers (and Processors) will become more skilled at knowing from experience what works what doesn't and some interpretations of guidelines.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d0941/d094167e131e60d0d95201944500a60a09ebc92e" alt=""
16 April 2015 | 22 replies
DM me if interested (no, I don't get referral fees from anybody I refer to, but I wouldn't mind a nice christmas present or a good bottle of scotch once in a while... hint hint to all my network guys) I think you're using a phrase that I interpret differently, but what do you mean by Umbrella policy?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6480f/6480fea4480a62768ab76d57ac9ae9c9935f7ffb" alt=""
5 April 2015 | 7 replies
We have a number of clients that will use this interpretation to fund improvements at the closing of the purchase.
1 March 2016 | 31 replies
I am not a lawyer, but I am pretty good at interpreting legal speak.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/381c0/381c0c92d796d71efe9c40c7cc183c97bb8e0c3f" alt=""
12 February 2019 | 48 replies
[/i]I would interpret this to mean that you do need a license.Source: http://www.idfpr.com/faq/dpr/realestatefaqs.pdf
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6e149/6e1490a5cc63d235f9c480b8fde744894fffbafb" alt=""
13 June 2013 | 24 replies
Here in Canada, the Currency Act describes legal tender:8. (1) Subject to this section, a tender of payment of money is a legal tender if it is made(a) in coins that are current under section 7; and(b) in notes issued by the Bank of Canada pursuant to the Bank of Canada Act intended for circulation in Canada.Marginal note:Limitation(2) A payment in coins referred to in subsection (1) is a legal tender for no more than the following amounts for the following denominations of coins:(a) forty dollars if the denomination is two dollars or greater but does not exceed ten dollars;(b) twenty-five dollars if the denomination is one dollar;(c) ten dollars if the denomination is ten cents or greater but less than one dollar;(d) five dollars if the denomination is five cents; and(e) twenty-five cents if the denomination is one cent.It would also appear that under the current interpretation of the Act, the method of payment (e.g. cash, debit or credit card) used in a transaction is a private agreement between the buyer and the seller.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1f656/1f656b08959145b9ee01f1d7d8b65f4b7223da1b" alt=""
19 December 2018 | 23 replies
{Note: It took me way too long to figure out how to input those characters on my keyboard - I had to fire-up my old APL interpreter}
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c46cd/c46cdc76a93a89b744e5a4bf67fb7055e1c7a274" alt=""
10 October 2016 | 15 replies
From an outside perspective, I interpret this situation a little differently.