They can help you interpret the documents and identify any potential red flags.

I could see how you interpreted that from what I wrote, but what I was doing was listing how to properly operate for asset protection, not that guaranteeing a note or any contract will put a remote entity in jeopardy of becoming a “disregarded” entity.  

I don't believe this interpretation is correct.

Sometimes this medium makes it hard for people to interpret at their end what is meant at our end.  

@Alex P.Here's a few references to start that may help you to find the answer to your question: Treasury regulation §301.7701-(3)(b)(1)IRS Private Letter Rulings 9807013, 200732012 and 201216007If you need help finding these or interpreting them, as well as knowing how reliable they are for you to use for your own taxes, consult a tax professional. 

Additionally, I personally like the Northeast market, much less competition since people interpret the tenant friendly aspect as more challenging, but with that comes less competition.

As the the lines get blurred on who is interpreting the definition of these terms correctly, the desire from the owner to update a property that from the naked eye needs work should be absolutely heard.

I’m just trying to point out that you heard it and interpreted it as presenting a less than ethical message about bankruptcy and BP should be more cognizant of that.

Then of course look up the actual laws as shown above versus just going off others' interpretation.

@Atul Mohlajee  That's how I would interpret it too, it's in the lease and they would probably win in court.