Keep in mind stocks are 100% designed for investors returns where as most if not all SFRs were 100% designed to be lived in, excluding the original developer investor.

The technical answer is that if you are obligated on a liability such as your brother's lease, you would need to show that he has paid the rent on time from his own funds for 12 months in order to exclude the debt from your liabilities.

So there is something called a Homestead exemption - that usually has to do with property taxes being lower for owner occupants than for landlords.Then there is the IRS Section 121 exclusion, which allows people to sell a house that they lived in for two out of past five years with 250K (500K if married and jointly owned) of capital gains being excluded from capital gains tax.Which of these is your post about, @Jeremy Clarke?

I just received a policy from Statefarm and it also excludes intentional damage but I cannot find a way to cover it. 

That whole process is a separate post, and includes filing the claim, coordinating with the adjustor and my mgmt, providing the adjustor receipts and documentation, catching that my claim reward accidentally excluded a material part of the plumbing repair, receiving two separate claim checks, depositing them without realizing they required endorsements by my mortgage servicer, having the checks rejected by my bank while incurring fees, having the insurance company re-issue the checks directly to my loan servicer, finally depositing the checks this past weekend…and while I write this I’m realizing I may have coverage for lost rental income to follow up on!

as I would lost coverage and according to him, the only coverage that would allow those dogs would exclude any liability associated with the animal putting me and my family in danger.Other reason is that according to the fair housing act, Applies to virtually all forms of housing, whether for sale or rent.

Excluding emergencies.Payments:When do they release checks?

If they really had an issue with this, I think they could easily exclude non persons (entities) from purchasing properties and the fact that in some circumstances, you could also negotiate the restriction out of the sale does tend to suggest this is not necessarily an absolute.The material question here is whether there is a severe public harm that results from this? 

And then I choose absentee owned excluding trusts and corporate owned properties.

This would exclude extremely large cities like LA, Chicago, NY, SF, PHI and smaller cities like Boise but include cities like Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, etc.