![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/679596/small_1694658647-avatar-waynelittrell.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
7 February 2017 | 5 replies
Issuance of stock in proportion to my financial interest in the total assets of the company?
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/231105/small_1640487111-avatar-matt3173.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
28 October 2015 | 8 replies
That means they recognize gain in proportion to the principal paid.Look at it this way if I sell you a building for 400k that I have a 100k basis in And you put 100k down in 2014 and your first payment is in 2015.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/537728/small_1621492064-avatar-christdfw.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
17 August 2016 | 7 replies
The worry is if ANYTHING was done out of proportion you have a prohibited transaction.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/348901/small_1621445879-avatar-kodirath92.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
30 November 2015 | 6 replies
Or, do they see themselves as having proportional (two thirds) equity if you ever sell?
27 March 2018 | 15 replies
-splitting the profits - It is not 50/50 but instead in direct proportion the the amount of money put in to the deal by each party.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/77500/small_1621415278-avatar-dinobuddy.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
21 June 2018 | 6 replies
DEFINITION: Under joint and several liabilityor all sums, a claimant may pursue an obligation against any one party as if they were jointly liable and it becomes the responsibility of the defendants to sort out their respective proportions of liability and payment.Meaning the landlord can go after both people or just one person.. but either way each person is responsible for the other's actions.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/706298/small_1621495795-avatar-seanr70.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
16 July 2018 | 21 replies
@Michael PlaksI understand that the amount of gain eligible for the §121 capital gain exclusion is reduced in proportion to the total period of non-qualified use divided by the total period of ownership.The point I am trying to make is that the total ownership period begins on the actual purchase date and ends on the day before the settlement date of the sale.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/579333/small_1621493034-avatar-pauls143.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
6 March 2021 | 8 replies
If you are looking for a compact stacked center, LG just came out with a new unit that looks good. 4.5cf washer.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/55479/small_1621412229-avatar-amenegay.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
12 November 2011 | 10 replies
The due on sale is blown out of proportion to it's application.
![](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/275345/small_1621440739-avatar-paymana1.jpg?twic=v1/output=image&v=2)
6 June 2016 | 3 replies
(are the deferred and payable portions directly proportional to the values of the relinquished and replacement properties?)