Interesting enough the safe harbor actually agrees to bypass any interpretation of your intent. 

I don't like this term, it's too vague, there is too much room for interpretation and many tenants take advantage of that fact.

That's the general idea behind the chart.The following is my own opinion to help describe the charts, but that's all it is - my own interpretation. 

For example the stock market is all about financials and the hard numbers and while the numbers matter in RE as well, i believe there is a lot more up for interpretation and isn't so much a concrete quantitative detail.I hope that makes sense, haha. 

No one can answer how each judge would interpret other forms of written communication so best to stick with what the law says verbatim. 

I interpret it as to mean the ERAP does apply to those who vacated the property. 

In my interpretation, equipping the place before the stay, including coffee and towels, is safe.

@Christopher Smith it is well known by through litigation that Cohan is not an end all be all. 274 elimated the initial interpretation of Cohan

I tell people like it is and then they can interpret the data anyway they want and make a decision.I like NNN value add because a shorter time to improve the value.

There are some statements that read as nasty that could be open to more than one interpretation.