That works much better at 50+ unit properties.I have made the decision to invest exclusively in SF homes a long time ago, because it requires the lowest amount of management and provides the highest revenue per unit.

Land doesn’t depreciate, and while buildings require maintenance, they usually gain value as markets grow, demand increases, and inflation takes its toll.Real estate investors benefit from a significant tax write-off based on the concept that properties lose value over time, even as their market value skyrockets.

we see it done frequently and have done it but we will not go above 50-60% and require cross collateralization of 3-4x the amount being borrowerd.

I would ask what their commission percentage is, how much training they provide, if they require you to be in the office, and how much their agents make on average. 

Many times a commercial lender will require that you take title as an LLC or other business entity.

As mentioned, they often come with limited returns and still require management.I’m curious—when you say active investing doesn’t appeal to you, is it because of time constraints or concerns about risk?

I understand that BRRRR would provide more cash flow, but from what I've read this method also requires more time and investment.

(Inspectors are generalists, so specialists are essential for plumbing and electrical issues in older homes.)Structural Concerns: If potential structural damage is spotted, hire an engineer to assess it properly.Be Diligent and Proactive: Old homes often require extra due diligence.

However, my US investors are required by the IRS to report it.

Both methods require finding a property that makes sense for your risk tolerance, purchase ability, etc.