It seems like the majority of the time post removal is merely open to the interpretation of the individual moderator (with regards to the self-promotion rule) vs any well-defined guideline or rule of thumb.Thanks

This can be interpreted as you having the good faith ability to purchase the property and close on the transaction. 

But the rules in this case leave room for interpretation.

I think this is where most people miss interpreting the law. 

I guess a lot depends on the legal definition of "indirectly benefiting" and not the IRS interpretation.

Two travel days, two rental days (one each house) and two leisure days.Over half the trip would be four days, meaning I count two travel days and two rental days (even though they are two different properties).I think your interpretation is that this trip is deductable, and I split expenses evenly, except when working on a specific property.

The California Franchise Tax Board takes abroad interpretation of what constitutes “doingbusiness” in California.

With that being said, I believe the general interpretation here is that if you have intent to rent for less than that time period (ie rental booking showing only staying for a month), then that would be in violation of that code.On top of that, if you're looking for tenants that are wanting to stay in the area for a month at a time, I don't think AirBnB is the best place to target those types of tenants anyways, it's much more catered to the nightly and weekly rental crowd.

This is not the correct interpretation of David's situation.

The truth is these books are almost out of date when published and almost impossible to understand by anyone other than an attorney and even those not trained in regulatory law as opposed to contract law would have difficulties correctly interpreting it.