Same thing with 3, laws for every possible jurisdiction you would encounter are pretty accessible online, that doesn't mean I wouldn't hire an attorney, just because information is free, doesn't mean that everyone can interpret that information effectively.   2 & 4 are just spite haha. 

Hopefully someone following this thread is a lawyer that can be more educated in his interpretation of this, but it looks like the bankruptcy trustee may try to re-claw bank the rent money from the tenets.   

That would be a reasonable interpretation, especially if you're converting space within an existing building (something specifically identified as legal by the state).

so its how a cpa interprets the code.. just like attorneys. until there are final rulings who knows right. 

According to the interpretation of some CPA'S the de minimus rule applies to real estate investors.

I interpreted your 1st question differently so hopefully between me and Guy we can answer what you are looking for.1.

For some reason, some people interpret it to be 150k.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt and liberally interpreting this: "He also did say to make some attempt to sell items and whatnot, but that it's good to pay $1,000 towards the "business" and be able to claim $8,000 on taxes)."

This is the exception that other states, and many federal interpretations, as Jeff S pointed out, have used to allow hard money and private lenders to make loans without a license.

The current attorney general has very loosely been interpreting the consumer protection act.