Let me know if I interpreted your comment correctly.

Assuming the source website is legit, the tax law can be interpreted that if you only own a few properties and it's in your name (or an LLC and you and/or your spouse are the sole member) then you do not operate a trade or business and are not required to issue a 1099 regardless of >< $600.http://landlordsolutionsinc.com/2013/12/does-your-handyman-need-to-fill-out-a-1099/However, I did read on this BiggerPockets post: http://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/51/topics/87325-issue-w9-for-work--600... that it's generally a good idea, good practice.

The proposed HUD Rules interpreting the federal SAFE mortgage act can be viewed at www.regulations.gov Use the search parameter "HUD" and the keyword "safe".

If you PM me I can give you my interpretation of it, but that isn't legal advice.

@Jade Smith under your proposal, you would probably need an agent license to work with a broker.Hopefully, you have a copy of the regulations that allow your interpretation of California licensing requirements and didn't depend on someone's opinion:)

You've confirmed what I'd interpreted in my research.  

But as I read the highlighted sections above, I'm seeing two different interpretations; 1) anyone that has a right to the property and was not notified [33.54(b)] is not bound by ANY limitations period, 2) anyone that falls into the first interpretation actually has a 2 year limitation [34.08(c)].

I will forewarn you they are written in a lot of legal language, so it can be difficult to interpret. 

Even CPAs and lawyers struggle to interpret it.

Please keep in mind this is a very conservative interpretation of the law here (section 469).