
23 June 2024 | 29 replies
If you PM me I can give you my interpretation of it, but that isn't legal advice.

26 April 2024 | 6 replies
@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:)

7 January 2024 | 7 replies
You've confirmed what I'd interpreted in my research.

25 August 2016 | 1 reply
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)].

21 September 2022 | 23 replies
I will forewarn you they are written in a lot of legal language, so it can be difficult to interpret.

22 March 2024 | 19 replies
Even CPAs and lawyers struggle to interpret it.

7 March 2024 | 7 replies
Please keep in mind this is a very conservative interpretation of the law here (section 469).

9 February 2024 | 5 replies
The key is in the interpretation of the passive income rules and guidelines which define what is a REP (real estate professional), as it relates to this space.I am looking for:1.

15 February 2024 | 8 replies
The way we interpret it (based on the tax court cases) to make it more black and white: Any hour that is material participation must be integral to the rental, AKA must directly affect the profit and loss of the property.

18 April 2024 | 7 replies
Sounds like they are having a wrong interpretation of active/passive.