You seem to imply that the aggregation is somehow relevant for the ToB determination, and I don't think it is. 

If you spend $100 at Costco, you get 4% back and you will have $4——-Correct @Joe SplitrockI was not implying you’d have $100 you just spent at Costco.

The answer is YES It could be a violation because the ad could imply that “couples first starting out are childless and therefore, families with children may feel excluded.

 I only have a minute unfortunately, but I'm not loving the semi – broken English, overly flexible terms indicated, sense of implied urgency with the holidays, "optional" lenders fee, and the well-worn "out of town" line, etc.

I would think their inquiry is just to determine if it might work for them, but it would be prudent to allow them to make that determination on their own and say nothing that might imply you'd rather they not consider it.  

No, tax 101 says rental is passive even as a real estate professional who still reports it on Schedule E.I understand you'd like it reported on a Schedule C so you can take losses against other income; however, that is not the case.Those situations for exceptions would imply that the RE is either inventory OR would be used in that business such as the office building the taxpayer's medical practice is located in.Yes, it is on a property by property basis.But don't try to stretch your situation into something it isn't.

This could imply you are discriminating against those who can't work (eg: a disabled person).

That's a big limitation.I guess I don't see how an SDIRA, loaning money to an LLC with other outside investors, implies any indirect financial benefit to the LLC owners, but I guess that's how it works.

That may be true, but it implies an unspoken corollary: “This trend will probably NOT continue if [market] interest rates rise more than a few points above existing loan [interest rates].”I found an interesting, albeit legally meaningless, clause in the law.

First, the REI has almost ZERO impact on City zoning and is frequently a victim thereof (ie: constrained from enhancing a SFR into a Duplex).That implies that 'added value' will also be limited to enhancements that FIT the current zoning of the property.