And even pierce the LLC or Corporate veil to make the principals of this transaction be held liable. 

However, with a 30-year term, your mortgage payment obligations are smaller, but you have the option to pay more toward the principal if you choose.If you’re having trouble penciling things out, it could be because you’re using an atypical debt structure.

It sounds like the transaction is close to closing, which means instead of finding a new buyer, they'd likely be open to reasonable concessions.Included full clause below...FORCE MAJEURE: Buyer or Seller shall not be required to exercise or perform any right or obligation under this Contract or be liable to each other for damages so long as performance or non-performance of the right or obligation, or the availability of services, insurance, or required approvals essential to Closing, is disrupted, delayed, aused or prevented by a Force Majeure event.

Or do I have literally NO tax obligation from the sale?

I don't feel obligated to return it to her.

You're killing me here man.This thread is about a proposal that would discourage corporate landlords from raising rent by more than 5%/yr by reducing their federal tax breaks if they do it.It's not my fault if you didn't read the actual proposal nor the other half of the OP that specifically mentioned the tax breaks being what is tied to the rent increase limit.You can't separate them. 

So the question is whether this setup can be pierced by the corporate veil during a lawsuit.

Search these very forums for info on this, but you will find that LLCs and Corporations are not what they're hyped up to be.

They will usually never own up to these facts - instead they will use the cover of "our corporate clients", etc - it's a big tell!  

Sometimes big corporations have a tendency to keep certain projects on life support and not really moving forward.They don't want to scrap it but haven't been presented with a plan or motivation to improve and move it forward.