zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. anigbr+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-08-28 01:54:34
The courts found it excessive (and it might be) and proposed a valuation so ridiculously low it alone gives Trump grounds to appeal

This is just wrong. The very low valuation was not proposed by the NY court, but by the Palm Beach County tax appraiser. This is because the property is deeded for use as a social club rather than a private residence (a condition of sale when Trump purchased it iirc, and one which affects future disposal of the property) and as a commercial entity the value is appraised as a multiple of business income.

replies(1): >>sbsudb+k3
2. sbsudb+k3[view] [source] 2024-08-28 02:34:25
>>anigbr+(OP)
Notably, the bank in question wasn't bothered by restrictions on the property when granting the business loan. Nor did the bank ever have to find out.
replies(1): >>anigbr+c6
◧◩
3. anigbr+c6[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-28 03:19:48
>>sbsudb+k3
Thing is, under law you are not allowed to falsify information on financial disclosures like this, regardless of whether the counterparty is OK with it or not. It may be that the state considers the integrity of the financial system a higher priority than individual deals, or it may be designed to prevent money laundering - more likely the latter, as there are a lot of ways to clean dirty money if everyone involved is willing to accept some imaginary claims as fact.
[go to top]