• finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Not only would it make sense for each of the shell people to have the income on their own tax statements when running that sort of subsidizing loan operation, but its actually got fiscal incentive to be done that way because it puts them in lower brackets.

    Plus, given the number of foreign owners invested in US properties, it would be difficult or possibly even impossible to charge and expedite them for tax evasion given the tightly constrained budget of the IRS and therefor their inability to go after people without a gaurantee they can earn more back than they spend on the court proceedings.

    • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I can’t follow your reasoning. If companies cannot own houses, how do you propose this shell-ownership would work? Wouldn’t the owner just be free to sell the house at any time and pocket the cash for themselves?

      As for tax evasion by foreigners that own real estate, I mean how is that even a problem? There’s millions of foreigners that do business in the US everyday, plus, these ones have actual immovable assets that can be seized…

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        34 minutes ago

        Financing.

        The shell-owners would get paid to be a shell, and the properties would get financed under their names, thus circumventing the law.

        Because what I described above could be considered tax evasion, that is why it becomes another new problem when dealing with foreign investors.

        The US Government sells seized real estate dirt cheap, but that negatively impacts the shell owners who could fight it in court.