Business Structure (by Gayle [NM]) Mar 9, 2010 1:40 PM
Business Structure (by Reid [KS]) Mar 9, 2010 1:50 PM
Business Structure (by James [MA]) Mar 9, 2010 2:37 PM
Business Structure (by Chris [CA]) Mar 9, 2010 4:16 PM
Business Structure (by Mike45 [NV]) Mar 9, 2010 4:35 PM
Business Structure (by Dave [CA]) Mar 10, 2010 1:56 PM
Business Structure (by Mike45 [NV]) Mar 10, 2010 2:10 PM
Business Structure (by Rob [MN]) Mar 10, 2010 5:51 PM
Business Structure (by Gayle [NM]) Posted on: Mar 9, 2010 1:40 PM Message:
State Specific Question About: NEW MEXICO (NM) I've been advised to put ea property into its own LLC with an umbrella LLC over all. Many people I've talked to think this is going overboard. (Each evidently would require its own checking account, etc.) Any opinions?
--75.161.x.xxx |
Business Structure (by Reid [KS]) Posted on: Mar 9, 2010 1:50 PM Message:
I'm not an attorney but I 'll just tell you what our attorney told us -- "Forget it , you don't need it " --69.155.xx.xxx |
Business Structure (by James [MA]) Posted on: Mar 9, 2010 2:37 PM Message:
Even if you did need it, you would undo most of it you are taking an active part in the managing the property. --132.183.xx.xx |
Business Structure (by Chris [CA]) Posted on: Mar 9, 2010 4:16 PM Message:
Not sure about your state, but I can tell you for CA the following: 1.) a $ 800 annual minimum tax and 2.) tough filing requirements. 3.) in court, you need an attorney. 4.) so you think who owns a LLC will be a secret and be a layer against a law suit? Wake up, don't waste your money. --125.25.xx.xxx |
Business Structure (by Mike45 [NV]) Posted on: Mar 9, 2010 4:35 PM Message:
Chris, hiding the ownership of the property is not usually the goal. The idea is that if someone is injured, only the equity in that property is available to the injured party and the rest of the "real owner's" assets are not at risk.
But James is right, insulating each property within its own separate LLC is not very useful for those of us who actively manage our own properties. Because I would be personally liable, not as the owner but as the personal responsible. So all of my properties would be exposed.
Unless we did the 'hidden ownership" thing, where my ownership is somehow hidden in a maze of corporate ownership, and I was prepared to lie under penalty of perjury about my ownership and my knowledge of the ownership.
Better to just make sure there is plenty of insurance!!
--216.240.xx.xxx |
Business Structure (by Dave [CA]) Posted on: Mar 10, 2010 1:56 PM Message:
Mike45, isn't that the whole purpose of having an LLC - to limit personal liability? It would seem that the corporate veil would need to be pierced (as they say) for you to be personally liable. I would think that would only be an issue if you were grossly negligent about something to do with the property. --192.55.xx.xx |
Business Structure (by Mike45 [NV]) Posted on: Mar 10, 2010 2:10 PM Message:
Dave, if I negligently repair something, or if I negligently supervisor someone else who does something, or if I negligently hire someone who does something, I become personally liable. This is not based on my being the owner, but on my own conduct.
There is no need to pierce the corporate veil, because I am liale based on my own conduct. Then, all of my assets re vulnerable.
If I am not operating the properties myself, if I sit back and let a licensed nd bonded and reputable property management company handle it all (and steal me blind!!), I don't have to worry about personal liability. Then, individual LLCs would make sense. Only LLC #1 is exposed for damages involving Property #1. I am not, and the rest of my properties are not. But for those of us who are hands on, there is personal liability without the need to pierce!
--216.240.xx.xxx |
Business Structure (by Rob [MN]) Posted on: Mar 10, 2010 5:51 PM Message:
I've been told that it's very easy for attorneys to pierce the corporate shield, so for most "small fry" folks it's not worth bothering with it. --71.51.xxx.xxx |
Reply:
|
|