ReportWire

Tag: corporation

  • Newsom and Trump have vowed to crack down on corporate home buying. A new bill aims to curb it

    [ad_1]

    In a rare moment of political alignment last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom and President Trump vowed to crack down on corporate home buying. Now, a new bill aims to make it a reality.

    Assembly Bill 1611, introduced by Assemblymember Matt Haney (D-San Francisco) in January, would eliminate a “tax loophole” that Haney says corporate landlords and investment firms use to buy up single-family homes across the state.

    “It’s shocking to me that by design, our tax system lets large firms take advantage of tax breaks in order to outbid California families when buying homes,” Haney said. “They’re able to use a tax loophole to give themselves an upper hand.”

    The so-called loophole takes the form of a 1031 exchange — a tax-filing strategy that allows real estate owners to defer capital gains taxes when they sell an investment property, such as a single-family home, as long as they buy a similar “like-kind” property within 180 days. Essentially, it allows investors to replace one investment property with another, avoiding taxes in the process.

    The bill would ban companies that own at least 50 single-family homes from taking advantage of the tax break. It would apply to sales completed after Jan. 1, 2026.

    California has the second-lowest homeownership rate in the country at 56%, and Haney said corporations shouldn’t be shirking real estate taxes in the midst of a housing crisis. The California Department of Finance estimated that during the current fiscal year, the state lost $1.2 billion in revenue due to like-kind exchanges.

    Lenny Goldberg, the policy director for the California Tax Reform Assn., worked with Haney to develop the bill. He said he has viewed like-kind exchanges as a rip-off for years, but it’s an ongoing issue with a powerful lobby behind it.

    “They’re called like-kind exchanges, but they’re not actually like-kind,” he said. “You can exchange an office building for a hotel, or an apartment building for a single-family home.”

    He added that corporate investors aren’t buying up high-end neighborhoods; it’s mostly working-class or middle-class areas, where the affordability crisis is more acute.

    Goldberg said the ban would help in two ways. First, it would result in more tax dollars being paid by corporations. And second, it would stop allowing corporations to dominate bidding wars for homes.

    Currently, corporate owners can afford to bid more on a home than an individual, knowing that when they eventually sell it, they can avoid the capital gains tax by buying a different property, making it a more valuable asset. If they didn’t have access to that benefit, that advantage would be gone.

    He sees it as a modest proposal; a more ambitious effort would be to eliminate like-kind exchanges altogether. But this is a good place to start, and it still lets mom-and-pop landlords or investors who own fewer than 50 properties to take advantage of the tax break, he said.

    The corporate home buying trend became a focal point during the pandemic emergency, when low interest rates sent the housing market into a frenzy, and first-time home buyers competed with investors viewing the house as an asset, not a home. During the second quarter of 2021, 23% of home sales in L.A. County went to investors rather than someone wanting to live there.

    But data show that corporate ownership still makes up a much smaller share of the overall market. Analysis from the California Research Bureau showed that 2.8% of single-family homes in the Golden State are owned by companies that own at least 10 properties.

    The biggest chunk of that appears to be smaller mom-and-pop landlords rather than giant corporations. Companies with more than 50 properties own roughly 110,000 homes in California, whereas companies with 10 to 49 properties, which would be exempt from the ban, own roughly 235,000 properties.

    Haney said now is the right time for the bill, given the momentum provided by Newsom and Trump last month.

    Newsom vowed to take a tougher stance on corporate home buying in his final State of the State speech, saying that “it’s shameful that we allow private equity firms in Manhattan to become some of the biggest landlords in many of our cities.”

    It’s unclear which form the crackdown will take; Newsom said it means more oversight and enforcement, and potentially changing the tax code.

    A few weeks prior, Trump announced immediate steps to ban institutional investors from buying single-family homes, but no specific actions have been announced.

    Haney said it’s also timely in the aftermath of the Palisades and Eaton fires, since data show that investors are flooding the market for burned-out lots, replacing longtime locals. A recent Redfin report said at least 40% of lot sales in fire-damaged areas went to investors in the third quarter of 2025.

    “It shows you that this shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Whatever your political leaning, you should want regular families to have access to homeownership,” Haney said. “Maybe this is one of the rare issues where there’s broad agreement across political stripes, and we can actually solve a problem.”

    A different bill addressing institutional investors, AB 1240, took a different approach. Introduced by Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-San José), it looked to ban investors that own at least 1,000 single-family properties from buying more homes in order to rent them out.

    Nine companies own more than 1,000 single-family homes in California. The largest is Invitation Homes, which owns more than 11,000 homes in the state and has faced a litany of lawsuits related to unpermitted renovations, unfair eviction practices and withheld security deposits.

    Lee’s bill passed the state Assembly last year but stalled after fierce opposition from real estate agents and the California Apartment Assn. It awaits a Senate committee hearing.

    [ad_2]

    Jack Flemming

    Source link

  • Billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer is running for governor

    [ad_1]

    Billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer announced Wednesday that he is running for governor of California, arguing that he is not beholden to special interests and can take on corporations that are making life unaffordable in the state.

    “The richest people in America think that they earned everything themselves. Bull—, man. That’s so ridiculous,” Steyer said in an online video announcing his campaign. “We have a broken government. It’s been bought by corporations and my question is: Who do you think is going to change that? Sacramento politicians are afraid to change up this system. I’m not. They’re going to hate this. Bring it on.”

    Steyer, 68, founded Farallon Capital Management, one of the nation’s largest hedge funds, and left it in 2012 after 26 years. Since his departure, he has become a global environmental activist and a major donor to Democratic candidates and causes.

    But the hedge firm’s investments — notably a giant coal mine in Australia that cleared 3,700 acres of koala habitat and a company that runs migrant detention centers on the U.S.-Mexico border for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — will make him susceptible to political attack by his gubernatorial rivals.

    Steyer has expressed regret for his involvement in such projects, saying it was why he left Farallon and started focusing his energy on fighting climate change.

    Tom Steyer, who ran for president in 2020, addresses a crowd during a primary election night party in Columbia, S.C.

    (Sean Rayford / Getty Images)

    Steyer previously flirted with running for governor and the U.S. Senate but decided against it, instead opting to run for president in 2020. He dropped out after spending nearly $342 million on his campaign, which gained little traction before he ended his run after the South Carolina primary.

    Next year’s gubernatorial race is in flux, after former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla decided not to run, and Proposition 50, the successful Democratic effort to redraw congressional districts, consumed all of the political oxygen during an off-year election.

    Most voters are undecided about who they would like to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for reelection because of term limits, according to a poll released this month by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times. Steyer had the support of 1% of voters in the survey.

    In recent years, Steyer has been a longtime benefactor of progressive causes, most recently spending $12 million to support the redistricting ballot measure. But when he was the focus of one of the ads, rumors spiraled that he was considering a run for governor.

    In prior California ballot initiatives, Steyer successfully supported efforts to close a corporate tax loophole and to raise tobacco taxes, and fought oil-industry-backed efforts to roll back environmental law.

    His campaign platform is to build 1 million homes in four years, lower energy costs by ending monopolies, make preschool and community college free and ban corporate contributions to political action committees in California elections.

    Steyer’s brother Jim, the leader of Common Sense Media, and former Biden administration U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy are aiming to put an initiative on next year’s ballot to protect children from social media, specifically the chatbots that have been accused of prompting young people to kill themselves. Newsom recently vetoed a bill aimed at addressing this artificial intelligence issue.

    [ad_2]

    Seema Mehta

    Source link

  • Social Bonding Through Movies: The Emotional Magic Behind Watching Films Together

    Social Bonding Through Movies: The Emotional Magic Behind Watching Films Together

    [ad_1]

    Movies can be an excellent social bonding experience in a variety of situations, including first dates, family movie nights, group watches, couples therapy, and professional settings. Learn more about the emotional dynamics behind watching films together.

    Beyond being a source of entertainment, films have the power to foster social bonds and create shared experiences among individuals.

    Whether it’s getting together at a friend’s house on a weekend night, embarking on a first date at the theaters, or upholding a family tradition of watching the same movie during holidays, watching movies together is one of the most common ways we connect with others.

    But what’s the psychology behind these cinematic connections? Let’s dive into the many social benefits behind movie watching and how they can improve our relationships in a number of different social settings.

    Shared Experiences

    Every time you press “Play” on a new movie, you are starting a collective journey with whoever you are watching with. No one knows what will happen, so you are both entering the unknown together and experiencing it for the first time.

    Every film is a rollercoaster of different emotions – joy, laughter, surprise, fear, suspense, disgust, sadness, anger – and everyone is experiencing those emotions together as a “hive mind.” Research shows emotions are contagious, and when multiple people are experiencing the same emotion in unison, feelings are often amplified more than if you were just experiencing it by yourself.

    Movies create new shared experiences that mark new chapters throughout our relationship. “Remember that one time we saw Wolf on Wall Street? That was fun!” A memorable movie can become a distinct event in our relationship’s storyline, especially if it symbolizes a special day like a first date, birthday, or anniversary, giving us a positive memory to look back on and reminisce about.

    Watching movies together doesn’t require much work, it effortlessly creates a sense of unity among the people watching. Even if everyone hates the movie, it still creates a shared bond, “Wow, that movie was really stupid!” and then you can all laugh about it.

    Icebreaker and Conversation Starter

    Watching films together serves as an excellent icebreaker, especially in situations where individuals may be meeting for the first time or trying to strengthen new connections.

    The movie theater, often considered a classic venue for a first date, provides a natural conversation starter. After the credits roll, initiating a conversation becomes as easy as asking, “Did you like the movie? Why or why not?” Ask about favorite scenes or whether they’ve seen other movies featuring the same actor or actress.

    Use the film as a springboard into other topics to talk about. If you’re skilled at conversation threading, you should be able to take one thing from the film and branch off into more important subjects. If it’s a film about music, inquire about their musical preferences or whether they play an instrument. For sports-themed movies, explore their favorite sports or childhood sports experiences.

    Icebreakers aren’t exclusive to first dates; they’re equally helpful in building connections in various scenarios, whether it’s getting to know a coworker outside the office or deepening a friendship.

    One fair criticism of movies as a bonding experience is that you don’t get to do much talking during them. It’s a passive experience, not an active one. But there are also benefits to this: it’s a shared experience with little effort (no pressure, just sit and watch), and it gives you a convenient starting point for more meaningful conversation later on.

    Nostalgia and Tradition

    For many, watching films together is not just an occasional activity but a cherished tradition that spans multiple generations.

    Family movie nights play a pivotal role in strengthening the bonds between parents and children. Holiday film marathons, especially during festive seasons, elevate our collective spirit and enhance the joyous atmosphere. Revisiting favorite childhood movies creates a profound sense of nostalgia, keeping us connected to our past.

    One popular family tradition may be during Christmas, such as having A Christmas Story playing in the background as you decorate the tree or watching It’s A Wonderful Life every Christmas eve.

    These traditions are about more than just the movie; they’re about creating a whole family experience. Infuse your own unique twist by turning it into a game, baking homemade cookies before watching, or simply enjoying jokes and good company. The film itself is just one aspect of a complete family ritual and bonding experience.

    When families embrace these shared traditions, they contribute to a profound sense of belonging and unity. These rituals become the threads weaving together the fabric of family ties and friendships over long periods of time.

    Team Building and Group Bonding

    Beyond personal connections, watching films together can be an effective team-building activity in professional settings.

    Organizational unity can be difficult to achieve for many companies, especially when workers have radically different jobs and skillsets, often being assigned to work within one department of a company but being siloed off from the organization as a whole.

    Movie nights and film screenings can be an effective way to provide employees with a stronger sense of unity and camaraderie. Different departments that normally don’t see each other get to cross-pollinate and make connections with faces they don’t often get to see. Scheduled events like this can foster a team of teams mindset, helping to interconnect different departments into a cohesive whole.

    Perhaps certain movies depict an idea, philosophy, or mindset that an organization wants to embrace more of. Requiring every employee to watch a movie together is more than just making friends at work, it can also tap into a deeper meaning behind the organization’s mission and purpose.

    Couples Therapy

    Movies can serve as bouncing points to important conversations that need to be had between spouses and loved ones.

    It’s not always easy to bring up certain topics of conversation, but through film you can organically dive into subjects that otherwise wouldn’t get brought up in everyday discourse, like mental health, sex and intimacy, or experiencing grief after a tragedy or loss.

    It’s common for a couples therapist to recommend a specific movie to their clients. You may already know of a movie that you’d like to share with someone. You can also ask friends or seek recommendations online. Ask yourself, “What’s something I really want to talk about with my partner?” then “What’s a good movie that can introduce this topic?”

    A powerful film can help couples process their relationship more clearly. It shows the universality of humanity – you’re not alone with whatever you are going through – and brings ideas out in the open that need to be expressed or talked about.

    One exercise you can try together is to each take notes or fill out a movie analysis worksheet while watching.

    Communal Bonding and Bridging Social Divides

    On a larger scale, film watching can help bridge cultural and social divides, as well as be used as a tool for communal bonding.

    Social events such as public screenings, outdoor showings, movie festivals, or drive-thru theaters are great settings to watch a movie among a large and diverse group of people within your community.

    These days with easy access to streaming services at home, most people watch movies all by themselves, but there used to be a time when movie-watching was an intrinsically social activity done in public spaces.

    As we continue to see a decline in community feeling, movies may be one avenue to start bringing people together again as a cohesive group.

    One idea is for local organizations to throw more public events with film features to celebrate holidays or special events – or you can set up a projector on your garage door and invite some neighbors for a weekend movie watch.

    Conclusion

    Watching films together is more than just a passive form of entertainment; it is a dynamic social activity that brings people together, creating lasting bonds and shared memories.

    Films are universal connectors. Whether it’s with family, friends, or colleagues, the act of watching a movie together creates an automatic bond and sense of unity.

    Are you a big movie watcher? In what situations can use film watching to improve your relationships with family, friends, loved ones, or coworkers?


    Enter your email to stay updated on new articles in self improvement:

    [ad_2]

    Steven Handel

    Source link

  • Unexpected Liability For Owners Of Small Businesses

    Unexpected Liability For Owners Of Small Businesses

    [ad_1]

    An entrepreneur wants to create a small business. So they set up a corporation or a limited liability company online, because they know that’s how you’re supposed to do it. That way, your personal assets aren’t supposed to be at risk if the business fails. It’s a good insurance policy.

    A recent New York case demonstrated once again that the corporate-structure insurance policy might not be so good after all.

    There, a person named Yuan Sheng Situ (or perhaps Su Hua Situ) apparently created and owned a company that signed a lease as tenant. The tenant took possession of the leased premises but never paid any rent. The landlord sued the tenant on the lease, of course, but also tried to sue the individual owner of the company (the “individual defendant”) for the unpaid rent.

    The individual defendant presumably argued (or should have argued) that the only tenant on the lease was the corporation, there was no personal guaranty, the landlord had chosen to do business with a corporation, the landlord should have known what a corporation is, and therefore the landlord should only be able to sue the corporation even though the corporation had no assets. Whether based on those good arguments or other arguments, the individual defendant asked to be removed from the landlord’s lawsuit.

    The court that initially heard the case refused to do that. The appellate court agreed. To the contrary, both courts accepted the proposition that the landlord might very well be able to “pierce the corporate veil” and convert the claim against the corporation into a claim against the individual defendant. That could happen because the individual defendant somehow lost the protection the corporate form was supposed to provide.

    Exactly what did the individual defendant do to expose itself to that risk? According to the appellate court, the individual defendant negotiated the lease on behalf of the corporate tenant. The landlord communicated with the individual defendant almost daily to negotiate the lease. The individual defendant was in the leased premises “on almost a daily basis.”

    All those things are, however, exactly what always happens when someone sets up their own corporation and then runs that corporation’s affairs. Those ordinary activities of a corporation’s owners are just how any corporation works. The fact that the corporation’s owners do things in their role as corporate officers shouldn’t create individual exposure. How else are corporations supposed to conduct business?

    The court also stepped back a bit and declared that the lease “resulted in inequitable consequences” because the tenant didn’t pay rent. In other words, the individual defendant “conspired to perpetrate a wrong by opening a judgment proof shell company” to avoid paying rent. If the landlord wasn’t happy with the credit strength of the corporation, though, it should have demanded a personal guaranty, a larger security deposit, or a better tenant entity. The fact that it didn’t do those things doesn’t mean the landlord should have a good claim against the corporation’s owner. The landlord chose to deal with the corporation.

    Those are great arguments, of course. But the individual defendant remains stuck in this litigation, facing potentially substantial claims. The use of a corporation was supposed to protect the individual defendant from those claims.

    An owner of a small business can, of course, avoid that problem by making sure that its corporation always pays its debts. But sometimes that doesn’t happen. The essential function of the corporate form is to protect the owner of the business. If the facts of this case are enough to convince a court to remove that protection, then any small business owner shouldn’t rely on the use of a corporation as a way to protect the owner’s other assets.

    [ad_2]

    Joshua Stein, Contributor

    Source link

  • International Venture Capitalist and Founder/CEO of TrüNorth Global and Waystone Capital Comes Home to Invest and Reimagine Hometown

    International Venture Capitalist and Founder/CEO of TrüNorth Global and Waystone Capital Comes Home to Invest and Reimagine Hometown

    [ad_1]

    Press Release
    –

    Nov 4, 2022 10:00 EDT


    CHARLOTTE, N.C., November 4, 2022 (Newswire.com)
    –
    William Kirk Eskridge, born and raised in Sturgis, Mississippi, is currently building Highland Oaks, an event, festival, and music venue on property close to his childhood home in Sturgis. Eskridge’s goal is to invest in and reimagine the American small town.

    Eskridge’s development group is looking to add businesses to the area for the local community. All venues and businesses will be dedicated to giving back to local charities and business development in the area. 

    When asked why he was doing this, Eskridge stated, “I am looking to give back to the area where I grew up, and when thinking about my childhood, I wish I would have had places to go like what we are looking to build when I was a child.” 

    Eskridge’s mother, June; his brother, Lance; and additional family also live in the area. Eskridge’s companies have offices in over 60 countries, but he and his family reside in the Carolinas. Eskridge states, “I will not be moving back to the area; however, I will be flying into Sturgis and Starkville’s Bryan Field more often to attend festivals, and music events, and spend time with family.” 

    Much focus will be on charitable events, such as fishing rodeos, outdoor concerts, movies, fall and summer festivals, and so on. Some of the features will include multiple areas for families and individuals to walk, play games, paddle board, and kayak, with fields for games and fire pits. Eskridge’s vision for Sturgis is to rebuild the small town into a Norman Rockwellian-style American throwback with small unique stores and restaurants, bringing life into the American small town. 

    Eskridge says, “My goal for the area is to be a regional draw, not a pass-through and give the citizens a reason to buy local and create jobs while drawing others to what will be a fantastic little piece of Americana.” 

    Highland Oaks is scheduled to officially open in the Spring of 2023. For more information, visit www.thehighlandoaks.com. 

    For inquiries and proposal requests, please contact:

    Kaitlyn Rogers, Global Director of Operations, 1.800.903.7489

    Source: TrüNorth Global

    [ad_2]

    Source link