Rep. Jared Moskowitz calls for Palm Beach County to tax Mar-a-Lago at the rate Trump claims it's worth

[Marener]

Like what?

Can’t be subdivided. Can’t be a personal residence.

Trump‘s people put a value on it assuming they could subdivide it and turn it into residences which isn’t legal.

 

[struth]

Can’t be subdivided. Can’t be a personal residence.

Trump‘s people put a value on it assuming they could subdivide it and turn it into residences which isn’t legal.

It can be a personal residence…trump has his personal residence there

It’s a resort, who wants to make it a subdivision?

Trump never purchased it wanting to make it a subdivision.

Why are you making this up?

Nothing in a deed makes it illegal to make it a subdivision.

There might be something in the city code, about making that area a subdivision, it all depends on the city codes that area

 

[Marener]

It can be a personal residence…trump has his personal residence there

It’s a resort, who wants to make it a subdivision?

Trump never purchased it wanting to make it a subdivision.

Why are you making this up?

Nothing in a deed makes it illegal to make it a subdivision.

There might be something in the city code, about making that area a subdivision, it all depends on the city codes that area

Controller valued Mar-a-Lago at $500M despite deed restriction

Get updates from the trial of former President Trump in the civil fraud suit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

abcnews.go.com

 

[surada]

Everything in your post is a lie, but we're getting used to that with you.

Mara Lago is not a money maker ... it's a money pit. That's why the state of Florida sold it for 5 million.

Last March it was valued at 75 million dollars. Trump inflates all his holdings .

He's got the money to pay his fines. This morning he said that he had 500 million in cash, but he was going to use it for his campaign.

He may be manic over Truth Social, but that's crazy too.

How to Lose Money: Buy Digital World Acquisition Corp.

The odds are stacked against public shareholders.

www.morningstar.com

 

[surada]

It can be a personal residence…trump has his personal residence there

It’s a resort, who wants to make it a subdivision?

Trump never purchased it wanting to make it a subdivision.

Why are you making this up?

Nothing in a deed makes it illegal to make it a subdivision.

There might be something in the city code, about making that area a subdivision, it all depends on the city codes that area

Marener is right. It can't be a personal residence. Trump may have lost his mind.

 

[struth]

Controller valued Mar-a-Lago at $500M despite deed restriction

Get updates from the trial of former President Trump in the civil fraud suit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

abcnews.go.com

Your link says trump, in 2002, deeded the rights to use it as a social club. Not that he wanted to subdivide it

 

[surada]

Your link says trump, in 2002, deeded the rights to use it as a social club. Not that he wanted to subdivide it

You are completely missing the point. Nothing can be changed. They can't build anything or expand the Post house. It's deemed historic. They can't modernize or even change the paint color.

Trump charges $2000 a night to members only.

 

[j-mac]

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Could tRump even pay it at this point?

Rep. Jared Moskowitz calls for Palm Beach County to tax Mar-a-Lago at the rate Trump claims it's worth

Trump has claimed his Florida resort is worth as much as $1.5 billion, but the Palm Beach County property appraiser valued it far lower.

www.nbcnews.com

Y’all need to stop fucking with the system in a revenge filled rage….get a grip.

 

[Marener]

Your link says trump, in 2002, deeded the rights to use it as a social club. Not that he wanted to subdivide it

Longtime Trump Organization controller Jeff McConney continued to value Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in excess of $500 million -- on the basis that the property could be sold as private residences -- despite knowing that Trump has signed a deed in 2002 with the National Trust for Historic Preservation exclusively limiting the property to being used as a club.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Can’t be subdivided. Can’t be a personal residence.

Trump‘s people put a value on it assuming they could subdivide it and turn it into residences which isn’t legal.

/——/ Sez the libtatd who rents an SRO in a rehab building.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

/——/ Sez the libtatd who rents an SRO in a rehab building.

Damn, sissy... maybe public forums aren't for you

 

[Crepitus]

Y’all need to stop fucking with the system in a revenge filled rage….get a grip.

LMAO!!!

Orders of magnitude.

Look it up.

 

[j-mac]

LMAO!!!

Orders of magnitude.

Look it up.

“In recent years, it has become commonplace to claim that the U.S. Supreme Court is deeply politicized. The court’s current 6–3 conservative majority is often seen as pursuing a partisan or ideological agenda, and views on the Court’s rulings often break down along partisan and ideological lines. For some on the left, this perceived politicization justifies drastic measures like court‐packing or executive defiance of judicial decisions.
In some ways, the judiciary is indeed politicized. But there are many occasions where conservative judges have prioritized jurisprudential values over any partisan or ideological goals, showing that the court is much more than a merely political body. Moreover, resorting to steps like court‐packing in response to real or imagined judicial excesses risks destroying or gravely weakening judicial review—a cure far worse than the disease, one that would leave the country more vulnerable to aspiring authoritarians.”

snip

”Anger at the Supreme Court’s more conservative rulings and the GOP Senate’s political maneuvers in 2016 and 2020 have led many progressives to advocate radical responses that would undermine judicial review. The most notable is a court‐packing or “court expansion” law—that is, having Congress increase the size of the Supreme Court so that Democratic President Joe Biden and a Democratic‐controlled Senate can appoint new justices who will alter the court’s ideological balance. Another prominent suggestion is executive branch defiance of judicial decisions that progressives vehemently oppose.

These measures would have dangerous consequences. Even if they were depicted as a justifiable retaliation for the GOP’s recent political skullduggery on appointments to the Supreme Court, a successful court‐packing effort is likely to lead to the destruction of judicial review of congressional and presidential actions. If the Democrats pulled off such a measure, the Republicans would surely retaliate in kind the next time they had control of both the White House and Congress (recall that such reversals in political power can happen regularly in our era of close elections). Justices would hesitate to rule against measures favored by the party in power, for fear of further court‐packing. If they nonetheless occasionally issued such rulings, they would likely be reversed after an additional round of packing.

The end result would be a court unable or unwilling to challenge policies supported by the dominant party in government. As President Biden once put it, “We add three justices. Next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all.” He is right to have resisted left‐wing pressure to push this idea.

Successful large‐scale executive defiance of court decisions would lead to the same result. In the aftermath of a president’s successful refusal to honor a ruling by the court, courts would hesitate to rule against the executive again on major issues or any such rulings would have little effect, since those in power would feel free to largely ignore them. Indeed, executive defiance is an even slipperier slope than court‐packing because it can be undertaken by the president alone, without the need, as with court‐packing, for new legislation to be enacted by both houses of Congress and signed by the president. This makes executive defiance an even more attractive tool for a would‐be strongman.

Undermining judicial review through tools like court‐packing is a standard tactic of incipient illiberal authoritarians like Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez as they seek to concentrate power in the executive; it’s especially useful in the early stages of authoritarian consolidation. American progressives readily see this when it comes to countries like Russia, Turkey, Hungary and—most recently—Israel, where the right‐wing government has been trying to eviscerate the power of that country’s judiciary.“

https://www.cato.org/commentary/drastic-liberal-schemes-undermine-us-supreme-court-will-enable-authoritarian-presidency

 

[DBA]

Trump has been taxed at the rate of an $18 million valuation. If Mar-a-lago is indeed worth $300 million, then TRUMP OWES MILLIONS IN UNPAID PROPERTY TAXES.

This is true of ALL Trump properties because Trump has consistently fought high property tax assessments on his properties.

I suppose Trump could have gone to his county auditor’s office and filed a dispute that his property was actually worth a lot more than their assessment. The auditor would have looked at him like he was crazy because NOBODY EVER DOES THAT.

I don’t think you people have ever owned real estate in your lives. Apartment renting urbanites in NY don’t have a clue about any of this.

 

[DBA]

Nope the judge did not. He was only going by what the county appraiser down their in Florida appraised MAGA-Lardo at!

In my state, tax appraisals are almost always considerably lower than market value. Large increases in assessments are very rare with the exception of when a property is sold and the assessment is squared up with the sales price.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Could tRump even pay it at this point?

Rep. Jared Moskowitz calls for Palm Beach County to tax Mar-a-Lago at the rate Trump claims it's worth

Trump has claimed his Florida resort is worth as much as $1.5 billion, but the Palm Beach County property appraiser valued it far lower.

www.nbcnews.com

Why don't they tax it at the valuation that Letitia James' pet judge put on it? Fair is fair...right, Crepitus?

 

[Dragonlady]

No it doesn't, dumbass. Since when have dead restictions ever limited the resale price of a property? Keeping the resale valu up is the whole point of dead restrictions.

What are "dead restrictions" Finger Boy?

The whole point of deed restrictions isn't to increase the resale value, it's to prevent a potential purchaser from changing the use of the property.

 

[Hollie]

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Could tRump even pay it at this point?

Rep. Jared Moskowitz calls for Palm Beach County to tax Mar-a-Lago at the rate Trump claims it's worth

Trump has claimed his Florida resort is worth as much as $1.5 billion, but the Palm Beach County property appraiser valued it far lower.

www.nbcnews.com

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if ignorant Dems / Marxists understood property assessment for tax purposes?

 

[DBA]

Not me. I'm waiting to see what happens on appeal.... Which is part of the legal process....

Trump will get his chance once again, in the appeals court.

This case is not about taxes or insurance fraud or bank fraud.....

It is about following the laws in place for good business practice and environment for all businesses....A market place of fairness and truth for all businesses.

The law was meant to protect ignorant consumers from savy and experienced lenders, not to protect savy and experienced lenders from ignorant consumers.

A bank ask you what you THINK your property is worth. You can think whatever you like. You can list your property for whatever you what to list it for. If there is one buyer willing to pay your asking price, then that was the market value. In the case of Trump’s properties, there is much more subjectivism involved because he is a former President and well known person. It is hard to put a firm price on that value because people aren’t just buying the property, they are buying the legacy.

It was, is, always has been and always will be the responsiblity of the lender to determine the value of collateral and they always do, particularly in very large jumbo loans such as this. In this case, the banks did their due diligence and determined that the reward was greater than the risk. Even if they felt he had over-valued his properties, they didn’t care because their own evaluation still far exceeded his loan amount. They were correct in their assesment and made a lot of money in the deal. Both parties were happy in the end.

The entire case is an absolute joke. ANY reasonable, non-partisan judge would have thrown this out before trial, but we are dealing with hyper-partisan Democrats in a hyper-partisan city that only care about the law to the extent that it can be used to persecute political opponents or push their agenda.

Democrats around the country need to wake up from their indoctrinated fog before it is too late. It may work in their favor this time, but the tables can always turn. The law should not be used as a political tool, no matter which party is wielding the gavel.

 

[Dragonlady]

In my state, tax appraisals are almost always considerably lower than market value. Large increases in assessments are very rare with the exception of when a property is sold and the assessment is squared up with the sales price.

The tax appraisal for Mar-a-lago is $17 million, which is lower than the $27 million that the Trump Corporation said the property was worth in 2020. But both figures are substantially lower than the $1+ billion that Eric Trump claimed, based on recent sales of unrestricted acreages in the area.

The values of Florida real estate have increased substantially in recent years but the building restrictions on this property will always keep the value low. Trump has a history of trading away future value for short term gain today. But at the time he signed off on the restrictions on Mar-a-lago in the early 90's, he was in deep financial trouble in Atlantic City and he was unsuccessful in selling the renovated beach property to raise cash.

If the club was operating at a profit, it would be worth more as well, but the only time the club was profitable was when Trump was in the White House. That's not to say that under better management it couldn't be turned around, but money losing businesses are worth a lot less than those which are profitable when you go in the door.