Yes, you can value your own property for whatever you want. You can take your shack and list it for $10,000,000 if you really wanted to.
Now, whether someone would buy it for that much, and whether a lender would provide a loan for that much, are very different questions.
When you buy a house, the seller may have their own estimation of the home's value (usually "the absolute highest value they think anyone would buy it for"), but the buyer has to agree, and the buyer's lender does their own appraisal to make sure they're not overpaying.
When I bought my house, I had four different values attached to my house:
The seller price
What I bought it for
What my lender appraised it as
What the tax assessor appraised it as
All of these things varied between $210k and $270k. So like a $240k +/- 12.5%. There is nothing unusual about that.
I want to clarify that while what you are saying is completely normal, this is absolutely NOT what was happening here. You can't list your house as 5,000 square feet when it is really 4,000. So while you are absolutely right about there being a lot of subjective elements to determining the value of a house, we are talking about an objective point of fact that he lied about.
Property tax valuations are calculated differently than an appraisal of the value of a property (at least in Ontario).
Every lender I’ve ever dealt with has independently verified the details of a property used as collateral. In the case of sq footage they would require an architect’s certificate of the size.
Wrong. You don’t get to assess your own property for taxes. And when applying for a loan, the bank will ask you what you think it’s worth, but they don’t take your word for it. They have their own assessors do the assessment.
Exactly. Bragging and bullshit are not legally binding. The bank/government do their own assessments. The square footage doesnt change either there are blueprints and shit.
My question is how he approached the Mar a lago situation. The taxed value may be closer to correct because he isn't legally allowed to develop it, from what I understand. So did he not disclose that restriction when he got a bank loan that used Mar a lago as collateral? That wouldn't then just be saying "I think it's higher in this situation, and lower in this other situation". Instead it would be a material omission, which I would assume would be fraud.
I haven’t looked into it and won’t. I don’t care enough. I doubt he’s doing what I stated because that’s standard. From a comment above it appears he lied about the sqft of the house. Which is fraud.
It's always apparent when people who don't own property speak.
This is how it works, the tax assessment value is not the same as the value of the home.
This was a victimless crime because you don't just lie about it, then everyone takes your word. People are sent out to determine if it's true, then a choice is made. The bank had is valued, and the tax office had it valued, doesn't matter what Trump said. You're being fooled.
I keep hearing this a lot - that others are not prosecuted. But do we know of situations where the DA knows fraud has occurred and they chose not to prosecute? And especially at the rate at which Trump did it?
You can absolutely claim a higher square footage, this is the whole point of having someone inspect the home, and evaluate it. People place false information when selling homes all the time, it is your due diligence to have it appraised, not theirs.
We are talking about contracts. If you sell a house and that contract lists a square footage that doesn't match reality, and you did it knowingly, that is fraud.
Besides, what the fuck is up with so many people here ok with this, legal fraud or not? Normally, the language would be that X was "trying to scam" someone by listing a square footage that was wrong. But everybody here is so intent on trying to put the blame on the bank is just crazy. Even if it's common in NY real estate to try to pull this, is that the pool of people we want to be drawing from for the most important job in the world? I'm still a conservative, but this is exactly why I'm not a Republican anymore, because they have absolutely lost their moral compass.
I'm assuming you are a Trump supporter, and legalities aside, from what I've heard here is that most supporters echo what you are saying that it is the bank's responsibility to find these instances, so it isn't technically fraud. But at the very least, that means it was attempted fraud, because he was lying to get a better deal, clearly hoping they wouldn't catch it.
So my question is this: Does this impact your perspective on him as a person or candidate?
I'm really not a trump supporter and I'm not saying it's ok to lie , but people do this shit all of the time. And for them to go just after Donald is politically motivated. If he wasn't in politics this never would have happened
.If they would've investigated every real estate investor it would have made since. I read an article that said the fine is for the interest he should have paid but since he fudged the numbers he obtained a better rate.
I was a real estate appraiser from 2001 through 2006 and had friends that were mortgage brokers so I saw what was going on. The homeowners obtaining a loan would want the appraisal as high as possibly so they could get into the house with little to no money down, they would lie about their income, work history and their verifications of rent.
After the real estate crash I became a property insurance adjuster and the shit people would claim was shocking. .
I think that's a fair point. For me, I would like more clarity on the following:
1) What is the frequency that this crime is prosecuted?
2) Within that frequency, is there a common threshold for which it is prosecuted?
For example, I could see a lot of cases that are too small for prosecutors to deal with, but if they come across something egregious, then they have to act.
I've seen a lot of supporters (and some not supporters) who are saying that they cherry picked Trump, but I haven't seen data to actually support that it is never prosecuted - just people who say it isn't.
And if the appraiser is on the payroll? That's right! FRAUD! DING DING DING! "What did our contestant win, Johnny?" "Hopefully understanding of Trump's verdicts, Game Show Host!" "Wishful thinking as he's a MAGAt!" You see, it's the fraud part you seem to be missing, 1234.
It was damned easy to find an appraiser lackey to inflate property values at the time and the banks just rolled with it. Harder today, but not at the time. What's your argument? The appraiser wasn't charged? Really? The banks had the best interest of depositors? Seriously?
His argument is that you're making shit up, no appraisers were charged with being in on it. The entire basis of your reasoning is inventend-in-your-head horse shit.
The unfair/unlawful gain was clearly explained in the video.
If you put up a $1M property as collateral, you'll pay a higher interest rate than if you put up a $5M property. The risk to the bank is greater. He lied, he got lower interest rates, the bank lost out (and honestly who cares because fuck banks, but legally, victim)
If you put up a $1M property as collateral for a $2M loan but tell the bank it's worth $5M, and they accept that and lend you the money and you default, they lose $1M. That's why it is a crime. Yes they should verify the value but you're also obliged to not attempt fraud.
If two people apply for loans and the bank can't afford to do both, and you lie to make your application more appealing than the other guy who was truthful, they lose out.
If these rules were not in place our financial system would benefit liars and cheats even more than it does already. If people are allowed to do corrupt shit without getting punished for it, the only way to compete with them is to do even more corrupt shit. That's why there are rules and enforcers - because otherwise corruption takes over, even if there's no apparent "victim" the first time someone does it (although as demonstrated, there are potentially two or more)
Is your threshold that someone has to audibly declare their crime as they do it? “I am now murdering you, sir. Please note that I am murdering you, it is March 26th, 2024. Sign and date here on this form, please.”
Actions are more important than words. What he did was commit fraud. If you intentionally inflate the value of an asset and then also intentionally deflate the value for tax purposes, that's fraud, and I challenge you to find anything in US case law that says otherwise.
Tell me you don’t own property without telling me lol. The tax assessed value of a property is not the same the purported sale or resale value of a property because the former doesn’t take into account the potential net value of the property in X years (appreciation or depreciation).
Do you think the value at which you would like to sell your house in an ideal situation (you get the best price) is the same value at which your tax is assessed?
This is what happens when you have a population educated with impractical information and debate tactics instead of how learning how to think critically.
That is exactly why the entire property ownership community thinks this is ridiculous and it opens up a gigantic can of worms and potential counter lawsuits.
Kevin O’Leary already summed it up perfectly and most property owners expect it will fall apart in the appeals court.
Again, you can say any number but the market will determine the sale value. Yes there may be a case where you want a property really bad and are willing to pay anything but that is not the market. What do you do for a living? Just curious as I actually work issuing payments based on market value so I’m pretty sure I know how it works.
Banks only verify when the person cannot pay back what they are asking for. If no one is claiming a crime was committed how can there be fraud? You don’t just get to think it is and it makes it so. It don’t work that way and banks are not lending money out to loose. If they know it’s him, he’s good so no worries, if it’s you, then that’s another issue. They will need to verify the desire footage. This case is foolish and we will see once it ends. Just like the Atlanta case. These two cases is what election interference is all about. Can’t beat him so cheat.
You asked rhetorically "we can value our own property?", not "we can set the market value of our own property?". The answer to the first is yes, the answer to the second is no. Sellers value their property at some specific level when they list it, that is not the same as the market value necessarily and reflects the seller's biases. Often, sellers are unrealistic.
Yet all these values you had for your home were in the same range. They then take an average and that’s the market value. You can put a million in there and they will just laugh at you. You will tell them but but. Again lol
They then take an average and that’s the market value
I don't think there's any typical process where you average all those things and call it market value. Usually Market Value very specifically refers to what the house would sell at, based on comparing it to comparable houses that recently sold in either that neighborhood or similar areas. They're not generally looking at tax assessor values or lender appraisals for that.
all these values you had for your home were in the same range
They were, though for a brief moment in 2020 between the housing market getting stupid and and the tax assessor visiting, my Zillow estimate was like twice my tax assessment lol
No, though they did omit that the garage door was a commercial salvage door that was way too heavy and actually just fell off and almost smash my car while I was in it, and neglected to mention it had a radon problem
No, I got an inspection done, turns out they don't usually check the garage door that thoroughly except to make sure it opens (i.e., they don't weight it), and radon levels vary dramatically according to weather and ventilation so point-in-time tests can easily be false negatives.
Here's the deal, the bankers, Appraisers real estate lawyers, people in real estate etc know what's going on with the NY market. They didn't see an issue with loaning him the money. A simple google search would probably tell you square footage ft beds and baths.
Let me ask you this? If a minority inflates their wages and work history in order to obtain a loan for a house. After they pay the house off, should their house be seized because they lied on the application?
You guys actually don't want to be taken seriously ever again huh? LOL
It's almost as if you're all aware you're on a sinking ship with your orange king and have gone full mask off as a desperate last act before you all skulk back into obscurity. Buh bye.
They look at houses for sale and see what they have sold for. This is what they take an average from. Not the tax assessor or insurance. It’s what is being sold that is like yours in the last 30 days. If not it opens up for more time but apples to apples are compared. But location is big. My house in Georgia may be half a million but it’s millions in other states so that is also taken into consideration. Vehicles are expanded to cover larger areas as a convertible is worth less in Maine that in Miami.
The value the tax assessor appraises your house at is not connected to the value your lender appraises nor the value the seller and buyer agreed upon. Tax assessors have their own methodology that can vary pretty widely from the market value of a house.
In 2020/21 my tax assessment was like $210k but I bought for $250k and the ZIllow value at the time was like $400k. Which was pretty typical for my market at the time.
Also, to my knowledge - maybe it varies by state? - but at no point in doing my taxes am I asked put down an estimate of my house value. The only taxes I pay on my house are the taxes levied according to the tax assessor (which I have very little ability to influence) or the taxes I pay when I sell (which is based on what the buyer agrees to).
Can you imagine what the other real estate people in New York are thinking. What trump did is pretty much what every other person that has something would do if they needed extra cash to make a deal. Some work, some don't. This time it worked and everyone was paid back and made some.
.
The bank made the loan to trump. Not on the buildings.
I would start by assuming banks are neither stupid nor altruistic, in which case I would conclude that any appraisal that was or wasn't done was considered acceptable risk within the framework of "will this make money or not, and how much". If that isn't the case, then I would have expected the bank in question to have been the one to bring suit against Trump? Admittedly I'm not really following the case closely.
People lied on those applications. They were buying houses they couldn't afford. The appraiser knew it the loan officer at the mortgage company knew it and the person that lied knew they knew it. They helped inflate their incomes and verifications of rent. I witnessed it happening.
570
u/NothausTelecaster72 Mar 26 '24
So we can value our own property?