Posted by Tim Jensen on February 14, 2002 at 16:46:57:
is this guy is full of it.
My plan is to give my wife 90% of the benifecial interest before we both assign it to the Limited Partnership. Is that even nesseccary?
Thanks AGAIN,
Bill
L.P. Bill and John you won’t believe this - Posted by Tim Jensen
Posted by Tim Jensen on February 12, 2002 at 22:16:27:
Bill and John,
I need your comment on this.
I was at a chamber function tonite. I got talking with an personal injury attorney there. I figured pick his brain a bit. I started to discuss that I was putting my properties into a Limited Partnership with me being the general partner and my wife and daughter being the Limited partner. I would have 10% ownership wife and daughter would have 90%. I would manage it and they would not. He proceeded to tell me that that would not hold up in court and the limited partnership would be a shame because how could the wife have 90% ownership when she has 50% ownership in the propery before they went into the limited partnership. That did not make sense to me?
Could you set me straight?
Thanks,
Tim
Re: L.P. Bill and John you won’t believe this - Posted by JHyre in Ohio
Posted by JHyre in Ohio on February 16, 2002 at 06:20:22:
I’m sure that’s what he’d like to believe, it would make collecting on his claims so much easier. He’s high as a moonbat.
John Hyre
I believe it. - Posted by William Bronchick
Posted by William Bronchick on February 14, 2002 at 15:57:11:
What I believe is that this atty doesn’t know an ambulance from a limited partnership. Transfers between spouses are gift taxt-free and done all the time. So, changing ownership % doesn’t make it a sham.
Let me add… - Posted by Tim Jensen
Posted by Tim Jensen on February 13, 2002 at 15:36:31:
I have a feeling this attorney was a little intimidated.
I have found that attorneys do not like it when a simpleton,like myself, can actually articulate myself when it comes to legal matters. He may have been grand standing for his other attorney buddies there. I also mentioned my idea of letting a tax buyer (my parents or a Personal Property Trust) get deed to the properties by not paying the taxes. He told me that it would be a fraudualnt transfer, I pressed him further on why it was. I explained that I did not transfer the peoperty, just stopped paying the taxes and they were taken from me. His only response was “How would you explain why you didn’t pay your property taxes?” My response “I needed the money to prepare for this legal battle.” His response “oh”.
It gets better, I told him that I am putting them in Limited Partnership for estate planning and tax savings. He tried to tell me that it would not hold up. “Why are you estate planning at age 32? Thats too young”. My response was “You never know when you are going to die.” His response “oh”.
I can’t wait to see what Bill and John have to say on this subject.
Tim
His Aurguement… - Posted by ScottS
Posted by ScottS on February 13, 2002 at 13:18:14:
Makes no sense to me.
Once the property is deeded into the LP neither you nor she owns the property. What you do own is an interest in the LP. Her 90% and you 10%.
Maybe your use of words sort of confused him. Maybe he just does not understand. Either way, he’s not representing me in any case against the properties. 
ScottS
Re: L.P. Bill and John you won’t believe this - Posted by RS (So. CA)
Posted by RS (So. CA) on February 13, 2002 at 11:50:51:
I would like some clarification too. My understanding is that a limited partnership is a separate entity, akin to a corp. or an L.L.C.
If this is true, wouldn’t a formal transfer of ownership have to take place? That is, wouldn’t all the owners (in this case, a husband and wife) have to sign the deed for the property over to the L.P.? If so, why would the percentage of interest in the property or L.P. before and after the transfer be an issue?
Am I missing something, or is the aforementioned lawyer not well versed on this subject?