- Joined
- Mar 27, 2014
- Messages
- 63,641
- Reaction score
- 33,679
- Location
- Tennessee
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
There are a lot of variables here. First it’s important to clarify that the issue isn’t the value of the property. The issue is what Trump was claiming as income in the form of property occupancy rates. The rates Trump provided to the lender were much higher than the rates claimed in his tax filings. For example, he told a lender in 2012 that the occupancy rate of Trump Tower was 99% but claimed an occupancy rate of 83% in his tax filing. What he essentially did was claim higher taxable income to the lender than he reported in his tax filing.
OK, I don't think we actually disagree, but I appreciate the explanation. I wasn't aware of how he manipulated the values.
It gets back to my point about what he submitted to defend the values. One of those occupancy rates was likely the true one. If he represented an occupancy rate of 99% to the lenders, I'd guess that's fraud because he'd know it's nowhere near that. The lender should be able to rely on that number without a full blown audit of occupancy of that property.