The AG readers will be happy to learn that you have great expertise in a few more areas than short sales as well

Yep, I could have worded that better. I was thinking that the RSS feed would be primary and members could choose print if they needed to. This, as opposed, to killing trees for members who really don’t read it because of lack of desire or they have already read it online.

It’s seems odd that REBAC and NAR are pushing tons of Green information out, yet the magazine and other extensive materials still get sent out to everyone in print. This could also save money and allow those dues dollars to be used in developing other programs.

You folks in the tech area are far ahead of some of the other divisions.

There’s no perfect answer… this is just my thoughts.

Welcome!

Bob said (in a comment to Pamela), “You folks ever thought about going a bit more green and giving us the option to only receive an online version?”

My wife and I each get one. 5 of our 9 agents get Realtor Magazine delivered to my house (which is technically our “office”). We all read it online.

So every month, that’s 7 copies that hit the recycle bin. Instantly.

REALTOR Magazine does have RSS feeds for some content — the daily news and the blogs. You can subscribe here:
http://www.realtor.org/RMODaily.nsf/pages/aboutussubscriptions?OpenDocument#two

Look for more of the magazine’s content via RSS feeds in the future.

Thanks for a great post and great discussions too!

Best,

Hilary Marsh
Managing Director, REALTOR.org (NAR)

it’s funny how everyone can be an expert no? so many things just taken for granted

We’ve bought a number of short sales where we’ve gotten the idea that nobody talked to the seller about tax consequences and …..

Even though we obviously don’t represent sellers I’m thinking I might want to grab that magazine out of the recycle basket!

The quote in question is this:

Although it’s true that the federal government passed a law in 2007 directing the IRS not to count mortgage debt forgiven by a lender as income, the provision is limited. It applies only to purchase money; it doesn’t apply to debt on a cash-out refinancing, and it doesn’t apply to second homes.

The issue is acquisition debt, not whether or not its a purchase money.

To be specific, the tax code calls its “qualified principal residence indebtedness”:

Section 108(a)(1)
(E) the indebtedness discharged is qualified principal residence indebtedness which is discharged before January 1, 2012.

Acquisition indebtedness is defined in Section 163 cited below:

Section 163(h)(3)
(B) Acquisition indebtedness
(i) In general
The term ”acquisition indebtedness” means any indebtedness which –
(I) is incurred in acquiring, constructing, or substantially improving any qualified residence of the taxpayer, and
(II) is secured by such residence. Such term also includes any indebtedness secured by such residence resulting from the refinancing of indebtedness meeting the requirements of the preceding sentence (or this sentence); but only to the extent the amount of the indebtedness resulting from such refinancing does not exceed the amount of the refinanced indebtedness.

Purchase money is acquisition debt, but refinancing purchase money for rate and terms, or to consolidate two loans into one can still apply. Even part of a cash out refi can still apply. You can use it to build a garage and your good. If you use it to build a garage and buy a new car to put in the garage, you have to back out the money spent on the car.

I wrote an overview of the original bill here that ties together the relevant parts of the tax code. Keep in mind that the sunset date was changed with the passage of TARP from 2010 to 2012.

Let me just submit this… I have been critical of the Realtor magazine to some limited extent, but I realized that writing a magazine that would appeal to 1 million different personalities is impossible.

However, kudos for actually reading it and not trashing it. I think if we all took a bit of time to comb through the stuff that bored us, the useful stuff would shine through.

Having said that – I would LOVE to see (hint to Pam) Realtor mag, just be on RSS feed and allow members to choose their preference.

There is a number of our local agents who read it and would never read anything online. It’s sad, but true.

Great first post!

You are correct that it is Lance, not NAR per se, but it’s NAR’s mag, so by extension…

Anyways, here is a hint – it has to do with the limitations he specified.

Lance is correct. It is crucial to be accurate. However, in this article, even NAR didn’t get it 100% right. A $20 Starbucks to the first person who posts the error and the correct answer.

This one has me a bit stumped. My only guess would be that the quote seems off. Why would Lance say its “a limited law” referring to the tax consequences. Fact is its not very limited. The IRS sees canceled mortgage debt as income and will tax it at the appropriate level. There are a few exceptions to that, but other than that, its a pretty hard and fast tax law.

Of course, NAR didn’t say that, Lance did. So I don’t think that’s it.

Could it be that you’re getting to the nitty gritty and calling them out for the comma after Idaho (since the list of cities is only two long, no comma is required to separate them…the word “and” is the separation for this list – its only after there are three items in a list that commas are needed).

That coming from a guy who overuses commas all the time.

Anyway, welcome again Bob!

The biggest problem with most courses is that it tends to be very general info.

Take the term “short sale”. It means that a lien holder agrees to release the lien on a property to facilitate a sale, even though the payoff is “short” of the full amount needed to payoff the note.

However, on Scott Thompson’s site, it is described as this:

A Short Sale is the sale of a home when sales proceeds do not fully pay off the existing loan(s) and lender(s) accepts a discounted payoff to fully satisfy the loan.

No doubt that will be corrected quickly, as fully satisfying the loan would suggest no deficiency, which we know isn’t always the case.

The other suggestion I have is to find out how and if your state is regulating short sales. In California, a new law goes into effect on July 1, 2009 that will make it illegal to negotiate with the lender on behalf of a seller once a Notice of Default is filed on the property. The reason being that the law would preclude a seller from granting a power of attorney to anyone that doesnt have either a $100,000 surety bond, or is an attorney that is in the business of representing clients. Most 3rd party companies, including attorney fronted companies, would be unable to help at this point. Without the bond, the seller would now need an attorney to negotiate, or do it themselves.

@Russell – Thank you.