bcdxtaxnd.info

If and when planning to purchase a commercial property, the question often arises, ‘How Can I Find a Reliable and Competent Building Inspector for Conducting a Commercial Building Inspection?’ While one could easily write an eBook on this subject matter, this article offers several tips to help you hire a reliable and competent inspector for the purpose of obtaining a thorough and diligent commercial building inspection. So without further ado, let me begin by telling you ‘What Not to Do’.Never hire a commercial building inspector who was referred to you by the real estate agent or any other outside party who has a vested interest in and stands to gain from the sale of the property. Although this statement goes without saying, it’s worth mentioning simply because many of those looking to purchase commercial real estate believe it is standard protocol to rely upon the realtor’s recommendation for hiring an inspector. In reality, this practice poses a conflict of interest that can have dire consequences for the party purchasing the property. Unfortunately, real estate agents who knowingly partake in this practice along with inspectors who continue to burn the candle from both ends know exactly what they’re doing and how to get away with it. While there may be a few exceptions to what I am telling you, I can assure you that the majority of inspectors who rely heavily upon referrals from real estate agents for their business are not going to rock the boat by disclosing any information to the client during the course of an inspection that may later serve to jeopardize their relationship with the broker or real estate company who referred them in the first place.Never hire a Home Inspector to conduct a Commercial Property Inspection.As for hiring a home inspector to conduct a commercial building inspection, suffice it to say that in most cases, conducting a commercial building inspection is altogether different from performing a home inspection for reasons too numerous to list in this article. However, the proliferation of home inspectors over the past twenty years (everyone wants to be one, especially in those States where home inspection licensing has become mandatory making it relatively easy for anyone to become licensed), hasn’t helped either as this has spawned an increasing number of home inspectors who are still unable to properly inspect a home, much less a commercial building, even if their life depended upon it. Moreover, given the number of significant and distinct differences between residential and commercial property, while experience in inspecting homes may well serve as a prerequisite, it is by no means a substitute for the vast amount of knowledge and experience required and yet to be learned by most home inspectors before they can even begin thinking about conducting a diligent and thorough building inspection.Aside from ‘What Not to Do’, there are also other criteria you need to consider or at least be aware of in your quest to hire a reliable and competent commercial building inspector. namely:Know the fundamental difference between a Commercial Building Inspection and a Property Condition Assessment (PCA).Although this topic warrants a separate discussion, it’s important to note that the terms ‘PCA’ and ‘Commercial Building Inspection’ are often used interchangeably in the commercial sector. This in turn has resulted in a lot of confusion not only among real estate investors and others looking to purchase commercial property but real estate agents as well who more often than not simply do not know much less understand the difference. To make matters worse, the ASTM (American Society of Testing Materials) has also gotten in on the act by promulgating their ASTM Standards for Conducting a Baseline PCA. What this means is that since they happen to be a nationally recognized organization in the construction industry, in certain respects they’re similar to the AMA in the medical profession meaning anything and everything they write on a particular subject happens to bear a lot of weight. The problem arises in that the Standards for Conducting a Baseline PCA are often misunderstood by many in the profession and seldom if ever read by those buying and selling real estate.To simplify things, all one really has to know is that the difference between a commercial building inspection and a Baseline PCA is like night and day since the later can be performed in a fraction of the time it takes to conduct a thorough and diligent commercial building inspection. The reasoning behind this is pure and simple in that a PCA is essentially a cursory walk-through of the property that relies heavily upon second hand information obtained through interviews and documentation (that may/may not be readily available let alone veritable) normally obtained through the owner and/or occupants of the property. Hence, my advice to anyone who is seriously considering having a PCA in deciding whether or not to purchase a commercial property is to forget it since in most cases a PCA is a total waste of time and money in providing information contained in a property condition report that isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.Try to obtain as much information as you can about the company and the inspector beforehandThis is another statement that goes without saying but I mention it because many people feel uncomfortable in asking questions of this nature especially when speaking with someone they don’t already know. However, if you reflect upon what I’ve just said for a moment, the fact you don’t know anything about the company or the inspector should be reason enough to ask all the questions you can to solicit answers without being embarrassed.Be sure to ask the company or building inspector for referencesLast but not least, do not be embarrassed to ask for bonafide references regarding recent clients for whom they have conducted similar commercial building inspections. If the company or inspector is reputable and if they have confidence in the service they provide, they normally will not have any reservations whatsoever in providing you with this information.My next article will provide tips as to what questions you need to ask and what else you need to be aware of in looking to hire a reliable and competent commercial building inspector.

When it’s about differentiating both of them it’s quite difficult to do, as both assist in making investment decisions. That involves choosing MF schemes as well. Both are the enrolled entities and managed by the different regulatory body. As the Mutual Fund Distributor is under and controlled by AMFI ( The Association of Mutual Funds in India). And the Investment Advisors are controlled by SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India).Before moving on first understand a difference lets discuss that who are mutual fund distributor and investment advisor is?Investment Advisor- A Investment Advisor is an individual or group who give financing and investment advice. Even manages securities analysis in return for a fee, whether by direct administration of client assets or by written publications. If he has sufficient assets to be enrolled with the SEC is recognised as a Registered Investment Advisor or RIA. Investment Advisors are also known as “Financial Advisors”. He/she do an evaluation of the investor’s assets, liabilities, income and expenses and advise investment plan.Mutual Fund Distributor – They be person or entity facilitating in buying and selling of MF units to the investors. They earn income in the form of commission for bringing leads(investors) for investing in MF schemes. He/she is expected to know the investor’s situation, risk profile and suggest suitable investment plan to meet the investor’s demands.Getting a commission never means that a Mutual Fund distributor is allowed to trade the MF scheme to the investors just to get a commission. Well, the regulations are very severe in this respect.Now let’s discuss 8 points which help in differentiating between a Mutual fund distributor from Investment Advisor.

Paying mode for advice

We all know that mutual fund distributor is enrolled with AMFI, they are usually the executors of your investments. The investor asks the mutual fund distributor to buy/sell MF plans for them. From doing so the AMC gives commission to the MFD. To avoid mis-selling of MF plans the SEBI has directed AMCs. To pay only trail commission by utilising the trail-only model. Also, not to give any upfront commissions or upfronting of any trail commissions straight or secondhand. Even the contests or sponsorships would be recognised as an upfront payment. These investment advisors normally charge a fee rather than get commissions from AMC. So with this change in the industry investors.

Depositary Duty

Distributors differ from advisors in the sense that advisors are bound by depositary duty. That implies they are committed to giving investors with honest advice, while distributors are bound by no such promise.

Examination and Certification

The examination exam for both mutual fund distributor and investment advisor are different. For MFD get a valid certification by the National Institute of Securities Market(NISM). By clearing their certification examination NISM Series V-A: Mutual Fund Distributors Certification Examination. For Investment Advisor a person needs to clear both the levels 2 levels:

NISM-Series-X-A: Investment Adviser -Level 1

NISM-Series-X-B: Investment Adviser -Level 2

The mutual fund advisor must have a certification in financial planning.

Advisers can advise but not distribute

An MFD has a plus point that they can advise for the best MF schemes. They assist an investor to understand the benefits of mutual funds, types of MF and risk factor. They also guide the investor about the MF investment and meet the investors demands. After that, they ask the investor to invest money in mutual funds. They keep distributing the mutual fund’s plan. The Investment advisors give advice on which MF to invest but cannot work as a distributor. Their duty is just to advise. After that its investors choice but distributor make sure that investor does invest in mutual funds.

Duties differentiation

Apart from this, the central focus of a mutual fund distributor is the distribution of the funds. Whereas the job of a MF, the advisor involves various other duties.

Helping the investor change his/her portfolio

Record-keeping

Evaluating risk-taking capacity funds

Choosing the right investment option

Direct plan vs Regular planA Mutual fund distributor will give Investor regular plan and ask them to invest in the same. But the Investment Advisors advice an investor to invest in direct plans. In past the MF had to be purchased under the guidance of distributors, there wasn’t any different option. But in January 2013, SEBI mandated the AMCs to begin direct plans of the mutual funds. This enables the advisors to not only advise investors but also assist them to invest in direct MF plans. Direct plans have a more economical expense ratio than the regular plans. So while distributors may fascinate you towards the regular plans for their commissions, advisors will not.

Take into outline their level of gathering relevant information differs

Recognizing the necessity to find general information about your financial profile, is the base of good financial planning. It is consequently necessary to guarantee that the person you’re trusting with for finances, is interested to ask important questions. Like about your goals, income, expenses, long and short-term goals, assets, liabilities, tax status etc. They must also offer need-based plans to reach your financial goals, rather of product-based advice. While MFD is likely to discuss your demands with products they are commissioned to market. A financial advisor is expected to offer unbiased advice to fit your necessities.

Discussing the factor of risk and returns

This factor is usually discussed by the advisor in a great manner than the Investment advisor. He/she will discuss the risk factors for MF I.e high, low, moderate etc. Then he will look out for MF scheme performance in past years. After that will suggest you invest in the plan. The investment advisor will ask the distributor to convenience the investor to invest in plan particular MF plan they are looking for just to meet their financial need. An advisor would be more interested in evaluating your risk appetite. Also, setting the proper expectation with concerns to returns on investment.ConclusionIt’s quite difficult to say that a mutual fund distributor is necessary or adviser. Both are an important source for the right investment in mutual funds. From the MF regulation view- all persons including companies, who get AMFI certification number (ARN), are mutual fund distributors, from the highest to the smallest. In the way of distributing the MF schemes of different AMCs, they also need advice in many ways – scheme selection, asset allocation, tax planning etc, all in the scope of MF schemes. So its all investor choice that he directly wants to contact a distributor or want advice for mutual funds.’Invest today – Enjoy tomorrow’!

For most married couples, the cornerstone of estate planning is the transfer of their biggest asset: their home. So it’s important that couples be aware of the many roads this process can take.Married couples who own real property together have many options when deciding how to share the asset. Traditional approaches include joint tenancy, tenancy in common, tenancy by the entirety and community property. All have advantages and disadvantages.Joint tenancy is a form of concurrent ownership where each owner has an equal interest in the property. It is available to unmarried couples as well, though I will focus on married couples in this article.Arguably, the most useful feature of a joint tenancy arrangement is the “right of survivorship.” When the first spouse dies, his or her stake in the property passes directly to the surviving spouse, without the need for probate administration. During probate, a court determines the validity of the decedent’s estate documents and helps to settle any claims against the estate before the property is distributed to the heirs. Avoiding this process can save the beneficiary of an estate substantial costs and time. By foregoing probate, the surviving spouse also gains additional privacy, since the probate process is a matter of public record.Tenancy in common usually does not have the right of survivorship. However, it allows other customizations, and offers greater flexibility. As in joint tenancy, tenants in common do not have to be married; unlike in joint tenancy, tenants in common may hold unequal interests in the property. Tenancy in common is not dissolved when one of the tenants dies, either. If John and Jane are tenants in common, each with a 50 percent interest in their property, John can bequeath his 50 percent to their son John Jr., and Jane’s interest will remain unaffected.Tenancy by the entirety is available only to married couples, though Hawaii and Vermont offer options for domestic partners and those in civil unions, respectively. For legal purposes, it is as if the property is owned by a single entity (the couple) instead of two parties. Neither party can dissolve the tenancy without the other’s consent, except in cases of divorce or annulment. Like joint tenancy, tenancy by the entirety offers a right of survivorship, allowing the surviving spouse to avoid probate. It can also shield the property from creditors of one spouse only, though not from creditors to whom the couple is jointly in debt. Not all U.S. jurisdictions recognize tenancy by the entirety.Community property laws exist in only nine states: Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. In Alaska, couples may enter into community property arrangements, but must do so by signing agreements or forming a trust. The validity of such arrangements is still untried on a federal level, though, and it is not clear whether the Internal Revenue Service will honor them for federal tax purposes.Although the specifics of community property laws vary from state to state, the basic idea is the same. Like tenancy by the entirety, community property is an option only for married couples. Generally, any property acquired by either spouse during the marriage becomes community property, unless it is a gift or an inheritance. Property owned prior to the marriage is also excluded. Spouses may enter into agreements, such as prenuptial or postnuptial arrangements, that preclude otherwise eligible property from being subject to community property laws, or which convert separate property to community property.Community property has no right of survivorship. Each owner can dispose of his or her interest individually. As a result, without additional estate planning, most transfers will be subject to probate, even if one spouse simply leaves the entirety of their interest to the other. Creditors can also generally reach the deceased spouse’s interest through normal estate administration rules. Community property offers the advantage of allowing a full step-up in basis upon the death of either spouse, which typically allows the survivor to pay taxes on a smaller capital gain should the property be sold.This is illustrated in the example below, contrasting joint tenancy with community property:John and Jane purchased a home for $1 million, and it is now worth $2.5 million. Jane has died and John inherited the home. If they owned the property as joint tenants with right of survivorship, John’s basis in the property is $1.75 million. This is because only Jane’s half of the interest is stepped up to the current market value ($1.25 million). The cost basis of John’s half of the interest continues to be based on the $1 million purchase price ($500,000). In contrast, both John’s and Jane’s interests would be stepped up to the current market value of the home if they had owned it as community property, and John would inherit the home with a cost basis of $2.5 million. This could mean a significant reduction in taxable capital gains if John were to sell the property after Jane’s death, even allowing for a potential reduction due to the home-sale exclusion rule. This would also be the case for other property, such as investment assets, owned by the couple.All of these arrangements offer benefits and drawbacks, which may weigh differently depending on a couple’s situation. Joint tenancy and tenancy by the entirety allow the surviving spouse to avoid probate, but do not offer community property’s generous terms for a full step-up in basis in the property. Community property risks giving creditors access to the decedent’s portion of the property, but also allows more flexibility in the way that property is distributed. Tenancy in common offers the option of unequal interests in the property, but does not have a right of survivorship.In certain states, couples have yet another option that is relatively new: community property with right of survivorship. In several states, the law has been on the books for less than 15 years. California – the state that has arguably received the most attention on the topic – first implemented these ownership rights in 2001. Of the nine community property states, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Texas and Wisconsin currently offer the right of survivorship option. Laws also vary by state regarding which property is eligible to be titled as community property with right of survivorship. For example, only real property may be titled this way in Idaho.The states that offer community property with right of survivorship seek to make it easier for couples that have relatively simple estates to transfer property to a surviving spouse. Before the advent of community property with right of survivorship, married couples had to draft special agreements or use trusts to convert joint property into community property. Community property with right of survivorship allows married couples to take advantage of the full step-up in basis while avoiding probate administration, all without the need for more complex estate planning.Like any estate planning method, community property with right of survivorship is not a cure-all. For example, should bankruptcy be a concern, joint tenancy or (in some cases) tenancy by the entirety would leave the non-debtor’s property out of the bankruptcy proceedings, while property held as community property, with or without the right of survivorship, would move entirely to the bankruptcy trustee’s control until proceedings were complete. Couples should carefully examine their situations before deciding which arrangement is likely to carry the most benefits.Though this option is not prevalent nationwide, financial advisors should be aware of both its benefits and its potential drawbacks. Even if a couple does not currently live in a community property state, they may have once lived in such a state, or they may move to one in the future. If a client lived and purchased real estate in a state that offered community property with right of survivorship, the property may continue to be characterized that way, even if the owners have since moved elsewhere.Most couples and, too often, the advisors with whom they work tend to overlook important consequences and planning opportunities when deciding how to take or maintain title to property. It is a big decision. Approach it carefully, and consider seeking qualified professional advice to guide you.