Trump NY indictment thread

Page 57 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
10,139
6,747
136
I would imagine there would be a lot of difficulty in assessing the value of the seized properties if multiple creditors claim a stake in the property if he cannot pay them. The State would need to know not only the market value of the property but the market value of the portion the State could actually seize.

Well if he took loans out on them.. that money must have gone somewhere. Trace it and seize that!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,251
48,454
136
I would imagine there would be a lot of difficulty in assessing the value of the seized properties if multiple creditors claim a stake in the property if he cannot pay them. The State would need to know not only the market value of the property but the market value of the portion the State could actually seize.
The value of the seized property would be what it gets at auction, no?
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
46,290
33,566
136
Given Trumps postings this morning really doesn't sound like he has the cash or a bond. We'll see soon enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,696
2,465
126
The value of the seized property would be what it gets at auction, no?

Less the allowable costs of collection (sheriff fees, auction costs, etc) which can really add up fast. If real estate the auction price is generally subject to prior mortgages and liens, including property tax. Sale may or may not be subject to tenants rights under current leases. After the costs of collection balance goes to judgment holder (NY) with any excess to the property owner. There is little or no incentive for NY not to seize/attach everything possible.

If The Donald was a normal debtor it's almost certain that his mortgages would all contain language triggering a default on the mortgage in the above circumstances, even if Trump was current on payments.

This cascading set of events cries out for a bankruptcy filing-either voluntary by Trump or involuntary forced on him by his creditors. It is astonishingly pig headed or just plain stupid for him to follow this course of action.

The situation is, of course, complicated enormously by how Trump holds title-odds are he has a alphabet soup of LLCs, corporations, limited partnerships, etc. But remember NY already has a financial monitor in place so they have a pretty good idea how he holds things-probably complicated by a blizzard of transfers he has done recently (if transfer in fraud of creditors rights can be reversed by court).

Trump is certainly well versed in all of this, and he can hire the best lawyers possible. Whether he follows counsels' advice is up to great debate.
 

Hans Gruber

Platinum Member
Dec 23, 2006
2,155
1,099
136
Do you guys want to pool money together to buy a waterfront property in Florida? The property I am considering is a place called Mar A Lago. The real estate brokers say the seller is distressed and in desperate need of cash. I think we should offer $3 million.
 

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
9,137
4,429
136
Whoa appeals court ruling. Reduced amount bond (not the total judgement) to $175 million and given 10 more days to pay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,526
4,609
136
Do you guys want to pool money together to buy a waterfront property in Florida? The property I am considering is a place called Mar A Lago. The real estate brokers say the seller is distressed and in desperate need of cash. I think we should offer $3 million.
How do you plan on getting rid of the smell?
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
46,290
33,566
136
Meanwhile it sounds like the Trump bid to delay the Manhattan criminal trial for a long period of time isn’t going great.
 

pete6032

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2010
7,531
3,078
136
The value of the seized property would be what it gets at auction, no?
Yes. I imagine his lawyers will argue to the tooth and nail about properties being worth tons of money in order to limit the amount of property seized. I would also imagine the properties are already crazy leveraged and might have multiple debtors that would need to be paid before the state got anything. That could really lower the fair market value of the properties. A big red tape mess that I could see locked up in court for months.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,235
12,368
146
I’ve seen a bunch of articles in the last few days about ‘it’s going to be hard for New York to seize Trump’s properties’ and I feel like the author is either a moron or it’s deliberate clickbait.

The basic premise is that the properties are already highly leveraged and other creditors are ahead of NYS in line to be paid if they are sold so the state might not see that much money from an individual sale.

Do people not realize that’s not a state problem, but Trump’s problem? All that means is they have to seize even more of his properties. lol.
Yeah, 'Joke's on them, none of his properties are worth anything!' isn't the hot take they think it is.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,663
10,096
136
Sigh - ridiculous special treatment there. That being said, not at all sure if he has the money to come up with this either.
The only caveat is that an insurer might be willing to play ball now to post bond for Trump. Though even 175mil is more than most insurers would like to sign up for, according to one of the articles I read.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,162
2,255
136
The only caveat is that an insurer might be willing to play ball now to post bond for Trump. Though even 175mil is more than most insurers would like to sign up for, according to one of the articles I read.
The amount is certainly a problem, but according to Trump's lawyers, that wasn't the real issue. Normally I DGAF what they claim, but most articles I've read state that bonding companies/insurers don't want RE as collateral. And they certainly don't want a large basket of mortgaged* Trump properties as collateral. They all want cash and cash equivalents as collateral, which is what he posted for the appeal bond in the EJ Carroll case. Obvious reason being they don't want to deal with the headache of asset recovery if he can't or won't pay.

If it's true that not Chubb or any of 30ish insurers is willing to bankroll $500M for Trump, then it's likely true they are still not interested at nearly $200M. Trump's litigious history and screwing over of businesses and people is also very well known. The 2.5% fee you can make isn't worth the risk unless he's putting up cash equivalents as collateral. And if he's elected POTUS in November, good luck seeing your money until 2029 at the earliest.

* Even his namesake Trump Tower has a $100M mortgage on it. If you were a rich billionaire, wouldn't you want to own your most famous building free and clear after all this time?
 

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,880
2,083
126
Sigh - ridiculous special treatment there. That being said, not at all sure if he has the money to come up with this either.
We should ask the resident conservatives if they approve of THESE handouts...when they oppose student loan forgiveness for example :D
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,362
4,493
136
We should ask the resident conservatives if they approve of THESE handouts...when they oppose student loan forgiveness for example :D

There is a huge difference between using Taxpayers money to pay for student debt and the reduction of an arbitrary bond amount for a trial appeal. As the original fine still applies if he loses the appeal.

I think this 454 million bond is excessive considering nobody was damaged and the banks were fine with their dealings with Trump.
Bernie Madoff's bail was only 10 million after his 64 billion dollar ponzie scheme fraud.

Bankman-Fried was released on a $250 million bond after stealing 8.6 billion dollars.

I'm all for justice, but this just seems like political retribution and revenge.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
46,290
33,566
136
There is a huge difference between using Taxpayers money to pay for student debt and the reduction of an arbitrary bond amount for a trial appeal. As the original fine still applies if he loses the appeal.

I think this 454 million bond is excessive considering nobody was damaged and the banks were fine with their dealings with Trump.
Bernie Madoff's bail was only 10 million after his 64 billion dollar ponzie scheme fraud.

Bankman-Fried was released on a $250 million bond after stealing 8.6 billion dollars.

I'm all for justice, but this just seems like political retribution and revenge.

I don't think the public interest is served by saying its ok to commit a massive amount of fraud and essentially be let off the hook to go keep doing it which he obviously would. Madoff died in prison and SBF might well too. I'd be willing to accept a much lower judgement if Trump faced criminal penalties that would result in the same but he isn't.
 

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
10,139
6,747
136
I don't think the public interest is served by saying its ok to commit a massive amount of fraud and essentially be let off the hook to go keep doing it which he obviously would. Madoff died in prison and SBF might well too. I'd be willing to accept a much lower judgement if Trump faced criminal penalties that would result in the same but he isn't.

He's just making excuses so he can justify voting for him again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: balloonshark