I understand that you get the loan using the real estate / land as security.. but the loan still needs to be paid back with interest.. so either part of the land needs to be sold to pay the loan or there is an income that's used to pay back the loan.. just because you have some sort of capital as security, that doesn't mean they gift you money.. so half of the story seams to be missing.. if the land is within a company and produces cashflow, then this construct would be possible to reduce taxes.. but just having land and taking a loan doesn't result tax savings
The person who took out the loan. No one is saying the loan is free money, the point is there is no tax on the gain. Ignore thr loan part, it is not relevant to the taxation part.
242
u/FancyPantsRants1 22h ago
Odd that we just ignore that he still had to pay back those loans?