What name is on the building isn’t of much value in enforcing a judgment. What’s important is what name is on title as the owner, and what security interests have been registered against title by the banks.
Trump has been selling his name (pardon me, his « brand ») for years now. If ABC Corp agrees to pay him to put « Trump » on their building because they think it will bring in more money, that doesn’t mean Trump now owns a share in the building.
It’s a case-by-case analysis, starting with the title, and then maybe the branding arrangement.
True but also this is not that complicated. Compared to some of the criminals the NY DA’s office has to deal with (drug barons, mafioso, etc.) who are (or who can employ) best people in the world at hiding assets and laundering money, Trump and the Trump co, are not that good at those things (or anything else)
A LONG time since I did collections, but IIRC when I did, in Florida any one primary residence and any one car - of any value - was exempt from garnishment. Plus, you could not garnish wages.
Mar-a-Lago isn’t a private residence. Rather it’s a club, and Trump is permitted to take up residence there because he’s listed as an employee. I don’t believe Mar-a-Lago would be protected from seizure because it’s not techinically a residence.
Thanks, all. I hated collections, and didn’t do it for long. Just knew it was a bitch to collect in FL and TX. And I thought it almost criminal how successfully wealthy people could insulate themselves from collection.
Here’s an article that came out when Trump officially changed his residence from NYC to Mar-A-Lago.
Then a year later, just as you said, Palm Beach allowed Trump to live there for as long as he’s considered to be an employee of the club.
So I guess you can think of it as any situation where a person is being provided housing by their employer. They are not considered to own the residence, and don’t even pay taxes because it’s a business expense for the business.
And indeed this is the kind of arrangement Trump has. The club is taxed as a club, not a residence. Frankly, Trump does not officially own a residence in Florida, so he has no property there that would be exempt from garnishment under Florida law. He kind of screwed himself a bit I guess.
Let’s face it. Mar-a-lago is overvalued. A $30 million property in disrepair bought for $10 million in the 80s, and developed, yes, but property restrictions were on it (and broken), and isn’t that his way, lying about development, or lack of development.
It appears he did the same in Scotland too, for his golf courses there, I am not sure if the Scottish police may also be looking at fraud charges for that too.
So, if Don the Con is an employee of Mal-a-Lardo and the club provides his housing, he must be reporting the value of the housing as income? I also wonder what his salary/wage is? What, if any, did he pay in rent? How much extra for the multiple storerooms and the bathroom? The Secret Service put in $700,000.00 in security renovations; what happened to that value?
I’m not sure that much if any of that information is public info so we might never know. If he’s an employee of a private business, that sort of thing isn’t subject to public disclosure.
I did find some info about his “employment” here:
Trump’s duties at Mar-a-Lago, according to his attorney, John B. Marion, include overseeing the property, evaluating the performance of employees, suggesting improvements to the club’s operations, reviewing the club’s financials, attending events, greeting guests and recommending candidates for membership.
So at the very least we have a public statement in regards to what his duties as an “employee” are.
I know I keep harping on this point, but this is a key point in enforcing a judgment: you have to find an asset that is clearly the property of the judgment debtor.
If Mar-a-Lago is owned by a corporation, who owns the shares in the corporation? Does more than one person or corporation that owns shares? Is it possible to trace it all back to Trump as an individual, or one of the Trump Org entities who are subject to the judgment? What if Melania owns shares in Mar-a-Lago Inc.? or all three of the Trump Org kids? If it’s clear that Trump and Trump Org entities are the sole beneficial owners, you might be able to enforce. But if there are other part beneficial owners, it gets tricky.
How do you know that? Trump learnt at the feet of the master: Roy Cohn, who was judgment-proof for most of his life. Mobsters have to hide assets. “Honest” businessmen like Trump [gag] can use a variety of corporations, trusts, and partnerships, all very legal and above-aboard, to make it very difficult to enforce a judgment, because ownership is so diffused.
Remember the case of the Scottish helicopter, where Trump owned a trust, that owned 99% of a NJ corporation, that owned 99% of another NJ corporation, that owed a Scottish company, that owned another Scottish company, that owned the helicopter. Who owned those 1% interests in the two NJ companies? That makes it difficult to say that Trump was the beneficial owner of the helicopter, because there is someone else in the chain of ownership.
The Wall Street Journal article concluded that fifteen different entities were involved in owning Trump’s two helicopters and three airplanes. That’s not impossible to untangle, but as George Harrison sang:
It’s gonna take time
A whole lot of precious time
It’s gonna take patience and time, mmm
To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it
To do it right, child
Everything I can find says Donald Trump has been the owner since 1985. Here is an article with some history of the building and a lot of info about what Trump has done with it.
I’ve also read that he converted it to a private club in 1995 to help offset the costs of owning and maintaining the property. He made the agreement with Palm Bean in 1993 ahead of that, which allowed him to turn it into a private club, but that was the same agreement that said he couldn’t live there full-time. By claiming he was an employee, he was able to get around that agreement.
The town defines “employee” as “any person generally working onsite for the establishment and includes sole proprietors, partners, limited partners, corporate officers and the like.”
Note that it says that you can be a “sole proprietor” and still be an employee. The actual owner of a business can be an employee if that owner spends time at the location performing work.