Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Regarding The CDC Order Halting Evictions

September 3rd, 2020

On September 1, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued an order temporarily halting residential evictions to prevent the further spread of COVID-19. Since that time, Huddleston Law Offices has received many questions from concerned landlords and tenants regarding how the CDC’s order works. The following Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) have been developed to address questions raised. This FAQ contains my opinions provided in an attempt to assist you in understanding the provisions of the CDC’s order. However, some responses are ultimately a matter of judicial interpretation.

Q1: When does this order go into effect?

A1: By its terms, the order becomes effective on the “date of publication in the Federal Register.” The order includes a notation that the publication date is expected to be September 4, 2020.

Q2: Does the CDC’s order halt all evictions?

A2: No. The order states that “a landlord, owner of a residential property, or other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or possessory action, shall not evict any covered person from any residential property in any jurisdiction to which this Order applies during the effective period of the Order.” The Order further indicates that a tenant can still be evicted for:

  • “[E]ngaging in criminal activity while on the premises;”
  • “[T]hreatening the health or safety of other residents;”
  • “[D]amaging or posing an immediate and significant risk of damage to property;”
  • “[V]iolating any applicable building code, health ordinance, or similar regulation relating to health and safety;” or
  • “[V]iolating any other contractual obligation, other than the timely payment of rent or similar housing-related payment (including non-payment or late payment of fees, penalties, or interest).”

Q3: Who is a “covered person” under the CDC order?

A3: The order states that a covered person means “any tenant, lessee, or resident of a residential property who provides to their landlord, the owner of the residential property, or other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or a possessory action, a declaration under penalty of perjury indicating that:

  1. The individual has used best efforts to obtain all available government assistance for rent or housing;
  2. The individual either (i) expects to earn no more than $99,000 in annual income for Calendar Year 2020 (or no more than $198,000 if filing a joint return), (ii) was not required to report any income in 2019 to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or (iii) received an Economic Impact Payment (stimulus check) pursuant to Section 2201 of the CARES Act;
  3. [T]he individual is unable to pay the full rent or make a full housing payment due to substantial loss of household income, loss of compensable hours of work or wages, a layoff, or extraordinary out-of-pocket medical expenses;
  4. [T]he individual is using best efforts to make timely partial payments that are as close to the full payment as the individual’s circumstances may permit, taking into account other nondiscretionary expenses; and
  5. [E]viction would likely render the individual homeless—or force the individual to move into and live in close quarters in a new congregate or shared living setting— because the individual has no other available housing options.”

Q4: What is the “Declaration” in question 3?

A4: The order states, “To invoke the CDC’s order these persons must provide an executed copy of the Declaration form (or a similar declaration under penalty of perjury) to their landlord, owner of the residential property where they live, or other person who has a right to have them evicted or removed from where they live.”

Q5: Can the court accept filings or can the landlord obtain a judgment to be executed when the moratorium lifts?

A5: It depends. The order defines “evict” and “eviction” as “any action by a landlord, owner of a residential property, or other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or a possessory action, to remove or cause the removal of a covered person from a residential property.” The language in the order: “any action . . . to remove or cause the removal of” is a matter of judicial interpretation.

Q6: Does the CDC’s order affect the contractual obligations of renters to pay rent?

A6: No. The order states that it “has no effect on the contractual obligations of renters to pay rent and shall not preclude charging or collecting fees, penalties, or interest as a result of the failure to pay rent or other housing payment on a timely basis, under the terms of any applicable contract.”

Q7: Does the CDC Order apply to commercial properties?

A7: No. The order applies to residential properties only. “Residential property” is defined as “any property leased for residential purposes, including any house, building, mobile home or land in a mobile home park, or similar dwelling leased for residential purposes, but shall not include any hotel, motel, or other guest house rented to a temporary guest or seasonal tenant as defined under the laws of the State, territorial, tribal, or local jurisdiction.”

Q8: Does this order include foreclosure on a home mortgage?

A8: No. The order “does not include foreclosure on a home mortgage.”

Q9: Does the CDC moratorium apply to Oklahoma?

A9: Yes. The order “shall be enforced by Federal authorities and cooperating State and local authorities through the provisions of 18 U.S.C 3559, 3571; 42 U.S.C 243, 268, 271; and 42 CFR 70.18.”

Q10: When does the CDC’s order expire?

A10: The order states that it “will remain in effect, unless extended, modified, or rescinded, through December 31, 2020.”

Q11: Is there a penalty for violating the CDC’s order?

A11: Yes. The order states that “a person violating this Order may be subject to a fine of no more than $100,000.00 if the violation does not result in a death or one year in jail, or both, or a fine of no more than $250,000.00 if the violation results in a death or one year in jail, or both, or as otherwise provided by law. An organization violating this Order may be subject to a fine of no more than $200,000.00 per event if the violation does not result in a death or $500,000.00 per event if the violation results in a death or as otherwise provided by law.” Landlords considering filing eviction proceedings for one of the reasons permitted by the CDC Order should therefore exercise caution and be certain of their grounds for eviction. Eviction proceedings in the current climate are likely to draw additional judicial scrutiny.

Q12: Who would prosecute for violations of this order?

A12: “The U.S. Department of Justice may initiate court proceedings as appropriate seeking imposition of these criminal penalties.”

Q13: What Should a Landlord Do If It Receives a CDC Declaration from a Tenant?

A13: If a landlord receives a CDC Declaration from a tenant, the landlord should respond in writing to the tenant to encourage the tenant to make partial payments of rent to the extent the tenant is able, in accordance with the CDC Declaration eligibility requirements. Additionally, the landlord’s written correspondence should remind tenants that: a) the rent and late fees are not forgiven, b) the rent will ultimately have to be paid or the tenant will be evicted, c) the tenant could eventually be subject to collection activities, and d) eviction proceedings are publicly available on OSCN.NET for prospective landlords to see. Additionally, many tenants may not be aware of the government assistance programs that are available to tenants to help tenants pay their rent during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Landlords should include a list of available resources that tenants can use to pay their rent. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has stated that nonprofits that received Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) or Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds under the CARES Act may use these funds to provide temporary rental assistance to tenants. The following websites provide information on federal assistance that is available: www.hudexchange.info/programsupport; https://www.hud.gov/coronaviru; and https://home.treasury.gov/policyissues/cares/state-and-local-governments. Additionally, many local jurisdictions have instituted their own relief programs and have their own resources available. In Tulsa rent assistance is distributed via a program that you can learn more about here: https://www.tulsahousing.org/. #TulsaCARES

The orders and laws related to the COVID-19 Pandemic are changing on a daily basis and Oklahoma and Tulsa County may enact stricter rules related to evictions. A landlord should verify the rules currently affecting their property before filing an eviction.

Share

Update on CDC Eviction Moratorium

September 2nd, 2020

the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), at the direction of President Trump, filed an order in the Federal Register that temporarily halts residential evictions to prevent the further spread of COVID-19. Huddleston Law Offices is preparing for the order which will go into effect this Friday, September 4. The order will bar virtually all evictions for both single family and multi-family housing until December 31, 2020. The CDC Order specifically states it is not a rule within the meaning of the Administrative Procedures Act, but is an emergency action taken under the existing authority of 42 CFR 70.2. To the extent it qualifies as a rule, notice and comment periods are ineffective as it is issued under a public-health emergency.  Thus, the order takes immediate effect upon publication in the Federal Register this Friday.  The CDC Order lists the compelling public interest, danger and police powers necessary to take this sweeping action under 5 U.S.C. Section 553(b)(3)(B).    

Here is what you need to know about the order:

1) It applies to virtually all rental housing and prohibits any eviction action to remove a renter during the covered period, so long as the renter provides the required declaration to their landlord.

2) The order does not prevent evictions based on the lawful reasons articulated in the order, i.e.: a) engaging in criminal activity while on the premises; b) threatening the health or safety of other residents; c) damaging or posing an immediate and significant risk of damage to property; d) violating any applicable building code, health ordinance, or similar regulation relating to health and safety; or e) violating any other contractual obligation, other than the timely payment of rent, late fees, penalties, or interest.

3) Outstanding balances will become due when the moratorium ends, including late fees.

4) To be eligible for the order’s protections, a renter must provide a declaration under penalty of perjury to their landlord (an example form is contained in the order and here) indicating the following: a) The individual has used best efforts to obtain rental assistance; b) The individual expects to earn no more than $99,000 (no more than $198,000 when filing jointly); was not required to report income in 2019 to the IRS; or received a stimulus check pursuant to the CARES Act; c) The individual is unable to pay their full rent due to a number of factors that remain unconnected to COVID-19; d) The individual is using best efforts to make timely partial payments; and e) Eviction would likely render the individual homeless or force the individual to move into and live in close quarters in a new congregate or shared living setting because the individual has no other available housing options.

5) Any landlord that violates the order may be subject to up to $500,000 in fines per violation and/or jail time. Enhanced penalties apply if the violation resulted in death, at the discretion of the U.S. Department of Justice. 

6) Jurisdictions that have an eviction moratorium providing the same or greater level of public-health protection than the CDC order are exempt from its requirements.

We understand landlords are concerned about President Trump’s actions, and the complexity of the language in the CDC’s order will amplify the strain of sustaining your investment property during these difficult times. Huddleston Law Offices is studying the enforceability of the order, how it will interact with existing federal, state and local requirements and a number of other ambiguities in the text, such as whether the order applies to eviction filings or is limited to the physical removal of tenants. Specifically, the statutory authority of the CDC to issue and enforce this order needs to be examined. 42 U.S.C.A. Section 264(e) gives the Surgeon General preemptive powers over conflicting state and local laws as to Federal authority.  It references 42 U.S.C.A. Section 266, which provides for special CDC quarantine powers in times of war.  Clearly, we are not at war in the traditional sense of that word. 

42 U.S.C.A. Section 264(a) gives the Surgeon General, with the approval of the Secretary, authorization to make and enforce regulations regarding communicable diseases to prevent their introduction or transmission from one state to another (and to or from foreign countries).

42 C.F.R. 70.2 grants the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, when it is determined measures taken by local health authorities are insufficient to prevent the spread of any communicable disease from such State/possession to any other State/possession, to take such measures to prevent the spread the Director deems reasonably necessary. 

Other outstanding issues include whether landlords may require proof to support the tenant’s declaration; if the declaration applies as an affirmative defense to an eviction action; and how these requirements apply to holdover tenancies, non-renewals and termination notices.  The CDC order clearly does not bar the filing of eviction cases. Instead, it provides a new Federal affirmative defense to a state law based eviction that must be pled and proved. If the tenant does not appear at the court hearing, a default judgement can still be entered. If the tenant fails to submit the Declaration, or if the tenant makes a false Declaration and the landlord can prove it, an eviction can still occur. One of the conditions of the Declaration may prove problematic for employed tenants trying to take advantage of the CDC order. That is the requirement that the tenant keep paying as much rent as the tenant can under the circumstances. Otherwise, the tenant could be found to have failed the eligibility test, which says the tenant should be trying to make partial payments to the best of the tenant’s ability.

As the situation and our understanding of the order continues to evolve, we will post updates of new developments.

Share

Extension of Foreclosure and Eviction Moratorium Due to COVID-19

September 2nd, 2020

The Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”) announced another extension of its foreclosure and eviction moratorium through December 31, 2020 for homeowners with an FHA-insured single-family mortgage covered under the CARES Act.

This extension means the FHA has now provided more than nine months of foreclosure and eviction relief to FHA-insured homeowners. As this is a continuation of the moratorium put in place in March of this year, the protections continue to apply to homeowners with FHA-insured Title II Single Family forward and Home Equity Conversion (“reverse”) mortgages.

On August 27 FHFA announced that Fannie and Freddie are extending their foreclosure and eviction moratorium to December 31, 2020. FHA made a similar announcement. (See Mortgagee Letter 2020-27.) The purpose of the Mortgagee Letter is to inform mortgagees of an extension to the foreclosure and eviction moratorium originally issued in ML 2020-4, extended in ML 2020-13, and further extended in ML 2020-19 for borrowers with FHA-insured Single Family mortgages covered under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act for an additional period through December 31, 2020. The extension of the moratorium announced in the ML is effective immediately upon the expiration of the moratorium announced in ML 2020-19 for all FHA-insured mortgages except for FHA-insured mortgages secured by vacant or abandoned properties.

Share

Why McGirt Does Not Affect Land Ownership

August 18th, 2020

Today, the reservation lands guaranteed to the five tribes in the 1866 treaty area are almost entirely owned by non-tribal members as private property. This is the legacy of the Oklahoma Enabling Act of 1906 as well as various Congressional allotment acts – or so-called “Indian homesteading” laws – in which treaty lands held by tribes were parceled out to individual tribal members, with the bulk of the remaining lands declared surplus and sold to non-Indians. McGirt , No. 18-9526, 591 U.S. ___ (decided July 9, 2020), does not alter land ownership, but it does uphold the 1866 treaty in another way. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that the Creek Nation’s 1866 treaty area, which includes the City of Tulsa and about one-third of the state, was never eliminated (the legal term in the Court’s precedent is “disestablished”) for purposes of the Creek Nation’s exercise of its inherent sovereign power to prosecute crimes involving Indians. More specifically, an 1885 statute, the Major Crimes Act (MCA) permits the federal government to exercise criminal jurisdiction over certain felonies arising on Indian reservations.

Under the MCA, federal officials – including the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Indian Country Crimes Unit; the United States Attorney’s Offices; and U.S. Magistrate Judges and U.S. District Court Judges – may exercise criminal jurisdiction concurrently with tribal governments within the exterior boundaries of about half of the Indian reservations in the United States. The MCA only comes into play when members of federally recognized Indian tribes are either the alleged perpetrators or victims of the specific offenses listed in the MCA. The Supreme Court has long held that there is no double jeopardy when such concurrent jurisdiction is exercised by tribes and the federal government over the same or similar criminal offenses. Just as it is with federal and state prosecutions, the separate sovereigns each have the right to enforce their own criminal laws.

Share

Webinar On Mortgage Forbearance for Landlords under the CARES Act

May 27th, 2020

Brian Huddleston, and Kristin Maun, Housing Coordinator for the City of Tulsa, presented an educational webinar on the mortgage forbearance and eviction moratorium provisions for landlords under the CARES Act. This webinar was recorded and we will post a link as soon as the video is available. The PowerPoint slides are here. It is helpful for landlords and property owners to learn more about mortgage relief and the eviction moratorium under the CARES Act. Including the secondary eviction moratorium applicable to those multi-family properties covered by a federally backed loan for which the borrower obtains a temporary mortgage forbearance after the general moratorium ends in late July.

https://www.newson6.com/story/5eccd0e029d2410c30484c72/webinar-on-eviction-moratorium-to-be-held-tuesday-

Share

Street Law School: Commercial Landlord Self-Help Evictions

May 26th, 2020

The ability of a landlord to evict a tenant during the COVID-19 outbreak is severely limited by executive or judicial orders issued in response to the pandemic. Most courts have limited operations and some have suspended residential and commercial evictions in addition to the CARES Act (discussed in a separate Blawg post).

In the absence of the ready availability of judicial eviction proceedings, landlords are asking if they can use self-help methods to evict or lock out tenants. In Oklahoma, the answer is a resounding “NO!” For example, in the Oklahoma Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, the landlord’s self-help remedies are outright eliminated, and the landlord is required to pursue judicial remedies only. Commercial landlords may think that the self-help remedies carefully detailed in their leases are enforceable as written. But they are not! Landlords may enforce their rights only by the judicial process despite language to the contrary in their commercial leases. See, Parker Livestock, LLC v. Okla. City Nat’l Stock Yards Co. (W.D. Okla., 2015) (An action for forcible entry and detainer is the exclusive procedure for ousting a both residential and commercial tenants.).

Thus, self-help measures, such as changing locks, cutting off utilities, or removing tenant property, may expose a landlord to civil damages, and a landlord should carefully consider and seek legal advice before acting. The statutory penalty for a wrongful residential eviction is two (2) times the rent for the period of the eviction until the property is restored to the tenant, plus attorney fees and court costs.

Demand for Cleaning and Quiet Enjoyment

Cleaning issues are likely to take center stage after the outbreak ends and business restrictions are lifted. Even if not expressly provided for in the lease or demanded by the tenant, landlords should take reasonable steps to maintain the property during and after the outbreak, following CDC guidelines for proper cleaning and disinfection.

Failing to maintain the property or failing to take appropriate steps to clean the property and prevent the spread of disease may be grounds for a breach of the landlord’s covenant of quiet enjoyment or for constructive eviction. Constructive eviction is a high bar, but issues related to the pandemic will provide opportunities for the development of case law applicable to our current circumstances.

As the length of business shutdowns grow, so will the scope and magnitude of issues that landlords and tenants need to navigate. The most effective method for dealing with the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak is for landlords and tenants to proactively communicate and avoid making decisions that could be regretted later.

Share

Victory on Appeal! Beeler vs. BONY

May 17th, 2020

Huddleston Law Offices is pleased to announce that Brian Huddleston just won a successful appeal in a long fought real estate foreclosure case involving the application of 12 O.S.2011, § 2025 and 12 O.S.2011, § 2017. The Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals issued an unpublished decision on May 12, 2020 reversing and remanding the case to the trial court in Tulsa County for further proceedings.  The opinion can be viewed here.

Case No. CJ-2005-1683 (yes, 2005!) began as an action for foreclosure of the Beeler home by The Bank of New York, Trust U/A dated 12/1/01 (EQCC Trust 2001-2). BONY was granted summary judgment that was reversed on appeal in 2013 due to BONY’s lack of standing to sue under the 2012 line of Oklahoma Supreme Court cases following Deutsche Bank Natl Trust V. Brumbaugh, 2012 OK 3, 270 P.3d 151. After the case was remanded, Huddleston argued that BONY’s petition should have been dismissed with leave granted to allow BONY to file an amended petition with the required properly endorsed note attached under the curative procedure established in HSBC Bank USA V. Lyon, 2012 OK 10, 276 P.3d 1002.

At BONY’s peril, the trial court did not require BONY to follow Lyon to cure the jurisdictional defect. Instead, BONY was allowed to substitute Nationscredit Financial Services Corporation as the plaintiff. Nationscredit in turn was allowed to substitute DLJ Mortgage Capital as the plaintiff (the latter two arguing in turn that they were the “holder” of the note and thereby entitled to substitution). DLJ filed and obtained summary judgment. On appeal for the second time, the COCA validated Huddleston’s argument that, because BONY never established its standing at the time it commenced the foreclosure case in 2005, it could not ignore the Lyon procedure and use 12 O.S.2011, § 2025 and 12 O.S.2011, § 2017 to substitute NationsCredit or DLJ as plaintiffs. That is to say, a plaintiff lacking standing to sue can’t cure that jurisdictional defect by simply substituting in a new plaintiff that arguably does have standing. Rather, the case must first be dismissed and refiled by the new plaintiff that must establish its own standing to sue.

The Beeler case stands for the proposition that, if a foreclosing plaintiff lacks standing to sue, the trial court also lacks jurisdictional power to grant any relief under 12 O.S.2011, § 2025 and 12 O.S.2011, § 2017 until the original petition is first dismissed and refiled by the original plaintiff with the properly endorsed note attached to the petition. Absent committing fraud upon the court, BONY could not do this after the first appeal in 2013, and cannot do it now after the second appeal, because BONY signed a special indorsement of the note to NationsCredit in 1998, and recorded an assignment of the mortgage and note to NationsCredit in 2007. After 15 years of fighting BONY, vindication was had with these words by the COCA in the Beeler opinion: “Bank was never the holder of the note.”

Brian Huddleston has achieved several appellate court victories since the foreclosure crisis began over a decade ago. While lenders usually win their cases on summary judgment, Huddleston defends borrowers with an extensive motion practice that many times provides the basis for the summary judgments to be critically reviewed and reversed on appeal. The lender’s legal arguments and evidentiary materials can be deficient in many ways. Often the errors are procedural and a technicality. Huddleston Law Offices is gratified to once again be found to be technically correct, which when it comes to appeals, is the best kind of correct.

Share

CARES Act Impact on IRS 1031 Tax Free Exchanges

April 10th, 2020

Late yesterday, the IRS issued Notice 2020-23, extending a variety of deadlines, including 1031 deadlines. Although the Notice is confusing, because it is not written like the typical Disaster Relief Notices, this Notice extends any 45-day or 180-day deadline that occurs between April 1 and July 14, to July 15, 2020.

Share

Landlords Beware: CARES Act Impact On Leases

April 10th, 2020

The CARES Act includes a number of provisions affecting properties with federally backed loans (e.g., Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA, HUD, Section 8, VA and USDA). Specifically, a moratorium is in place preventing evictions of residential tenants. The key provisions include the following:

  • There is a 120-day period beginning on March 27, 2020 (the “Moratorium Period”), where the landlord of a “covered dwelling” cannot (A) make, or cause to be made, any filing to initiate a legal action to recover possession of the covered dwelling from the tenant for nonpayment of rent; (B) impose any late fees, penalties or other charges on a tenant for late payment of rent; and (C) mail or post any notices to pay rent or quit (not limited to nonpayment) during the 120 day period.
  • During the Moratorium Period the landlord of a covered dwelling cannot: (A) require a tenant to vacate a dwelling unit located in an applicable property before the date that is 30 days after the date the tenant is provided a notice to vacate; and (B) may not issue a notice to vacate until after the expiration of the Moratorium Period.
  • An “applicable property” includes one that has a Federally backed mortgage loan or a Federally backed multifamily mortgage loan.
  • A “covered dwelling” is (A) a dwelling that is occupied by a tenant pursuant to a residential lease or without a lease or with a lease that is terminable under State law and (B) is in or on a covered property.
  • A “dwelling” includes apartment buildings, mobile homes, trailer parks, condominiums and certain single-family homes.
  • A “Federally backed mortgage loan” is any loan that is secured by a first or subordinate lien on real property (including individual units of condominiums or cooperatives) designed principally for the occupancy of from one to four families that is (A) insured by the Federal Housing Administration or the National Housing Act, (B) guaranteed under Housing and Community Development Act, the Department of Veterans Affairs, or the Department of Agriculture, or (C) purchased or securitized by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or the Federal National Mortgage Association.
  • The “covered period” is the period commencing on March 27, 2020 and ending on the first to occur of (A) the termination date of the national emergency concerning the coronavirus disease outbreak declared by the President on March 13, 2020 and (B) December 31, 2020.
  • This moratorium is not limited to tenants affected by COVID-19, but appears to apply to all tenants regardless of their situation.
  • Nearly half of the nation’s mortgages are owned or backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have easy loan look-up websites to determine if they own a mortgage. To look up online whether a mortgage is owned or backed by Fannie or Freddie, click these links:
  • The CARES Act authorizes criminal penalties, under existing law, for fraud or other misconduct, and creates an Office of the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery within the US Department of the Treasury to coordinate the auditing and investigation of the management and spending of funds under any program established under the CARES Act.
  • Finally, the CARES Act protections are in addition to any state or county limitations on evictions. Here is a link to the current emergency orders in place for Oklahoma.

Share

Street Law: I am a Landlord, can I get COVID relief Too?

April 9th, 2020

President Trump signed the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) into law on March 27th. That Act included relief in the form of $349 billion for loans to small businesses through the Payroll Protection Program (“PPP”) administered by the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”). The SBA initially described the PPP as a program “for any small business with less than 500 employees (including sole proprietorships, independent contractors and self-employed persons), private non-profit organization or 501(c)(19) veterans organizations affected by coronavirus/COVID-19.”

Last night the Small Business Administration issued Interim Regulations relating to the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). Although the CARES Act provides that any business is eligible for the PPP Loan Program, the Interim Regulations refers to 13 CFR 120.110 and the SBA “standard operating procedures” (SOP) 50-10 Subpart B Chapter 2. Both of those provisions make it clear that “passive businesses” are not eligible for CARES Act money. In that regard, 13 CFR 120.110 excludes:
“c) Passive businesses owned by developers and landlords that do not actively use or occupy the assets acquired or improved with the loan proceeds.” SOP 50-10 further states that “Businesses that are primarily engaged in owning or purchasing real estate and leasing it for any purpose are not eligible”, that “Apartment buildings and mobile home parks are not eligible”, and that “Residential facilities that do not provide healthcare and/or medical services are not eligible.”

As a result of the Interim Regulations, unless Congress changes the CARES Act to circumvent the Interim Regulations, Real Estate holding companies, Landlords, RE investors, HOAs, Co-Ops and Condominiums are not eligible for to receive PPP Loans.

Share
  • Categories

  • Archives