Garrett Sutton returns to the Creating Wealth show to give Jason Hartman’s audience an update on new asset protection laws that have since changed when he was on the podcast last. Garrett is a lawyer, author, and a Rich Dad advisor. On the show, Garrett talks to Jason about what a B Corp is, how trusts work, and provides a deeper look into LLCs. Jason also reminds his audience early in the show that there are still a couple more hard copies of the Meet the Masters home study course, so get it while supplies last!
Key Takeaways:
1:30 – Jason gives a quick update reminding you to leave a voice mail on the website.
3:00 – Jason introduces Garrett.
5:15 – Garrett explains why you’d want to create a B Corp.
11:20 – Many states are not protecting the single member LLC.
17:45 – Garrett explains what a trust is.
22:10 – The state of California is being ridiculous in their taxes. Garrett explains what they’re requesting from his clients.
29:00 – Garrett explains the importance of having a good registered agent.
32:00 – Garrett’s company, Sutton Law Center, is offering a $100 discount to all of Jason’s listeners.
Tweetables:
“The living trust is really good for probative avoidance, that’s why you set it up.”
Mentioned In This Episode:
https://www.jasonhartman.com/cw-371-rich-dad-attorney-garrett-sutton-on-asset-protection/
SutLaw.com
Transcript
Jason Hartman:
Welcome to the Creating Wealth show. This is your host Jason Hartman. This is episode number 481. 481. Thank you so much for joining me today. We have Garrett Sutton back on the show today. He is the attorney who has written a couple of the Rich Dad books, the Robert Kiyosaki Rich Dad, Poor Dad series. Rich Dad Advisors, actually. He’s got some new updates on asset protection issues and maybe a little bit bordering into the tax issues, so we will have him here in just a moment.
Wanted to remind you all though, to go to the website and send in your voice mail. It’s super easy to do this, just go to JasonHartman.com, send us a quick voicemail. It’s just a little tab on the right hand side of the website and you can very quickly just send us a message, a question, a comment, anything you want and we’d just love to hear from ya.
So, go to JasonHartman.com and do that at any time you have a question. If anything comes up or comment, whatever, we always love listener feedback. So, thank you for doing that and then also we are almost out, we’re just on the home stretch of those Meet the Master home study courses the physical product incredibly discounted at $197 dollars per month and this is a close out sale, so get them while you can. They’ll look great on your bookshelf and there’s some great information there.
Do check with us by the way on updated providers. If you listen to those, we always have updates for you and things like that. Before you use anybody, whether they be talking about tax strategies or legal strategies or different marketing around the countries in terms of local market specialists, make sure you’re talking with your investment counselor at my company and we’re helping you get the latest and greatest guidance, okay. That’s it, let’s get to our guest today, Garrett Sutton as we talk about asset protection, here he is.
Hey, it’s my pleasure to welcome Garrett Sutton back to the show. He is founder of the Sutton Law Center, owner of CorporateDirect.com and, of course, you probably heard his name most famously because he is a Rich Dad advisor to Robert Kiyosaki and author of Loopholes of Real Estate, which is just a fantastic book. It was just translated into Spanish and it’s a pleasure to have Garrett back. Garrett, welcome, how are you?
Garrett Sutton:
Good, thanks Jason for having me back.
Jason:
Yeah, it’s good to have you. Where are you located today? Wyoming or Reno?
Garrett:
I’m in Reno, Nevada today and it’s a beautiful day here.
Jason:
Good stuff. Well, all of you lawyers always live in these very favorable smart states.
Garrett:
Right.
Jason:
Just out of curiosity, did you strategically locate there or were you raised in Nevada?
Garrett:
No, I grew up in California in the Bay Area, went to Cal and Hastings law school in San Francisco, but California just got too crowded and too regulatory, so I moved up here in 1989.
Jason:
California, you know, I left California about three and a half years ago and I always say I swear, Garrett, that state does not want me to employ anybody or have any businesses.
Garrett:
Well, it’s gotten even worse, so if we have time we can talk about some of California’s new rules with regard to corporation.
Jason:
Gosh, okay, okay. Let’s try and touch on that if we can, but one of the new things and, you know, we’re going to talk a lot about real estate investing and so forth, but one of the new things I just want to kind of get out of the way, it may not be super applicable to real estate investors is there is a new type of corporation, right? I mean, in the past we always known there is a C Corp and a S Corp and how long has it’s been since they’ve made a new one? This is gotta be kind of ground breaking, right?
Garrett:
Well, yeah, we had the LLC about 30 years ago, but now we have the B Corp or the Benefit Corporation and there are allowed in, I think, 27 states. All 50 states will have them and it’s a really interesting idea, Jason. The idea is that you can have a corporation that not only makes money, you know, has profits, but can also benefit certain activities. Before to do charitable work and social purpose work, you had to use a 401c3. An organization that was approved by the IRS as a non-profit organization. The problem with the non-profit was you couldn’t pay the adequate salaries to get the work done by efficient people.
So, they come up with the B Corp, which allows you to not only make profits, but to provide low-income or undeserved individuals with beneficial products or services. Perverse the environment and improve human health. There are all these categories that you can fit in and you don’t..under regular corporate law, both C and S Corp, under regular corporate law you have a duty to the shareholders to make as much money as possible. You can’t leave money on the table.
With the B Corp, you don’t have to make every last penny for the benefit of the shareholders. You can have profits, but at the same time, provide services at a discounted rate so that you’re not maximizing shareholder profit, but you’re providing a public service as well and so that is what the B Corp is. It’s really interesting. I guess it’s been around for 5 years. It started in Maryland, but to be honest, Jason, we haven’t had that much of a call for it. There are a few B Corps out there, but it’s not like there’s this surge towards people starting as a B Corp. I think part of it is people just aren’t aware of this new entity.
Jason:
This is really most appropriate or maybe just appropriate for non-profits then?
Garrett:
It kind of fits in between non-profit and social purpose where you’re trying to make a profit. So, yes, it’s for people that want to do good in the community, but they don’t want to be restricted by the non-profit rules. They wanna operate as a corporation. They want to pay full salaries. They want to be able to go out and do activities on a corporate basis as opposed to a non-profit basis, but they don’t have to make every last dollar for the benefit of the shareholders. That’s the key here.
Jason:
Well, doesn’t that fall under what’s known as the business judgment rule. I mean, if a non-profit, there’s been a lot of debate about this stuff about, you know, salaries with the ALS, the bucket challenge. The way that company, I guess I’ll call it a company, in that non-profit is managed and you know, like the head of the United Way in the past. I remember hearing complaints about, oh, this person is making like, you know, $700,000 or a million bucks a year or something and everybody thought that was ridiculous. You know, I don’t know. I have a hard time reconciling that kind of stuff, because you know, number one that’s a huge organization and if you want to attract a talented person who is going to make it grow, you know, they can go out in the private world and get a job as a Wall Street crook and make a fortunate.
Garrett:
Well, exactly right, Jason. The B Corp kind of solves that problem. You can have someone engaged in social purpose activity, but pay them that salary that the private sector would pay them anyway.
Jason:
Hmm, interesting. Okay, because I have a foundation. I mean, it was setup about ten years ago and I never heard anything about a B Corp until I saw it on your website recently. So, interesting, interesting point. Okay, good and the whole doing good thing, I mean, isn’t that a really big question mark? A capitalist and an Adam Smith fan would always argue that every company does good, right? I mean, we hear a lot about social entrepreneurship nowadays, just any comments on that before we switch gears here.
Garrett:
Well yeah, Josh and Lisa Lannon, Rich Dad Advisors, wrote a book on social capitalist and it talks about the B Corp in there. Actually, I wrote the section in the book and there are a lot of people out there who want to use capitalism to solve social problems. So, the B Corp is kind of the hybrid entity that allows you to do that.
Jason:
Hmm, very interesting. Okay good. Well, you mentioned before that there have been some new regulations people need to be aware of and, you know, maybe you want to just talk a little bit, Garrett, kind of as a review, you were on the show before, of course. People can go find that old episode on iTunes or at JasonHartman.com, but you talked before about Nevada and Wyoming and those being really the most favorable asset protection states for entities. I mean, there’s more to asset protection than just entities, there’s homesteading and all that kind of good stuff too, but take it away with whatever you’d like to discuss.
Garrett:
Well, since we spoke, Jason, there has been this trend around the country where the courts are not protecting single member LLCs as much and I went back and looked at the old podcast and we did talk a lot about how LLCs offer great asset protection for both business and real estate and the benefit for the LLC is the charging order protection and that basically says, if you, Jason, get in a car wreak and someone wants to get at your other assets. They are making an outside attack. They want to get at your various assets. It has nothing to do with the real estate in the LLC, it’s not a tenant suing you on an inside attack, it’s someone coming after you after a car wreak. Well, the charging order protection says, if you’re going to come after Jason, you don’t get to sell his fourplex.
Now, California law does say that, but the good states, the strong states like Nevada and Wyoming say, you have to wait for distribution to be made if the fourplex has money that it’s going to distribute to Jason, then you stand in Jason’s shoes and you get distributions and that’s really good asset protection. Since we spoke, Jason, there are 5 states that protect single member LLCs. It’s Nevada, Wyoming, and now Alaska, Delaware, and South Dakota also protect the single member LLC, but the trend across the country is for courts to say, we’re not going to protect the single member LLC.
For example in California, the state will say, we don’t..if you have a single member LLC, the original purpose of the charging order was to protect the other partner in the LLC, so Jason gets in a car wreak and his partner sue is also an owner of this LLC. It’s not fair to sue to allow someone to go in and sell the fourplex so that Jason’s creditor can get paid. Well, you don’t have that scenario with a single member LLC. For the single member LLC, there is only one partner to protect and the courts have said it’s not fair to the car wreak victim to let Jason not pay this judgment, if it’s a single member LLC.
So, there’s kind of an understandable rational behind these courts saying we’re not going to protect the single member LLC and so, in California, in all cases in California, they won’t protect a single member LLC. In Colorado, in a bankruptcy case, they won’t protect the single member LLC. Same with Montana and Kansas and in Florida, the big case was the homestead case in Florida several years ago where the Florida supreme court, they had protected people in LLCs with a charging order and then out of the blue the Florida supreme court said, no, we’re not going to protect the single member LLC. So, Jason, that trend is spreading across the country.
So, a lot of our clients are looking at setting up multiple member LLCs, so you have the argument, well, it’s not a single member LLCs, there are two people involved. The charging order needs to protect the second partner, so the law is a dynamic area. Things change and it’s good that we’re doing an update now, because this is changing across the changing.
Jason:
So, Garrett, do I hear that you’re saying you’re afraid Wyoming, which has been the desirable state could go this way? Has there been any case lost so far?
Garrett:
Yeah, Wyoming had a recent case, the Greenhunter case, where they pierced the LLC veil on a single member LLC and so that shook a lot of people up. Nevada in a bankruptcy case on a single member LLC. The bankruptcy court in Nevada did not protect the single member, so we have the single member LLC, somewhat under attack and clients are starting to think about and I need to start doing the writing, because this has just happened. The Nevada and Wyoming case are just in the last couple of months. So, people are starting to think about using multiple member LLCs. So that’s kind of the trend now.
Jason:
Now, here’s the million dollar question. Does that member need to be a natural person or can it be another entity that you own? Like, can you have, you know, one of your LLCs, can you have them owning each other is what I’m saying, because for example in my case, I don’t have that many relatives, you know, or people that I necessarily want to make members.
You know, I got some, but how do you do that? There’s family strife out there. I mean, there’s parents that don’t want, you know, that think their kids will mismanage things and are very concern about that. Heck, they setup whole elaborate estate plans over that issue of doling out money slowly or giving it to someone else in some cases.
Garrett:
Well, actually that’s a really good question, Jason, because I have clients that say, look, I own this LLC myself. I’m going to keep it as a single member LLC. I have enough insurance, I’m not worried about a car wreak attack. So, some people are going to stick with a single member LLC and they’ll be fine. The issue of whether you can have a second LLC, be it 5% member is a good one. I would think that if that LLC was owned 100% by you and you owned the remaining interest in the LLC under attack, that might not work.
Now, if that second LLC though was owned 50% or 80% by Jason and 20% by a nephew, you may have an argument there. What a lot of people are doing is they will setup a Nevada asset protection trust to be an owner of the LLC and then have themselves be a 5% owner of that LLC as well. You have two separate members at that point. Jason is one member as an individual and Jason’s Nevada asset protection trust, a spendthrift derivative of the trust is the second member. So, in many cases that could work. We also have clients that will just setup, you know, not an expensive asset protection trust, but more of a garden variety irrevocable trust for their kids and have that trust own 5% and the parents own 95%. That could work as well.
Jason:
So, is there a certain percentage that is ideal by the way? You instantly jumped to the number 5% and then you also mentioned 20%. Is there a right number, like a percentage number that, you know, if you own 1/10th of 1%, is that really having another owner? I mean, if I were the judge I might say no, you know?
Garrett:
In the legal community most people say, rather I’m sorry, 5% is the right number. Like you say, 1/10th of 1% probably isn’t a significant enough membership interest for a court to say that it is a multiple member LLC. 5%, most people in the legal field feel 5% is a justifiable number.
Jason:
Okay, so 5%. Alright, so that’s what you do and what kind of trust is the ideal trust to have? Is it a spendthrift trust? Can you talk a little..we haven’t done much at all about trust. I don’t understand them very well. You know, I have two of them, but I can’t say I have a big understanding of this area. Can we talk about that a little bit?
Garrett:
Sure. I mean, trust has been around for over 1,000 years. The Romans use trust. So, the trust is a very time-tested instrument and basically you have a trust, it’s setup by a grantor or a settlor, someone puts assets into the trust, the trust is managed by a trustee for the benefit of a beneficiary. So, the beneficiary is like a shareholder in a corporation. The trust is managed for their benefit. The trustee has power over the trust. It gets to manage all the trust assets and that’s why you have banks serving in this capacity as trustees and the banks typically charge a very healthy fee for this, but they will..
Jason:
Like what’s a healthy fee? Can you give us an example?
Garrett:
Well, some banks charge a minimum of $5,000 plus 1% under management. That would be something. On a large trust, that could be a significant amount of money. So, you will have people operate as trustees and their job is to manage the trust, but when someone sues the beneficiary, the person who the trust was setup for, the beneficiary can say, look, I don’t manage this money. You say I owe you money, but I’m a beneficial owner of this trust, but I can’t go in and give you money, because the trustee manages everything. It’s their decision whether or not to give you any money and, of course, the trustee, when the beneficiary gets sued, does not have to make payments to that creditor, so that’s where the asset protection comes in. There’s also a trust called a living trust or a revocable trust.
Jason:
That doesn’t offer any asset protection though, does it?
Garrett:
No, zero asset protection although their promoters out there saying it does, just know that the living trust..
Jason:
Be careful.
Garrett:
The living trust is really good for probative avoidance, that’s why you set it up. Without a living trust, if your assets are held in your individual name, when you pass, you have to go to probate court and the court supervises the distribution of your assets. The attorneys make out quite well on the probate fees. So, for example if you had a million dollar house in California and even if there was $900,000 is loans against it, the court, when you distribute that trust through probate awards the attorneys $20,000 in legal fees. Now, you can set up a living trust and avoid that whole procedure for $2,000 or $2,500, so the living trust makes a lot of sense, but it’s important, as you mentioned, Jason, it doesn’t offer assest protection.
Jason:
You mentioned earlier Garrett about California. You know, it seems as I do business all over the country, it’s always, like, there are laws and then when it comes to like California and New York there’s a bunch of special extra laws. I mean, no one can keep track of all this stuff. It’s completely impossible. I think new years and just it’s last year and pretty much every year it’s a similar type of number, they were something like 800-900 new laws in the socialist republic of California, my former home state, it’s just crazy. I don’t even know what to think about that state.
Garrett:
Get this, Jason. This is one of the new ones that has a lot of people upset. We have clients in Utah and they have a Utah LLC. No, I’m sorry, they live in Utah, they have a California LLC, so they have a duplex in California and they pay the $800 a year for that California LLC. Now, we like to have the California LLC be owned by a Wyoming LLC, right, for the better asset protection. California has the worst laws in the country for asset protection. Wyoming still has one of the best. So, we have California LLC paying the $800 a year, a Wyoming LLC paying $50 a year in the state of Wyoming, and these Utah residents.
The state of California has come to them and said because you have California money flowing from California through Wyoming to you in Utah, you have to pay the state of California $800 a year for the Wyoming LLC. They don’t even live in the state of California. This has them selling the California property. They said, “We’re not paying $800 a year for an entity that is completely outside California and we’re not going to be apart of this.” But if you’re going to invest in California from outside the state of California, you need to know these new rules that are in affect.
Jason:
Well, when it comes to real estate, I mean, I don’t know why you’d invest in California anyway. The rent to value ratios never make any sense. You know, if you’re buying properties in California, that’s really a speculator’s game, that’s a gambler’s game. You’re just looking for appreciation, you definitely can’t make your money on cash flow and it’s funny, I talk about California as though it’s a city, but it’s like that rule applies to the whole state. I mean, you can’t even make a deal working Bakersfield or Fresno, really. It just doesn’t work anywhere. The numbers just don’t work and in California, if you live there, if you have to live there, you’re better off being a renter, because you’ll get the benefit of that fantastic rent to value ratio or RV ratio as I call it. You know, investing around the country, unless you’re just a gambler. If you’re a speculator and you’re looking for appreciation only, then hey, have at it.
Garrett:
Yeah, let’s talk about the reverse situation. Say you’re a California resident and you have a Utah LLC that owns property in Utah.
Jason:
That’s the more common or not even Utah or maybe Texas or one of the desirable..
Garrett:
Where ever. Whatever state it is. Alright, so, you have a Utah property and a Utah LLC or a Texas property and a Texas LLC and that money, the profits, flow through to you in California, you’re going to pay tax on that, but now California says because you have, let’s say, a Texas LLC that you manage from California, the Texas LLC is thus doing business in the state of California, because you’re managing it there from California, pay us $800 a year there. I have clients living in the state of California who just got hit with this a year ago and some of them are considering leaving.
When you talk to people at the franchise tax board on this and I call them up and I say, look, I’m just trying to understand your new rules so I can advise my clients, but when you talk to them, this is clearly about their salaries and pension. These people at the state of California are putting in these rules, I don’t even think the state legislator realize what the franchise tax board is doing, but they’re putting in these rules to collect $800 where ever they can and it’s really by a bureaucracy that’s trying to maintain their salaries and pensions.
Jason:
Yeah, of course it is. I mean, California is just a really corrupt place. It’s annoying. I got to say, you mentioned the $800 that you have to pay the state of California if you got any entity there, but really in the big picture, it’s kind of, it’s an annoyance for sure compared to $50 in Wyoming, but if you’re talking the big game, $800 is nothing but an annoyance. It’s a mosquito bite, right, it’s not that big of a deal. The more important thing is probably the fact you’re just not going to have any protection and one of the things that gets complicated about this stuff and I’m far from understanding it myself is that you’re doing business in all of these states and so forth and you have to domestic entities in various states, but once you do that, it sort of doesn’t matter what the laws are in let’s say Wyoming or Nevada, if those are the examples. It matters where you domesticate it, right. As soon as you domesticate or do business in that state, are you subjected to that states rules and Wyoming is thrown out the window? I don’t know, I don’t understand it.
Garrett:
Here’s how it works. For California, let’s set that aside and you’re right, I’ve talked to people in California and they feel like I’m willing to pay $800. I can make money in California. The $800is annoyance, fine, I’ll pay it, and that’s fine, but people need to realize that if you don’t pay the $800, the penalty is $1,200, so I just have to counsel all my clients on this penalty, yeah. Now, let’s talk about if you have a Texas LLC, Texas laws are pretty good, so if your tenants sues you in Texas, you are subjected to Texas law.
If you have the Texas LLC owned by a Wyoming LLC and someone in the car wreck case comes after you, you know, we don’t have any laws in Texas or California on this, but under the current law, if you setup the Wyoming LLC for that protection, Wyoming law applies and so that’s why we like to have all, yeah, that’s good, we like to have all these entities formed. If you own real estate in South Carolina, we use a South Carolina LLC, because South Carolina law is going to apply, but then we have it owned by a Wyoming or Nevada LLC.
Jason:
It gets complicated as heck though, doesn’t it? Managing all the entities and stuff in different states.
Garrett:
Well, we provide a service and we do that for people. We just have to build a team and we provide the asset protection and the corporate maintenance and that’s part of our job to be on your team. In the past, we’ve given all your listeners $100 off on the formation of an entity or LLC. We still honor that and so we’ve had great experience with a lot of your listeners, Jason. You know, we’re part of your team, we help you manage all that.
Jason:
What about some of those requirements. You gotta have a register agent in every state, right?
Garrett:
Right.
Jason:
Do you wanna say anything about that, how that goes around the country, and then I just want to ask you maybe about two more states before we wrap up.
Garrett:
Sure. So, the resident agent or registered agent is required if you have, say you’ve setup in Wyoming, you have to have a register agent in Wyoming and that’s free the first year with us and then we charge $125 a year thereafter. Now, if you take that Wyoming entity and qualify it to do business in New Mexico, you have to have a resident agent also in New Mexico. So, one entity formed in Nevada doing business in New Mexico requires two registered agents, so that’s how it works. The idea, the registered agents job is to accept service of process meaning a lawsuit.
So, you want a registered agent who appreciates the importance of getting the filing, the paper work from the lawsuit to you promptly, because you only got in most states 30 days to answer a complaint, so you want someone who is going to get that information to you pronto so that you can start working on filing an answer to the complaint.
Jason:
Garrett, I’ve heard some things and this may not be your area, because I know every attorney has their favorites, but we’ve all heard good things about Delaware, generally speaking I think that applies to larger companies. A lot of them you’ll notice are registered in Delaware and then also, oddly, Alaska. I’ve heard a lot about Alaska lately. Any comments on those two?
Garrett:
Sure, Delaware is where most fortunate 500 companies are. They have a strong body of case law on corporate law. They have a separate court for corporate matters, so does Nevada now, but in a lot of cases the venture capitalists are familiar with Delaware law. It’s almost like it’s their comfort zone. They just feel like they’re comfortable with Delaware. So, you’ll have situations where you’re trying to get funded with a company and your venture capitalist will say, well, you have to be incorporated in Delaware and if you want their money, you’ll do it. I personally don’t like Delaware when compared to Nevada and Wyoming, because there are more reporting requirements. You have to provide them with more information than you do in Nevada or Wyoming and as well..
Jason:
Wyoming though, interestingly, you have to give them your bank balance, I think, right?
Garrett:
No, no. We don’t. If you have money at work in the state of Wyoming over a million dollars, there’s a little franchise fee, but most of our clients don’t do that. I mean, don’t hold that much money in the state of Wyoming. With Delaware, the filing fees are a little bit higher. You’re right about Alaska. Alaska just took the step of protecting single member LLC like Nevada and Wyoming did. So, Alaska also pioneered the asset protection trust, although Nevada made its law a little bit more appealing than Alaska did when it came out with its asset protection trust. In Nevada, the assets are bullet proof after two years of being held in the trust. In Alaska, it’s three years. So, you just have a shorter time period in Nevada You’re right, Jason, Alaska is becoming a popular state for incorporation as well.
Jason:
Good stuff, well Garrett, please give out your website, tell people where they can find you. Thank you by the way for offer that discount to my listeners. I really appreciate that.
Garrett:
Sure. So, the website is SutLaw.com and if you request a consultation or information, we’d be happy to get that to you and just mention Jason’s name and we’ll give you the $100 off of the formation fee. So, instead of $695, which includes everything except the state filing fees which vary from state to state. So, instead of $695, it’s $595, and you can actually talk to someone on the phone when we’re helping you out with these entities. So, we’ll be happy to work with your listeners, Jason.
Jason:
Good stuff and then the other thing that they need to do is maintain their entity, correct? And do the reporting, the annual reporting, how much does that cost, Garrett?
Garrett:
Well, we charge $125 to be the resident agent, we provide that service in all 50 states, and then if you want us to prepare the minutes every year, you are required to do minutes once a year. We charge a $150 to do that.
Jason:
Okay, so $275.
Garrett:
$275, right. When you form with us, we give you a book on how to do all of this and the importance of corporate formalities, so your first entity, we provide you with a book that shows you how to do it if you want us to do it, we can.
Jason:
Garrett, any final words about asset protection or, you know, on the tax side, I mean, I know you’re not an accountant, but certainly you have to be a little bit versed on tax issues too, you know, if there are any thoughts there just in closing.
Garrett:
Well, in closing, I would say the law is a dynamic area in this discussion we talked about how things are changing with regard to single member LLCs. So, I think it’s important for people to stay up to date, to have advisors that are keeping an eye out for you on these legal changes. The other thing is that a lot of people like to do this themselves and I just see people getting into problems, you know, they put real estate into a C Corp, because they don’t know any better or they don’t follow the requirements, the corporate formalities and they get their veil pierced and that happens 50% of the time.
So, you just want to have a member on your team that can assist you with these important corporate formalities, so we would love to work with anybody who is interested in having that type of ongoing protection.
Jason:
Good stuff, good stuff. Well, Garrett Sutton, thank you so much for joining us again and for that generous offer to our listeners. We really appreciate your insights and your thoughts about this very important topic, so thanks for joining us.
Garrett:
Alright, thanks Jason.
Announcer:
This show is produced by the Hartman Media Company. All rights reserved. For distribution or publication rights and media interviews, please visit www.HartmanMedia.com, or email [email protected]. Nothing on this show should be considered specific personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, or business professional for any individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own, and the host is acting on behalf of Empowered Investor, LLC. exclusively.
