+1 (312) 520-0301 Give us a five star review on iTunes!
Send Buck a voice message!

169: Wealth 2.0: Leverage Your Deductions!

Share on social networks: Share on Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn

Buck: Welcome back to the show everyone. Today my guest on Wealth Formula Podcast is Jim Sullivan. Jim is the founder and president of Terra Optima which is a consulting firm that serves land owners, family offices and high net worth individuals and making a positive contribution to the sustainability of our world his firm as he likes to see intersects with the broader financial services an impact investing community to advance the cause of sustainable and tax efficient real estate activity. Jim, welcome back to the program.

Jim: Great to be with you, Buck.

Buck: So it’s been a while since we had you on and we have so many more listeners now than we did so let’s kind of start at the beginning. You’re involved with Terra Optima is the ultimate as a real estate development company that also does something in the land conservation space which you’ve done a lot with tell me why land conservation why have you dedicated your career to this.

Jim: Well it really is driven by the reality that we’re not anti development we just think that it needs to be done sustainably and you know I grew up in New York and I’ve watched for example I grew up on Long Island where you know the explosion of growth in just one generation irrevocably altered a landscape. And we just watched farm after farm after farm get developed and then ultimately when you get to Long Island East End for example that’s where a conservation still exists and properties are voluntarily conserved a concern by state or local agencies but you know the toothpaste is already out of the tube and so you really can’t kind of you can’t get any oceanfront real estate that’s not already developed you know for the public good you can’t get and available so I really what’s driven me in this space is the fact that conservation takes a vision we have to preserve some open spaces for generations to come and so it’s with that vision that we want to be able to have those open spaces where people can have some elbow room to move in the midst of the developmental sprawl in America. You know there’s got to be clean water there’s got to be clean air there’s gotta be places to go and and then we just as the song John Mayer song said we can’t pave paradise and put up a parking lot you know.

Buck: Yeah and ultimately you know I think what we try to what it seems to me is that what we’re trying to do is trying to find situations in which it also becomes a financially useful thing to do which ultimately economics is what drives everything. So you’re involved in you know what we call conservation easements. Tell us exactly what the conservation easement is like tell us the sort of the definition where you know what’s the historical background of these things.

Jim: Yes okay you know with today’s development pace of 6,000 acres being developed every day the conservation easement is a private deed restriction that can be used to permanently print if any development on a piece of property whether that’s on the surface or even subsurface. And so it permanently prohibits that and is treated by the Internal Revenue Code with the ability for one to take a charitable deduction based on that you just have to follow the the IRS guidance and the guidance of the Tax Court’s that have been provided over the years it’s been in the tax code for 43 years and essentially you know there’s a there’s an appraisal process it has to be done on the property to determine what that deduction would be to the landowner.

Buck: Well let’s let’s back up just a little bit when we talk about conservation easements so these are typically you know historically landowners farmers maybe that have a big piece of land is that accurate historically?

Jim: That’s correct with farmers or just you know undeveloped open space. You know people will own acreage and and you know it’s the properties these properties can be owned for a long long time or short that can be farming they can be hunting fishing properties you know with the boom that we’ve seen in different places in the southeast for example a lot of these properties you know were not even considered for development just even 10-15 years ago but now they’re on the cusp of development.

Buck: Right so so when you’re giving or you’re not giving the land away what you’re doing is you’re giving building rights away is that right?

Jim: Yeah that’s right there’ll be no other yeah or other economic rights like you know some of the properties we’ll work on it the habitats being preserved but that’s because what we’re doing is we’re we’re reserving the subsurface rights for mining where there’s been a clear mining opportunity that’s been demonstrated there but in order to go after the minerals it’s going to devastate a habitat so you know that could be just as much a cause to conserve that piece of property because it’s no longer habitat just becomes a pit.

Buck: Right and so what you’re doing is effectively saying okay I’m not going to build on this I’m not going to you know drill on this and the IRS recognizes that again it’s one thing that the government theoretically wants you to do because it’s actually helping with conservation. So who you know so who invests in conservation so you you know you hear about conservation easements and when I read about them initially I heard about you know the big landowners that we know use this kind of strategy or I don’t know if you wanted to go to strategy but this kind of charitable giving slash you know personal finance strategy you know guys like Ted Turner or even the Trumps you know who so how does this work in terms of those owners like who are the people who have traditionally done this in the past?

Jim: Traditionally it has been attack strategy of the affluent and even the uber affluent so you mentioned a few but it’s funny you mentioned Ted Turner but he and John Malone for example the founder of comcast were in a race to see who can have the most acreage and conservation easement and they would actually as it’s been relayed to me they would actually fly over each other’s properties and helicopters and then ultimately Ted Turner stop trying to compete with them. If you’re a West Coast listener who Tunes into your podcast the billionaire Donald Brent with the Irvine Ranch another good example you know took a huge deduction for the conservation of that ranch so yeah it’s been a tax strategy of actual and individuals and even corporations I believe it was a couple years ago up in New England it was thirty four thousand acres Apple conserved and it made for great PR and it was really great for the environment but it was certainly great for their books and a sense of the big tax break that they got.

Buck: So let’s talk about some of those no-good conservation easements of course are known to have potentially some substantial tax benefits. Let’s dive into that a little bit deeper how does that work exactly because you mentioned okay so now you have a piece of land or as we’ll talk about in a moment you could potentially invest in something that invest in a piece of land maybe if you’re not a billionaire you could still participate but how does the foregoing of these rights how does that equate into potential tax benefit?

Jim: Well it equates into potential tax benefit because the property meets needs very high IRS tests and so and those that clearly have to be demonstrated you know the property has to have some scenic beauty or some some historical value or some uniqueness to it and it’s and if it is biological its biological nature that make it a desirable asset for conservation. It also the deduction of it has to be based on the fact that the property’s debt-free for example we can’t give away something that you own debt on you can’t give an easement up on it. There is also a valuation process and that’s part of how that that valuation of the value of that deduction is derived which is where you’re going is that the property is not it’s not like you deduct a building that you could that you never build it’s the value of the land at it’s worse fully entitled for full development and and that that is at its highest and best use. So what that means in real estate law for your listeners is that which is maximally productive financially feasible and physically possible as well as maximally productive. And so legally permissible is key so these are all other factors of to consider when a property is valued for its highest and best use and then that property is then in a second valuation valued at what it’s worth when those economic rights have been permanently forgotten in the placing of a conservation easement and the difference between the two becomes the deduction to the donor. Now to your point about a bit of a misnomer that people say when they talk about investing in a conservation easement is a conservation easement is actually something that endures and the individual and organization can buy land but it can also be donated and we’re talking about donations of conservation easements for a charitable deduction you don’t invest in the conservation easement in that sense it’s a bit of a misunderstanding what an investor does is that they invest into a piece of property that clearly has economic opportunity related to it. And then through the election and through the voting to put that property under conservation easement that’s where those investors who hold an interest in that property realize tax benefit.

Buck: The valuation process itself seems pretty complicated. Who are the people you know if done properly who is the entity the people whoever that give this evaluation because essentially what we’re talking about I think you put it best one time you called it leveraged giving right and that’s basically what it is it’s like you know we use leverage all the time and as real estate investors we know the benefit of leverage. But in this situation what you’re doing effectively is you are investing it or you are buying or donating buying and donating is probably the best way to say it but you’re buying something and you’re giving it away or you’re donating it to this charitable cause but it has because of that valuation there’s leverage so that your write-off could technically be significantly more than the actual gift the economic gift that you initially gave know that difference is you called it was through this valuation who does that valuation when done appropriately?

Jim: The valuation has done a court compliant with the code by a qualified appraiser and so that’s somebody who’s got a real specialty in this area. This type of evaluation is not done by your typical appraiser most people are indeed accustomed to relating to somebody who kind of whistles their way through a commercial or residential valuation for to buy a home or they get approved for a mortgage. In contrast to that it’s a very very sophisticated appraisal process these appraisals classically can be as much as two to three hundred pages deck and so it’s a specialty in that respect and actually that appraiser has to disclose their own qualifications in the appraisal itself it’s one of the things that they put forward as an attestation to provide a qualified appraisal is that they have to be a qualified appraiser and meet the IRS tests which you know are found in Section 170 H as well as the related guidance.

Buck: So this is a this is something I think sort of fits into this whole concept that are not concept but that this reality that for the most part even though that this is law the IRS doesn’t really like these things very much right? In fact if you do a simple google search and conservation easements you see all kinds of stuff about you know conservation easements being sort of this you know loophole for the wealthy and how you know people are abusing the system etc. Talk about that a little bit if you would because you know variably run into people who say hey Jim I read this article and this article by the way who this same guy seems to be writing the same article every year. What’s your response to that?

Jim: Yeah this isn’t a loophole it’s a straight congressional incentive that’s like you are our fellow friend and colleague Tom Wheelwright would say when it’s about tax it’s all about the facts and you do things that comply with where Congress wants you to conduct your investment activity that comes with certain tax benefits and that’s their only way to incentivize which way markets go. So this is a provision not a loophole that’s been in the tax code since 1976 really permanent fixture in 1980 to incentivize conservation private land conservation. But if one were to simply rely on a one page of Google search nowadays you’re going to see a lot of buzz about concerns about abuses in the space and what to the unwitting reader they may look at that and say oh my gosh this is something that’s you know you put the skull and crossbones over it but when you understand somebody with the institutional legislative memory understand that anything with any duration in the tax code has gone through occasional ways of being abused actually that’s the big macro view the way that ledge sitters look at it so you know for example a guy like Chuck Grassley who who sits you know on Senate Finance he sat on Senate Finance 14 years ago in 2005 when they did their last review of the conservation easement charitable deduction and because of at that point in time concerns about abuses that existed and so here in in that brief span of a 14-year period of time where this one senator was on Senate Finance this has gone through two cycles of congressional review and so a lot of the chatter and the things that one will see on the you know you know when they just see write-ups you can’t make your investment decisions based on a Google search because there’s too many agendas is too much politicizing of things and issues you must make yourself a student of much deeper resources than that whatever it can be discovered by those needs because there’s a lot of misinformation a lot of misinformation you know I could certainly illustrate some of what that would be but you just really have to be a discerning and a careful listener. You know if you use a good example of an Internal Revenue Code that most people are very familiar with it’s section 401 K of the Internal Revenue Code right most people who invest and put money in their 401 K don’t give any thought to how many 401 k’s suffer miserably when audited by the by the Department of Labor and the SEC and and and are assessed penalties which even comes right out of the principle of people who have money in that plan now if there was concern about mismanagement or abuse and 401 KS and people wouldn’t abuse them any longer so I know that reduces it down to the simple but it does put it into the realm of something that most people understand we’re talking about 178and not an area where most people have any tax exposure and so they have to come to understand that abuse anytime there’s been anything in the tax code for any duration of time it’s had its period where it’s had to undergo some review and consideration for tax reform.

Buck: Along the lines of you talk about you know there’s certainly you know I’ve talked about this there certainly is abuse out there and part of the problem that the industry in general suffers from is that a few bad actors you know can spoil the whole thing and the big thing to me appears to be correct me if I’m wrong an attack on sort of egregious valuation so that’s why I was you know hitting that valuation question so hard.

Jim: Sure and the leverage issue you pointed to as well right you can speak to but go ahead no.

Buck: That’s kind of what I’m getting at is how do you control that or how do you know if you’re doing something that is not abusive like what are the metrics that you use and any other commentary around that because obviously there is this element that is creating a problem.

Jim: Well the a lot of the concern that you see that people demonstrate to the question about leverage which I’ll touch on first before I get into that this question is is that because they kind of lead one into the next is that when you’re taking a deduction larger than what your basis is in a property or in any particular asset for that matter that’s something that most individuals are unfamiliar with however it’s not an unfamiliar thing for a tax strategy of the affluent for Athlon individuals to give away appreciated assets for a deduction and so and then the tax code a charitable deduction is not limited to your basis and what you have you put into it for those who are tax aware or tax savvy you might want to look into section 704 D 3 B but it’ll it will explain to you how you know of how a partnership taxation for example that’s it’s just not limited to basis. Now in individuals in America for example if you have somebody who who makes a hundred million dollars a year and let’s say there are a moral person who has a religious upbringing who wants to give away 10% of their income they’re gonna give away ten million dollars okay. Now are they going to give ten million dollars cash or are they gonna give away ten million dollars of appreciated stock in the end of the day on their schedule A their charitable giving still says they gave away ten million dollars but they may have given away ten million dollars of stock that they procured a few years ago for a million dollars it doesn’t mean that they didn’t give away ten million dollars and so it just has to do with market valuation and determining you know the how something’s valued. So that kind of illustrates the leverage component in it in a different context you know. But to your question um your question is more about well what you’re with that in mind.

Buck: Really I think the question becomes and the question becomes then at what you know because obviously there is a you know there is an effort to at least you know even the IRS or you know even in individuals who are doing conservation easements within the industry of trying to trying to remove people who are abusing the system right but what it you know what metrics do you use and who’s to say what abuse is.

Jim: Yes so for a conservation easement we’ve counted there’s about 30 different 30 different technical tests that can be an area of potential abuse for a conservation easement and you really have to work with a firm that’s got a demonstrated track record and a prowess and acumen in this area when it comes to valuations which is of chief concern to people nowadays with the deduction of any size just a matter of best practices of ours is that we go ahead and always make sure that we’ve got a couple of different appraisers who weigh in on that because we are not appraisers so we will event appraisers we interviewed them we will interview 10 appraisers before we hire them for an assignment and then we’ll have an appraiser check the appraisers work and so on and when we pour over these documents because that’s why that that’s how we’re able to actually have a good track record. But that’s what a lot of a lot of the conundrum nowadays with conservation easements is a lot of concern about valuation it’s actually the least most documented reason why conservation easement deductions are actually disallowed it’s actually for a host of others.

Buck: But the motivation certainly from the IRS and dislike of these things has got to do with the valuation.

Jim: That may be the motivation but it does not end up being the criteria through what’s actually disallowed deductions okay they would much easier but it would be much happier to find easy to capture low-hanging fruit when they’re auditing something whether it’s easy to capture is this that you know they’re able to say oh well we can see clearly in this document and in the exchange and they that in the documents who have been able to review that you Mr. Donor had a quid pro quo going here where yes you did voluntarily give up the development rights for this piece of property but we can see on the other side of town that you’ve got entitlements on the other side of town to build over there because you gave up the rights on this side of town and so you can’t give to get and so there was no charitable intent and auction deduction denied and that’s not an isolated incident there’s things like that that of individuals have attempted to do another example of a conservation easement failure and post-mortem would be an example where somebody a CPA thought that they would go ahead and open their own Land Trust for example and then he essentially created his own 501 C 3 which was the donee and the recipient of the granting of the conservation easement and so in tax court he was brought on the stand and was basically asked what authority what experience what expertise do you have to be leading the conservation lands trust that would qualify to be a qualified donee a qualified recipient of this type of gift and what expertise what type of monitoring activity did you actually deploy in this circumstance and he actually you know under oath had to consent that he his satisfaction of the annual monitoring of those properties basically boiled down to him passing by them on his bike ride once a year let’s talk about that’s just an example of abuse the abuse is real but rare and we we don’t want to scare people because in reality in the divest the vast majority of conservation easements are good and not replete with the BSB you just have to watch out for for other types of abuses and any of your any of your listeners who won an IRS checklist I’ll be happy to send it to them.

Buck: Yeah and that’s we can get some contact information at the end but let’s talk a little bit about again so people want to know sort of like okay so how does this turn out and if there’s an audit what does that mean etc so let’s let’s just take it so I’m so let’s say I’m an investor and I have invest in conservation easements on multiple occasions and what I have found was as a limited partner say I invested you know fifty thousand dollars or something like that and I got it right $250,000 k1 loss and all of this sudden so my k1 is basically going into with all my other K1s all my real estate K1s. Now I have been audited and it’s not been I was ultimately told it wasn’t because of one of these things but it a lot of people get audited when make any sort of money. So in my case what was interesting was that the auditor looked at it you know not like you liked it but there wasn’t really anything you could do I mean there was you know I’m a limited partner and you know here’s a k1 I’ve done my thing so where’s the problem? The problem then if so as an individual there isn’t much to you know fret is that fair I mean it’s really more like okay if this thing’s gonna get challenged its gonna be challenged at the general partner level and if it gets challenged the implications of that are theoretically what?

Jim: So 30% of our projects we have done through directly for families and wealth and when that deduction goes on their form 1040 they’ve got to respond to that inquiry. So the other 70% of our projects have been these types of partnership structures like what like what you invested in and in those types of circumstances that’s exactly right the audit has to be dealt with on the partnership level and then if there’s any adjustment to it then it administrative really trickles down to people getting a readjusted k1 just it so that we’re speaking apples to apples and so that your listeners don’t confuse anything you were speaking very quickly and you mentioned like a k-1 loss it’s important that your listeners understand that it’s actually not a loss it’s charitable deduction because it would be treated differently for credit loss but that’s okay it’s you know words matter and so that I just wanted. That’s correct is that when one looks at it that’s why it’s important to know that you know you’re working in concert with a good developer and a good individual a good organization that actually can put together a project appropriately and if there’s a good on it reserve there for example where that’s pre funded that you know that as you’re investing into a real estate enterprise that might contemplate a conservation an implementation of conservation plan in part or in total the the reality is that those monies are there to go ahead and defend that deduction should it undergo scrutiny but the guy who is filing the form 1040 with that deduction like you you’re not going to be the one who defends that deduction and it’s not going to be a part of your inquiry with the service because your European and they’re unable to actually admit it violates the way the procedures are the way the IRS deals with partnership taxation.

Buck: You’d mentioned we’ve talked a little bit about some you know with its another round in Congress that’s kind of at least when we talked last was sort of um you know it was it was on the table right on the congressional table for some potential changes and I know one of the things that’s been useful in talking to you is you’re know you’ve been part of those talks and you’ve been talked to talking to politicians you’ve been talking to people on Capitol Hill. Can you talk about some of the things that you know some of those conversations and what the effect might be on the future of conservation easements?

Jim: There’s a number of things being contemplated and much like you know 14 years ago there were different proposals floating around in order to knock abuses out of the space. At that point in time in 2005 for example there was concern about over evaluation so when they saw the were real but rare they imposed certain types of overvaluation penalties for appraisals I mean a lot of people don’t realized an appraiser is not your typical appraiser with his head screwed on who’s capable in the space he’s got a tax ID number like your tax preparer does for all of his work in a space could be pulled with one mouse click by the service. So he and he also knows that if he provides some misstatement or overvaluation he can get a ding on his license a penalty could be enormous that’s all the result of the reform that happened in 2005. You know now if some of the things that are floating around are that we’re seeing just in our discussions with legislators is some things that will strengthen the conservation purposes for example some things that will tighten up on appraisers education qualifications by statute and because that’s actually not laid out a qualified appraiser is there’s a clear test there but to add to that into strengthen it where they must satisfy certain government endorsed coursework and substantiate that as a part of their certification and substantiation as a qualified appraisal to take say a certain type of course is an important you know suggestion also multiple appraisers for gifts above a certain size for example this is also some of the things are being floated around. And then one of the things that is being given serious contemplation is whether there should be a longer holding period for the donor of a conservation easement right now it’s the law stance if mom and pop give up their give up the development rights on their farm they could only do so and get a deduction for it if they’ve held that property for more than a year. That’s the way the rules stand now there is actually a provision in real estate and partnership law where if people are in that investment structure was mom and pop and mom and pop allow people to invest into their holding company and then together they Aine donate the conservation he’s been on to into a land trust rather than developing and putting up a subdivision for that matter they enjoyed the holding period that mom and pop have so if they’ve owned it for forty five years that’s how long the property is recognized as having been held now some people have exploited that and they’ve abused it where they they buy properties they hold them for a year and then they they bring in some cowboy appraiser who will provide a big number and then they do a real estate syndication and then everyone kind of puts money in and money out and it gets quick deduction and it’s an abusive system so in order to create a more fair tax system the suggestion has been made to require partners to be subject to that same one year holding period s now there’s other things that have tried to been suggested that create a longer holding period for partners than what original and only you know single land owners would have to comply with but the legislators we’re speaking with one a fair tax system everyone in America wants a fair tax system and not having one a set of rules for one type of donor versus another so I think that one of the key things that I’m just driving home here is I figured we’re gonna see a change in the holding period requirement yeah as a way to kind of beat out beat out of the space individuals who would be exploiting that one little loophole of partnership law it’s not it’s not isolated conservation partnerships the same type of provisions exist in tenants and common structures or 1031 exchanges and things as I’m told I am not a tax lawyer I’m not a CPA but I’ve developed in these financial circles for some time and so these it’s not something peculiar to conservation partnerships.

Buck: Just for clarity because I know we just said a lot of things one of the things I think that you have mentioned I think is of significance is that as the law stands today right unchanged if I you know if I haven’t in if I have purchased and donated a conservation easement and I have a tax benefit I can currently in 2019 buying in 2019 used for my 2019 tax purposes that donation and what you’re saying is that because ordinarily there’s a one year at least where you have to hold it and that’s where these farmers and stuff they’ve held for 45 years and and and right now a partner who’s joining up with them doesn’t have to wait because they’ve already waited that time that law made change so that for example if I invest this year it may not be the case that I can use that deduction in 19 I may have to wait until 20 tax season is that correct?

Jim: You’re exactly right got it Buck.

Buck: Just to be clear as of today which is what sometime in July mid-july yeah July 20th 2019 we are still sort of in a situation where we could potentially get benefit today because of that change do you have any sense that if that law changes what the timeline what does it look like?

Jim: Timeline, no one has a crystal ball and the legislative processes sometimes can be accelerated or be accelerated by certain events and so it all depends on whether you know a whole host of components. You know you’re correct in saying though that it as the laws exist today one invest today and then votes to put a conservation easement on one’s property. The treatment of that transaction is based on the laws as they exist today you might get my best guess though is that right now set finance is 32 reviewing this and pouring over millions of pages of documents and reviewing transactions and things of that sort so they can get an idea of what’s going on um they’re gonna come out you know back at a recess you know after Labor Day because they’re gonna go on recess in a couple of weeks and then they’re going to come forward with some recommendations that ultimately we have to go into drafting and then will have to be agreed upon and the house agreed upon in the Senate voted on and go to the president for signature and it wouldn’t be in a standalone piece of legislation it would be kind of a rider to something else that’s being passed so but there are things that can accelerate that process and and I’m fully prepared and preparing everyone we’re speaking with it and you must be prepared for change in the autumn after Labor Day anytime all bets are off as far as I’m concerned.

Buck: Yeah and I think the significance of that for people out there who are already doing this kind of thing as part of their planning is that you may be aret eclis in this situation you may have to prepare not only for this year but for next year as well if you want to potentially get that benefit one of the things that we did can I add one thing to my left my last statement there some of my colleagues in the space are more optimistic that because of the rate in which Congress is getting things done we won’t see anything into 2020. That would be great if that’s the way it pans out yeah but I just know that we’re just trying to let people know so that they’re not surprised and I think that that’s an important qualifier.

Buck: We haven’t really what we have an address and I think probably some listeners may be curious about is you know obviously we’re not you know this is not a we’re not all Ted Turner’s and Maloney we’re not Trump we may not have all of this you know all of this land to donate to something like this but what you do is you put together these opportunities. How does that structure look like because obviously there’s people who want to participate in the want to you know be part of the conservation movement etc but if you’re you obviously you do need to be an accredited investor correct but how does something like that how does it get structured?

Jim: Well get structure just like for example if you’re gonna invest in a piece of real estate could be amplified for a multi-family you know complex or something like that you know if you invested in that then the investment capital would go to work build them and over some period of time when market absorption those units would be filled bought rented or whatever it might be and then returns would be delivered to the investor proportioned to their and they’re their ownership in that particular investment opportunity and so that typically happens over some period of time with development and their market absorption. In a similar fashion if that same particular opportunity were such that saying yeah but this particular multifamily investment is let’s just say on you know a river shore or in a river view property and that is one of the reasons that made it very attractive to you know you know a community with such scenic environment but at the same time it puts a peril that whole the aquaculture of that river. And so if we choose to conserve that property in the same way proportion to my benefit but my contribution my ownership in the property I’m a three percent owner of it I’m a three percent recipient of that deduction that is allocated to the partnership so of my 30% on their wellness so it’s a ten million dollar deduction on my 30 percent owner well then I get a three million dollar deduction now it doesn’t matter that I’m invested $500,000 to get that now and make that investment into that enterprise.

Buck: So it’s just like any other syndication basically?

Jim: That’s correct yeah it’s important though that people know that this particular structure will be put together where there will be the opportunity for the property to be developed and exploited or to be held or to be actually conserved and they will be part of a voting for process that will determine the outcome.

Buck: So we’re looking forward to having you you are one of the speakers at our next wealth formula meetup in Dallas in September 27-28. In the meantime we’re going to have some updates I think you’re gonna do you know more of a you know in-depth thing because this is very limited to a credit investors and our accredited investor group obviously is familiar you’re familiar with you and you’ll be doing a talk on specific opportunities coming up. In the meantime how can we learn more about conservation easements if there’s a lot more questions etc and people are getting eager to potentially get involved, how can they get a hold of you?

Jim: Yeah they can reach out to me via email and and my email address is jsullivan@terraoptimus.com and I’ll be happy to go ahead and set the time to speak with them you know because these are investment considerations with multiple outcomes that could be explored you know we’ll just basically provide them with a summary of something we’ve got going on now or in the imminent future and then we can explore with them.

Buck: And again if you have not done so and you’re an accredited investor one way to also get exposure to that is simply by joining the investor club at WealthFormula.com. Jim it’s been great catching up with you and reviewing all this stuff as always thank you very much.

Jim: Yeah my pleasure Buck. Looking forward to seeing you in Dallas.

Buck: We’ll be right back.