Tenants Don’t Need To Carry Insurance (Maybe)

Print

We’ve shared many of these insurance thoughts before, but not all in the same place. Today, we’ll be staying out of the “weeds,” not because “there be snakes,” but we don’t want “detail” to drown out some basic messages.

Insurance is a credit enhancement. If you have a lot of money (think Exxon, Bill Gates, etc.), you can cover your own obligations, pay your own liabilities. You don’t need a sugar daddy back-up. And no one should require you to have one. A landlord who does an absolute-net lease of an entire $100 million building to Exxon, doesn’t need Exxon to buy property insurance from insurance companies. Exxon can buy the insurance companies. It can handle the loss. Its net worth is about $500 Billion. It has more than $50 billion of cash on hand. Chubb Insurance has equity of about $16 Billion. We would have said “only,” but that’s “only” when compared to Exxon. [Read more…]

Print

Thoughts About Tenant Allowances – Part 2

Print

Two weeks ago, Ruminations rolled out some thoughts about Tenant Allowances and that triggered a whole bunch of comments, some directly to the blog, and many more on various LinkedIn group discussion boards. Each contribution is sincerely appreciated.

A couple of readers brought up the category of “Trade Fixtures,” and how they, too, were improvements to real property. Those readers are correct – Trade Fixtures are improvements to real property, but of a special kind. They are ones that belong to the tenant and are intended to be removed at the end of the term of the lease. This doesn’t mean that a landlord should or shouldn’t allow the tenant allowance to be used to pay for a trade fixture. Instead, it has tax ramifications as well as raising questions as to whether they are part of a mortgagee’s collateral. We’re not “going” either place in this blog entry. [Read more…]

Print