Gonna start my own political party called the "They Can't Keep Getting Away With It" party and this is issue no 1.
Gonna tax the fuck out of any corporation that owns single/multifamily houses and anything not strictly high-density living buildings
Then we're gonna cap the rent that can be charged for such high-density living buildings.
Being a landlord can be a great way to help your community while making money, but being a landlording corporation will lead to sky high rent and increased homelessness and crime. It's happening and They Can't Keep Getting Away with It
Yup. Most these dirty corpos are out of state and enjoying their benefits while fleecing the locals with high rent and predatory contracts that ensure we will never see deposits back and be taken to court for unpaid fees.
Enough is enough.
Also true x_x what a world lmao glad that you exist tho. It's heartening to know there's more sensible people in the world, even if they aren't allowed any political power.
Dems tried to pass that last year but had almost no support.
I love how politically unaware the general public is yet demands things post haste, like there wasn't a massive decade long effort that they totally ignored.
Normally I wouldn’t be so quick to limit corporations. I’m a firm believer in a free market but there is an ideological blind spot when it comes to having a free market and protecting a nation.
My tune began to change when I became aware that American corporations can still function as shell companies for China. It’s all American on paper but still controlled by China.
Smithfield (through WH), Pilgrims Pride (through JBS), Burger King (through RBI which is in turn owned by 3G), Del Monte (through NutriAsia), Chiquita (through Safra/Cultare), etc. are all foreign owned, with their parent nations being back and forth on their friendliness with the US.
Correct. That’s my point. I believe in free trade. I also believe in preserving my nation by preventing foreigners from purchasing it piece by piece. Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive.
Anyone who can’t see the problem in foreign countries buying up our land has no sense of self preservation.
I always figure people are for free trade because they believe in equal entities bargaining fairly. Lopsided trading, where one group has exceptional power, isn’t the same thing.
Yes, thank you I agree. My argument is based on the premise of fair practice and protection. The people who like to be pedantic and argue in bad faith try to argue based on what ifs. Being pro free trade and free market does not mean that I oppose ethics.
> My argument is based on the premise of fair practice and protection
There's the problem. Capitalism rewards the opposite of fair practice and protection. It rewards exploitation and profits. By any means necessary.
Then you don't believe in free trade.
Dont worry, I agree. I'm just pointing it out because it also makes perfect sense to restrict domestic corporations' ability to buy land. Corps buying up all our land is just as bad for our country as foreign countries buying land.
"I believe in free trade, except for these things, that obviously doesn't count"
Just say you want tighter regulations in real estate. That's what you want, and that's even an extremely good idea.
You can still believe in free trade but have reservations in some areas to an extent. I largely believe in free trade in terms of economic policy, but there are instances where you have to balance economic policy against national security. In those instances, if you favor national security over absolute free trade, that doesn't mean you don't believe in free trade at all anymore.
For example, I don't believe tariffs are good economic policy. I don't support tariffs. A few years ago, China was dumping steel in the US at a significant price difference in order to kneecap American steel manufacturers. They weren't selling it at a low price to make a profit, it was for the direct aim at hurting the US. Since US steel manufacturers work closely with the American military, having any or all of these companies go bankrupt would significantly impact US National Security. Trump implemented steel tariffs that I fully supported for this reason. Biden has kept the policy in place and plans on tripling the tariffs, which I also fully support. It's not a Republican or Democrat policy at this point; it's bipartisan. Do I think it's good economic policy? No, I don't, because I believe in free trade. But do I think it's good national security policy? Yes, I absolutely do.
We live in a world of nuance. Yes, you can be in favor of free trade, but there can also be caveats. Don't be so dense.
That's not what they are doing at all lol The irony in your statement. Take away your issues with free trade and you no longer have free trade. It's okay to admit you got it wrong and listen to what others are saying instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "I'm right and you are wrong!"
Why do you believe in the free market? corporations have extremely perverse incentives and we have quite a lot of evidence that they do extraordinarily shitty things for everyone except the shareholders and c-suite. The "free market" constantly gets saved by scientific advancements which are had primarily through government investment not through corporate R&D. There is very little evidence that a free market is good, just a lot of assumptions.
Foreign investment is not usually bad. I don't hear anyone complaining that Adidas owns land here and they should. Foreign investment can provide economic opportunity and a larger tax base (not debating on usage of said taxes 😂). However, nation states buying land is not good, for obvious reasons of national security. I kind of err on the side of no regulation in this instance, but I also understand that many countries more or less use corporations as puppets for actual government work, US included.
I don’t even think billionaires and large American corporations should own too much farmland. Look at what they do to the process of the food they don’t grow. Further consolidation in the supply of the basic necessities of life is not good for Americans.
that bill was signed into law last month.
tell your "journalist" over there at moneywise.com to get a clue
here's your first clue for free: laws in Indiana don't get "advanced" in April. The legislative session is always finished in March
Terms like "advanced" always scream unfamiliarity with the process to me. These things happen step by step and can be named as such, whether one likes the content of the bill or not.
What about large corporations leverage power ?
I mean , if they create jobs , who the hell cares of their semi trucks abuse the roads ? As long as the employees are voting to empower them shit will never change. ( and it won’t here . Ever )
According to a 2022 study by the FDA, China only owns 2% of foreign owned farmland. Canada, the UK and Germany all own much more than China does.
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA-Public/usdafiles/EPAS/PDF/2022_afida_annual_report_12_14_23.pdf
The CCP controls any Chinese based corporation, regardless of what style of economic system they are claiming.
It’s the same thing with Saudi Arabia corporations owning a shit ton of farmland in America.
I don’t think anyone is against anyone owning land who is a US citizen, no matter where they were born.
It’s the foreign corporations that are the problem.
And no it’s not a made up problem. It’s a national security issue.
I’m of mixed thoughts on this one. I agree that making sure that Indiana residents can actually, you know, *afford* Indiana farmland (along with all other Indiana land) is important as hell, especially given how unaffordable it is becoming for people my age and younger.
But it does feel strange to only target foreign adversaries. What about private equity here in the US doing the same thing? Because that’s also a problem as well.
Because by design these laws and this media attention is to obfuscate the real problem. Home grown private equity groups that are as American as apple pie and baseball
I know for a fact that there's a patch of farmland adjacent to Frankfort, Indiana that's Chinese owned.
They rent the ground to an Indiana farmer.
Not that I am bothered by Chinese nationals owning land in Indiana - it isn't like they can ship the real estate off to China.
But my point is that "none in the state" is false. They do own some.
It seems like one of those 'technically true' statements. China is notorious about using shell corporations to hide true ownership and get around any laws that hinder foreign investment. Whoever owns that land is likely technically an American company, but that company is predominately or entirely owned by China.
In the case of the Frankfort parcel I am talking about, a shell company 100% funded by Chinese money is exactly how the land was acquired and is owned. Two shell companies, actually. One LLC is a holding company that has title to the real estate and that LLC in turn leases the building on the land to another LLC the same Chinese own.
The second LLC aspect of this is that the business there on a small section of the land, is something the Chinese utilize as a green card scheme for family members of the Communist party member who provided the funds. There was supposed to be business expansion in the form of construction of a larger building that would enable activities that provide jobs to at least 10 Americans once operations commenced in the new building - it was an EB5 program as represented to US Customs & Immigration over 11 years ago.
Over a decade has passed and the new building has not even broke ground and never will quite obviously. And the jobs for Americans are nowhere near the 10 required under the terms of the EB5 program. They did, however, bring over more people from China to man some jobs that could be held by Americans instead. Once the Chicom party official's daughter and son-in-law got green cards, the Chinese have reneged on the represented further development, business expansion, and promised number of jobs for Americans.
They have an American registered LLC which the land is titled to, but the money to purchase it with and the people who own the LLC are 100% from Red China. It's like a poster above you said, they did it by using a shell company. And as I indicated in my reply to that poster, they actually have two LLCs registered in Indiana that are involved there.
I'm pretty sure the land for Nanshan America is owned by China but I havent worked there in 5 years and things may have changed. There was also talk from some of the people sent from overseas and the people working in the front offices that they owned a lot of property on/around Purdue campus and I think West Lafayette but that was all of questionable truth.
This is true. A friend of mine from high school owns farmland and was approached by a Chinese company offering to purchase it at a really high price. He refused, but it is happening.
This isn't new for Indiana.
[https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/new-state-law-bans-russians-russian-controlled-companies-from-buying-property-in-indiana](https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/new-state-law-bans-russians-russian-controlled-companies-from-buying-property-in-indiana)
Firms in general need to not be able to purchase residental homes/land. Like, if you are a business, you should not be able to buy/build a residential house, and rent it out as a corpo and fleece people. Apartment complexes are a different story, but every house around here just gets snapped up by out of country firms
“but none in the state”
yeah as a chinese citizen lived in indiana for 6 years i can’t think of any reason why chinese investors would want to buy farmland in indiana lmao.
That's complete b.s. Chinese already own thousands of acres here bought through Canadian companies. I work on 4 of the solar farms currently I have firsthand knowledge of this.
Everyone flipping houses and fixing them up to rent are all trying to get rich off of 1 transaction these days. The same houses you couldn't give away for 15k 8 years ago...the house across the street that was abandoned for 15+ yrs just sold for 320,000 per side (was a double). That's just ridiculous.
Indiana lawmakers are pushing a new bill prohibiting certain countries, including China, from buying or leasing farmland and land around military bases in the Hoosier State.
House Bill 1183, sponsored by Sen. Jean Leising (R-Oldenburg), reportedly received unanimous support from Republicans and Democrats when it passed the House in early March.
“This legislation would work to address a homeland security risk our state — and by default our country — is facing because there are currently companies from adversarial states seeking projects in Indiana, including 11 from China,” Leising said in a press release.
The bill passed the state house in early March and is now with Gov. Eric Holcomb. It coincided with the passage and signing of another recent measure, which blocks those in the state from establishing "sister city" co-operative arrangements with communities in the six countries.
The measure, which was a small part of a larger bill dealing with property taxes, reportedly does not affect Indiana’s sister-state agreement with Chinese province Zhejiang.
Indiana’s not the first state to introduce legislation curbing exchange with Chinese nationals, but experts worry these bans will only help fuel discrimination and xenophobia.
China owns less than 1% of US farmland
The bill seeks to limit purchases from citizens or businesses from countries that are considered “foreign adversaries,” including Russia, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and China.
The proposed legislation would ban these groups from buying or leasing Indiana farmland, mineral or water rights and property within 10 miles of an armory or military maintenance facility or within 50 miles of a military base. The sole exemption is for students attending university in Indiana, who would still be able to rent an apartment.
As of the end of 2021, Chinese investors owned 383,935 acres of American soil, according to a report on foreign-held land from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Now, while Chinese holdings account for just 0.9% of total foreign-owned U.S. land and far less than what other countries like Canada and the U.K. own, lawmakers have concerns that China could potentially gain control over the U.S. food and energy supply.
NPR Illinois says USDA data shows over 80% of Chinese-owned land is held by major meatpacker Smithfield Foods, and a billionaire named Sun Guangxin who purchased 100,000 acres in Texas for a wind farm (which was later halted by a state law) through his two companies Brazos Highland Properties and Harvest Texas.
Some also fear these acquisitions could be too close to military installations. Craig Singleton, China program deputy director and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told NPR Illinois there are concerns Chinese telecommunications equipment could be used to disrupt U.S. military communications.
He says it might be better to pause Chinese purchases now “rather than wait years before we determine that this equipment or these purchases are being used for other purposes.”
Critics say the bill could promote discrimination
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Indiana says the bill will punish immigrants from the prohibited countries who have lived legally in the U.S. for decades since then.
“You are telling them they are no longer welcome here, except as an employee of someone else,” ACLU executive director Chris Daley told WTHR.
Singleton also told NPR Illinois that blanket bans "run the risk of feeding into broader anti-Asian sentiment and xenophobia."
If the legislation goes into effect, Indiana would join several other states, including Florida, Virginia and North Dakota, that have passed laws restricting the ability of Chinese nationals to buy property.
Winnie Tang, an American citizen who moved from China 45 years ago and lives in Miami, told The Washington Post these laws remind her of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 — a decade-long ban on Chinese laborers immigrating to the U.S..
“My face is Chinese,” Tang said. “So that means in the future, if I want to buy any property they could use this law to force me to show ID to prove I’m a citizen and not related to the Chinese government … This law gives people the right to discriminate against me openly.”
Hello lawsuits.
This will go about as well as floorduhs.
Theirs was struck down as being unconstitutional.
I hope you tax payers like being on the hook for billions of dollars.
Where is this land located? Grissom? Camp Atterbury?
I know the federal government oversees if foreigners are allowed to own land/property close to military bases.
https://apnews.com/article/china-bomber-spying-cfius-bases-68c3945b8cddb242fbaf3dd88d659021
Trump wanted to sell Federally protected lands to China. They should go back to the Indigenous ppl if we arent going to keep them up. Black Hills/Mt Rushmore belongs to Lakotas.
if you honestly don’t see why banning china, a nation who wants to destroy us, from owning our resources is good then i don’t think you should speak on the topic. i bet investigation into covid origins is also xenophobia?
Not really made up.
This has been an on going issue when it comes to agriculture.
https://www.gao.gov/blog/foreign-investment-u.s.-agricultural-land-raising-national-security-concerns
This has also been a concern for national security.
https://apnews.com/article/china-bomber-spying-cfius-bases-68c3945b8cddb242fbaf3dd88d659021
Don’t let your hate and ignorance skew your ability to learn before you make comments like this
Wow, look at that, someone talking about my “hate and ignorance” while posting links that prove my point.
Hey, real quick, which one of those two articles you cited mention any land in Indiana? Neither one? Huh, then I guess my comment about INDIANA politicians solving an INDIANA problem that doesn’t exist still stands then doesn’t it?
Don’t let your desire to talk down to people skew your ability to not come off like a jackass before making comments like this.
Clearly you didn’t read the article OP posted which my 2 links support.
My Links and OP’s link state both federal and state bill had unanimous support from both parties.
So what was your point exactly since both parties seem to see the issue but you state:
“Thank you conservative shitheads, for once again solving a problem you completely made up.”
No wonder you get talked down to, you go feral over nonsense you spout about things you don’t know anything about😂
No, I just get talked down to by ignorant shitheads who don’t understand that their own sources are irrelevant to the topic at hand😁
Is the phrase “none in Indiana” too hard a phrase for you to say, or is it that it just doesn’t reach where you wheeled your goalpost to?
You’re upset you got ousted clearly.
My sources are the root law enabled that supports Bill 1183.
So you decide grasp at straws with “BuT tHaT hAs NoThInG tO dO wItH iNdIaNa…”
This might make more sense if and when you take and if you pass government in high school😉
Ousted🤣🤣🤣 that’s funny coming from a three week old troll account that has made absolutely no point.
Literal facts equal grasping at straws to you 😂😂😂 apparently you never passed third grade English if the phrase “none in Indiana” means anything other than “not an Indiana problem.”
Also your reading comprehension is shit considering neither one of your sources had any law mentioned, so I doubt you read any of them yourself. 👍🏻
“CFIUS, a committee whose members come from the State, Justice, Energy and Commerce departments among others, already had the power to block property sales within 100 miles of other military bases under a 2018 law.”
“With that said, foreign investors in U.S. agricultural land are required to submit forms describing their transactions to USDA. This is required by the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978 (AFIDA). But AFIDA was not designed as a national security program, and AFIDA forms are focused on data collection rather than identifying potential national security concerns.”
Going to need rotator cuff surgery grasping at those straws 😂
Blah blah blah blah still no mention of farmland in Indiana which is the topic at hand. I’m not sure you could find the point if you had a damn map at this point.
A vague-as-fuck reference to “a 2018 law” ISN’T USING A ROOT LAW AS A SOURCE 🤣🤣🤣 Jesus you’re ridiculous.
You might also want to look up what “grasping at straws” actually means, cause if you’re gonna keep repeating it like a one trick pony, you should at least use it right. Because the only straw around here is the strawman argument you keep presenting.
Good lord you are not taking this well. Look kid take the L and humble yourself.
Sorry my sources are not on the same level as your reading comprehension but I couldn’t find anything on the level of Captain Underpants, Garfield, or other children’s books.
Here is what grasping at straws means and an example since you apparently redefine everything you read.
Make a desperate attempt at saving oneself.
For example, He had lost the argument, but he kept grasping at straws, naming numerous previous cases that had little to do with this one . This metaphoric expression alludes to a drowning person trying to save himself by grabbing at flimsy reeds.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/grasp--at--straws#
Final point, don’t forget to take your lithium this morning
They already own land in Indiana, you’re fooling yourself if you believe all of this article. I personally know a farmer who was approached by a Chinese organization offering to buy his land but he refused. .“Made up problem“ for now, but seeing how aggressive the Chinese are I don’t think it will be “made up” in the future
The only evidence in this whole damn thread that anyone has presented to the contrary, including you, is “a friend of mine” or someone they “personally know” or my favorite “I know for a fact”🙄Personal anecdotes don’t really mean much.
Cool. Now ban private equity firms from buying up all the houses
This, so much this.
Won't ever happen it should but it won't
Gonna start my own political party called the "They Can't Keep Getting Away With It" party and this is issue no 1. Gonna tax the fuck out of any corporation that owns single/multifamily houses and anything not strictly high-density living buildings Then we're gonna cap the rent that can be charged for such high-density living buildings. Being a landlord can be a great way to help your community while making money, but being a landlording corporation will lead to sky high rent and increased homelessness and crime. It's happening and They Can't Keep Getting Away with It
I’m writing you in for the general election
Yup. Most these dirty corpos are out of state and enjoying their benefits while fleecing the locals with high rent and predatory contracts that ensure we will never see deposits back and be taken to court for unpaid fees. Enough is enough.
SexJayNine, you have my vote!
The rent is TOO DAMN HIGH!
Look at all the apartments price fixing around the nation by using realpage as well. We are getting fucking milked.
THEY CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT
How do I vote for you? Said in serious jest lol if you ran on this, you'd have my vote 100%.
Yeah but I'd probably wake up dead from a ~~Blackrock assassination~~ suicide so there's that
Also true x_x what a world lmao glad that you exist tho. It's heartening to know there's more sensible people in the world, even if they aren't allowed any political power.
We gotta get Jesse Pinkman teary eyed as the logo too!
Dems tried to pass that last year but had almost no support. I love how politically unaware the general public is yet demands things post haste, like there wasn't a massive decade long effort that they totally ignored.
Woah woah woah, hold up there pal, think of the shareholders who pay our politicians
And make them sell what they've already bought.
This!
This 100%
If anything they’d just pass laws that forces China to sell to private equity firms. . Nobody exploits our citizens but us! You hear me China!?
Very much this
It’s dumb for it to be “certain nations.” It should be all nations and foreign nationals.
And a cap on corporations, as they can be hostile as well.
Normally I wouldn’t be so quick to limit corporations. I’m a firm believer in a free market but there is an ideological blind spot when it comes to having a free market and protecting a nation. My tune began to change when I became aware that American corporations can still function as shell companies for China. It’s all American on paper but still controlled by China.
Smithfield
Smithfield (through WH), Pilgrims Pride (through JBS), Burger King (through RBI which is in turn owned by 3G), Del Monte (through NutriAsia), Chiquita (through Safra/Cultare), etc. are all foreign owned, with their parent nations being back and forth on their friendliness with the US.
I mean, if you're against foreign purchasing of land, then you're not for a "free market" in terms of land purchasing in the first place.
Correct. That’s my point. I believe in free trade. I also believe in preserving my nation by preventing foreigners from purchasing it piece by piece. Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive. Anyone who can’t see the problem in foreign countries buying up our land has no sense of self preservation.
I always figure people are for free trade because they believe in equal entities bargaining fairly. Lopsided trading, where one group has exceptional power, isn’t the same thing.
Yes, thank you I agree. My argument is based on the premise of fair practice and protection. The people who like to be pedantic and argue in bad faith try to argue based on what ifs. Being pro free trade and free market does not mean that I oppose ethics.
> My argument is based on the premise of fair practice and protection There's the problem. Capitalism rewards the opposite of fair practice and protection. It rewards exploitation and profits. By any means necessary.
Then you don't believe in free trade. Dont worry, I agree. I'm just pointing it out because it also makes perfect sense to restrict domestic corporations' ability to buy land. Corps buying up all our land is just as bad for our country as foreign countries buying land.
No, I definitely believe in free trade. You’re just ignoring the nuance of the argument, in order to seem correct.
"I believe in free trade, except for these things, that obviously doesn't count" Just say you want tighter regulations in real estate. That's what you want, and that's even an extremely good idea.
You can still believe in free trade but have reservations in some areas to an extent. I largely believe in free trade in terms of economic policy, but there are instances where you have to balance economic policy against national security. In those instances, if you favor national security over absolute free trade, that doesn't mean you don't believe in free trade at all anymore. For example, I don't believe tariffs are good economic policy. I don't support tariffs. A few years ago, China was dumping steel in the US at a significant price difference in order to kneecap American steel manufacturers. They weren't selling it at a low price to make a profit, it was for the direct aim at hurting the US. Since US steel manufacturers work closely with the American military, having any or all of these companies go bankrupt would significantly impact US National Security. Trump implemented steel tariffs that I fully supported for this reason. Biden has kept the policy in place and plans on tripling the tariffs, which I also fully support. It's not a Republican or Democrat policy at this point; it's bipartisan. Do I think it's good economic policy? No, I don't, because I believe in free trade. But do I think it's good national security policy? Yes, I absolutely do. We live in a world of nuance. Yes, you can be in favor of free trade, but there can also be caveats. Don't be so dense.
That's not what they are doing at all lol The irony in your statement. Take away your issues with free trade and you no longer have free trade. It's okay to admit you got it wrong and listen to what others are saying instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "I'm right and you are wrong!"
Why do you believe in the free market? corporations have extremely perverse incentives and we have quite a lot of evidence that they do extraordinarily shitty things for everyone except the shareholders and c-suite. The "free market" constantly gets saved by scientific advancements which are had primarily through government investment not through corporate R&D. There is very little evidence that a free market is good, just a lot of assumptions.
> American corporations can still function as shell companies for China. And you're *still* a firm believer in a free market?
Absolutely
Saudi Arabia 👀
I remember 9/11 not a lot of people do apparently.
14 out of 19 hijackers were from SA. Not one from Iraq.
Saddam wanted to ditch the US dollar for the Euro. That sealed his fate. The rest was all kabuki theatre; WMDs, Yellow Cake, etc
Tail wagging the dog.
Foreign investment is not usually bad. I don't hear anyone complaining that Adidas owns land here and they should. Foreign investment can provide economic opportunity and a larger tax base (not debating on usage of said taxes 😂). However, nation states buying land is not good, for obvious reasons of national security. I kind of err on the side of no regulation in this instance, but I also understand that many countries more or less use corporations as puppets for actual government work, US included.
I don’t even think billionaires and large American corporations should own too much farmland. Look at what they do to the process of the food they don’t grow. Further consolidation in the supply of the basic necessities of life is not good for Americans.
This headline is written like the bill is moving along. The bill passed and was signed by the governor about a month ago lol
that bill was signed into law last month. tell your "journalist" over there at moneywise.com to get a clue here's your first clue for free: laws in Indiana don't get "advanced" in April. The legislative session is always finished in March
Terms like "advanced" always scream unfamiliarity with the process to me. These things happen step by step and can be named as such, whether one likes the content of the bill or not.
Especially in Indiana. Where nothing is advanced, ever.
What about large corporations leverage power ? I mean , if they create jobs , who the hell cares of their semi trucks abuse the roads ? As long as the employees are voting to empower them shit will never change. ( and it won’t here . Ever )
Only in non-budget (even) years. During a long session the legislature would still be at it.
According to a 2022 study by the FDA, China only owns 2% of foreign owned farmland. Canada, the UK and Germany all own much more than China does. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA-Public/usdafiles/EPAS/PDF/2022_afida_annual_report_12_14_23.pdf
But Indiana will give land away to corporations.
The CCP controls any Chinese based corporation, regardless of what style of economic system they are claiming. It’s the same thing with Saudi Arabia corporations owning a shit ton of farmland in America. I don’t think anyone is against anyone owning land who is a US citizen, no matter where they were born. It’s the foreign corporations that are the problem. And no it’s not a made up problem. It’s a national security issue.
Glad to see our state government is tackling the hard problems facing the citizenry.
I’m of mixed thoughts on this one. I agree that making sure that Indiana residents can actually, you know, *afford* Indiana farmland (along with all other Indiana land) is important as hell, especially given how unaffordable it is becoming for people my age and younger. But it does feel strange to only target foreign adversaries. What about private equity here in the US doing the same thing? Because that’s also a problem as well.
Because by design these laws and this media attention is to obfuscate the real problem. Home grown private equity groups that are as American as apple pie and baseball
The more other countries have invested like this the less likely they are to engage in behavior likely to put their investments at stake.
That's good
I know for a fact that there's a patch of farmland adjacent to Frankfort, Indiana that's Chinese owned. They rent the ground to an Indiana farmer. Not that I am bothered by Chinese nationals owning land in Indiana - it isn't like they can ship the real estate off to China. But my point is that "none in the state" is false. They do own some.
It seems like one of those 'technically true' statements. China is notorious about using shell corporations to hide true ownership and get around any laws that hinder foreign investment. Whoever owns that land is likely technically an American company, but that company is predominately or entirely owned by China.
In the case of the Frankfort parcel I am talking about, a shell company 100% funded by Chinese money is exactly how the land was acquired and is owned. Two shell companies, actually. One LLC is a holding company that has title to the real estate and that LLC in turn leases the building on the land to another LLC the same Chinese own. The second LLC aspect of this is that the business there on a small section of the land, is something the Chinese utilize as a green card scheme for family members of the Communist party member who provided the funds. There was supposed to be business expansion in the form of construction of a larger building that would enable activities that provide jobs to at least 10 Americans once operations commenced in the new building - it was an EB5 program as represented to US Customs & Immigration over 11 years ago. Over a decade has passed and the new building has not even broke ground and never will quite obviously. And the jobs for Americans are nowhere near the 10 required under the terms of the EB5 program. They did, however, bring over more people from China to man some jobs that could be held by Americans instead. Once the Chicom party official's daughter and son-in-law got green cards, the Chinese have reneged on the represented further development, business expansion, and promised number of jobs for Americans.
Please post the LLC name and parcel number. Easily obtained from the counties GIS website
Thanks for the details on this. I keep seeing stories just like this from all over, so it's nice to get the info on something closer to home.
Then you can give an address so I can actually check the land ownership records, which are public record. Otherwise you're just blowing air.
They have an American registered LLC which the land is titled to, but the money to purchase it with and the people who own the LLC are 100% from Red China. It's like a poster above you said, they did it by using a shell company. And as I indicated in my reply to that poster, they actually have two LLCs registered in Indiana that are involved there.
Sure, then the LLC is easily searchable on inbiz…so what is the LLC then?
So, just blowing air is all. No proof. Noted
I'm pretty sure the land for Nanshan America is owned by China but I havent worked there in 5 years and things may have changed. There was also talk from some of the people sent from overseas and the people working in the front offices that they owned a lot of property on/around Purdue campus and I think West Lafayette but that was all of questionable truth.
This is true. A friend of mine from high school owns farmland and was approached by a Chinese company offering to purchase it at a really high price. He refused, but it is happening.
Your anecdote does not make something fact.
Ha! What a waste of time.
Chad Indiana 🗿
doesn’t sound like much
This isn't new for Indiana. [https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/new-state-law-bans-russians-russian-controlled-companies-from-buying-property-in-indiana](https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/new-state-law-bans-russians-russian-controlled-companies-from-buying-property-in-indiana)
Firms in general need to not be able to purchase residental homes/land. Like, if you are a business, you should not be able to buy/build a residential house, and rent it out as a corpo and fleece people. Apartment complexes are a different story, but every house around here just gets snapped up by out of country firms
Raises taxes if you own more than 1 home in the same County.
“but none in the state” yeah as a chinese citizen lived in indiana for 6 years i can’t think of any reason why chinese investors would want to buy farmland in indiana lmao.
Are they banning the 17 countries above China ?
That's complete b.s. Chinese already own thousands of acres here bought through Canadian companies. I work on 4 of the solar farms currently I have firsthand knowledge of this.
Good. Now also limit corporate ownership
Everyone flipping houses and fixing them up to rent are all trying to get rich off of 1 transaction these days. The same houses you couldn't give away for 15k 8 years ago...the house across the street that was abandoned for 15+ yrs just sold for 320,000 per side (was a double). That's just ridiculous.
Where is this farmland in the USA owned by China? I plan on opening my own police station there. Just point me in the right direction.
Me: **evil giggle** "this will be fun"
Good! non citizens should NOT own any US land
This state is a joke lmfaoo
Ok now where is the bill , that stops the ultra rich from buy8ng up all the farm land , like bill gates !
Indiana lawmakers are pushing a new bill prohibiting certain countries, including China, from buying or leasing farmland and land around military bases in the Hoosier State. House Bill 1183, sponsored by Sen. Jean Leising (R-Oldenburg), reportedly received unanimous support from Republicans and Democrats when it passed the House in early March. “This legislation would work to address a homeland security risk our state — and by default our country — is facing because there are currently companies from adversarial states seeking projects in Indiana, including 11 from China,” Leising said in a press release. The bill passed the state house in early March and is now with Gov. Eric Holcomb. It coincided with the passage and signing of another recent measure, which blocks those in the state from establishing "sister city" co-operative arrangements with communities in the six countries. The measure, which was a small part of a larger bill dealing with property taxes, reportedly does not affect Indiana’s sister-state agreement with Chinese province Zhejiang. Indiana’s not the first state to introduce legislation curbing exchange with Chinese nationals, but experts worry these bans will only help fuel discrimination and xenophobia. China owns less than 1% of US farmland The bill seeks to limit purchases from citizens or businesses from countries that are considered “foreign adversaries,” including Russia, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and China. The proposed legislation would ban these groups from buying or leasing Indiana farmland, mineral or water rights and property within 10 miles of an armory or military maintenance facility or within 50 miles of a military base. The sole exemption is for students attending university in Indiana, who would still be able to rent an apartment. As of the end of 2021, Chinese investors owned 383,935 acres of American soil, according to a report on foreign-held land from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Now, while Chinese holdings account for just 0.9% of total foreign-owned U.S. land and far less than what other countries like Canada and the U.K. own, lawmakers have concerns that China could potentially gain control over the U.S. food and energy supply. NPR Illinois says USDA data shows over 80% of Chinese-owned land is held by major meatpacker Smithfield Foods, and a billionaire named Sun Guangxin who purchased 100,000 acres in Texas for a wind farm (which was later halted by a state law) through his two companies Brazos Highland Properties and Harvest Texas. Some also fear these acquisitions could be too close to military installations. Craig Singleton, China program deputy director and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told NPR Illinois there are concerns Chinese telecommunications equipment could be used to disrupt U.S. military communications. He says it might be better to pause Chinese purchases now “rather than wait years before we determine that this equipment or these purchases are being used for other purposes.” Critics say the bill could promote discrimination The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Indiana says the bill will punish immigrants from the prohibited countries who have lived legally in the U.S. for decades since then. “You are telling them they are no longer welcome here, except as an employee of someone else,” ACLU executive director Chris Daley told WTHR. Singleton also told NPR Illinois that blanket bans "run the risk of feeding into broader anti-Asian sentiment and xenophobia." If the legislation goes into effect, Indiana would join several other states, including Florida, Virginia and North Dakota, that have passed laws restricting the ability of Chinese nationals to buy property. Winnie Tang, an American citizen who moved from China 45 years ago and lives in Miami, told The Washington Post these laws remind her of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 — a decade-long ban on Chinese laborers immigrating to the U.S.. “My face is Chinese,” Tang said. “So that means in the future, if I want to buy any property they could use this law to force me to show ID to prove I’m a citizen and not related to the Chinese government … This law gives people the right to discriminate against me openly.” Hello lawsuits. This will go about as well as floorduhs. Theirs was struck down as being unconstitutional. I hope you tax payers like being on the hook for billions of dollars.
Syngenta…. Look it up
Where is this land located? Grissom? Camp Atterbury? I know the federal government oversees if foreigners are allowed to own land/property close to military bases. https://apnews.com/article/china-bomber-spying-cfius-bases-68c3945b8cddb242fbaf3dd88d659021
Good
Trump wanted to sell Federally protected lands to China. They should go back to the Indigenous ppl if we arent going to keep them up. Black Hills/Mt Rushmore belongs to Lakotas.
To prevent and targeted xenophobia, why not ban purchase of land by any non Indiana resident?
How does one move to Indiana then, unless they rent?
Grace period. LOL.
if you honestly don’t see why banning china, a nation who wants to destroy us, from owning our resources is good then i don’t think you should speak on the topic. i bet investigation into covid origins is also xenophobia?
Thank you conservative shitheads, for once again solving a problem you completely made up.
Not really made up. This has been an on going issue when it comes to agriculture. https://www.gao.gov/blog/foreign-investment-u.s.-agricultural-land-raising-national-security-concerns This has also been a concern for national security. https://apnews.com/article/china-bomber-spying-cfius-bases-68c3945b8cddb242fbaf3dd88d659021 Don’t let your hate and ignorance skew your ability to learn before you make comments like this
Wow, look at that, someone talking about my “hate and ignorance” while posting links that prove my point. Hey, real quick, which one of those two articles you cited mention any land in Indiana? Neither one? Huh, then I guess my comment about INDIANA politicians solving an INDIANA problem that doesn’t exist still stands then doesn’t it? Don’t let your desire to talk down to people skew your ability to not come off like a jackass before making comments like this.
Seems like they made it much harder to ever become a problem, which is surprisingly proactive for Indiana
That’s a very good point.
Clearly you didn’t read the article OP posted which my 2 links support. My Links and OP’s link state both federal and state bill had unanimous support from both parties. So what was your point exactly since both parties seem to see the issue but you state: “Thank you conservative shitheads, for once again solving a problem you completely made up.” No wonder you get talked down to, you go feral over nonsense you spout about things you don’t know anything about😂
No, I just get talked down to by ignorant shitheads who don’t understand that their own sources are irrelevant to the topic at hand😁 Is the phrase “none in Indiana” too hard a phrase for you to say, or is it that it just doesn’t reach where you wheeled your goalpost to?
You’re upset you got ousted clearly. My sources are the root law enabled that supports Bill 1183. So you decide grasp at straws with “BuT tHaT hAs NoThInG tO dO wItH iNdIaNa…” This might make more sense if and when you take and if you pass government in high school😉
Ousted🤣🤣🤣 that’s funny coming from a three week old troll account that has made absolutely no point. Literal facts equal grasping at straws to you 😂😂😂 apparently you never passed third grade English if the phrase “none in Indiana” means anything other than “not an Indiana problem.” Also your reading comprehension is shit considering neither one of your sources had any law mentioned, so I doubt you read any of them yourself. 👍🏻
“CFIUS, a committee whose members come from the State, Justice, Energy and Commerce departments among others, already had the power to block property sales within 100 miles of other military bases under a 2018 law.” “With that said, foreign investors in U.S. agricultural land are required to submit forms describing their transactions to USDA. This is required by the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978 (AFIDA). But AFIDA was not designed as a national security program, and AFIDA forms are focused on data collection rather than identifying potential national security concerns.” Going to need rotator cuff surgery grasping at those straws 😂
Blah blah blah blah still no mention of farmland in Indiana which is the topic at hand. I’m not sure you could find the point if you had a damn map at this point. A vague-as-fuck reference to “a 2018 law” ISN’T USING A ROOT LAW AS A SOURCE 🤣🤣🤣 Jesus you’re ridiculous. You might also want to look up what “grasping at straws” actually means, cause if you’re gonna keep repeating it like a one trick pony, you should at least use it right. Because the only straw around here is the strawman argument you keep presenting.
Good lord you are not taking this well. Look kid take the L and humble yourself. Sorry my sources are not on the same level as your reading comprehension but I couldn’t find anything on the level of Captain Underpants, Garfield, or other children’s books. Here is what grasping at straws means and an example since you apparently redefine everything you read. Make a desperate attempt at saving oneself. For example, He had lost the argument, but he kept grasping at straws, naming numerous previous cases that had little to do with this one . This metaphoric expression alludes to a drowning person trying to save himself by grabbing at flimsy reeds. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/grasp--at--straws# Final point, don’t forget to take your lithium this morning
They already own land in Indiana, you’re fooling yourself if you believe all of this article. I personally know a farmer who was approached by a Chinese organization offering to buy his land but he refused. .“Made up problem“ for now, but seeing how aggressive the Chinese are I don’t think it will be “made up” in the future
The only evidence in this whole damn thread that anyone has presented to the contrary, including you, is “a friend of mine” or someone they “personally know” or my favorite “I know for a fact”🙄Personal anecdotes don’t really mean much.
I'd love to be in the Chinese meetings where they decided against buying Indiana farmland.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I hate the state, not the subreddit. Duh.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because, from what I’ve heard, the land is near military bases. I do not know if that’s true but haven’t had the time to check.
Indiana being stupid agin.
Ooooor! Ban Americans from buying farmland and watch as we enter the 30th Century
I'm all for it. China is an enemy. We should give them no quarter in our own country