[QUOTE=Kodidog763;8220572]
(i.e. you “lease” the house from the facility for a certain amount you would be willing to cover as your mortgage, or the facility “leases” the barn/facilities/land from you as the homeowner), that ups the percentage that will cashflow a bit.
Of course there are a lot of other factors, but generally, the answer is “it depends.”[/QUOTE]
We did it the other way around, we maintained the complete property as a personal asset, then leased the grounds and buildings to the farm which as an independent stand-alone corporation.
The horses boarded were actually owned by a separate company
The separate company paid to board the horses at the farm then the farm paid rent to us.
There were several specific reasons we did this arrangement, One was to provide liability firewalls (just look at all the threads regaurding horse liability). Another reason was to shield income and provide educational opportunities.
This was not a true public boarding operation but in the eyes of the state it was considered a public boarding facility and met all the associated responsibilities of such. It was profitable and paid its taxes each year, but it had a boarder who always was reliable and paid whatever to maintain its horses.