LISTEN HERE:
Kevin O’Leary, billionaire TV personality and entrepreneur from ‘Shark Tank,’ earlier this week shared his insights on Fox News regarding the recent ruling against Donald Trump, the 45th U.S. President, in a civil fraud case. This case revolves around purported financial misrepresentations that had ramifications within the investment community, particularly in what O’Leary termed as the ‘loser state.’ Prior news coverage by DC Enquirer delved into the details of the judgment passed down by Justice Arthur Engoron in this Manhattan-based lawsuit, which was initiated by Letitia James, the Attorney General for New York State.
The court verdict held that Trump gained undue advantages in securing banking loans by misstating facts, leading to financial benefits. As part of the decision, Engoron imposed a hefty penalty of $355 million on Trump while also preventing him from accepting any executive or board roles in any legal entity or corporation within New York for a course of three years. This judgment, according to O’Leary, has contributed negatively to the real estate field in New York.
Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary is back again, this time scorching CNN’s Laura Coates:
??“Excuse me, what fraud? This is no longer about Trump. I care about America.”??
The exchange gets heated quickly when Coates defends the judgment against Trump, and asks why companies would… pic.twitter.com/C4jNrRaxBI
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) February 20, 2024
O’Leary emphasized that Trump’s real estate valuation strategies, which he used to secure loans, are fairly standard within real estate development circles. He expressed concern that the legal ruling could instigate unfavorable perceptions about property investment in the region. O’Leary elaborated on his views, highlighting the competitive nature of attracting business investments across various states.
He had previously held the belief that California was the leading American ‘loser state’ due to its slow but steady tarnishing of business vibrancy. However, with the emergence of this judgment, he revised his ranking, placing New York at the pinnacle of this unfavorable list. He then ranked California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Michigan right behind New York, attributing their positions to uncompetitive tax environments.
According to O’Leary, there is no necessity for investors to allocate their capital to these states, where such rulings are seen to be prevalent. He emphasized that investors exercise their discretion by making capital placement choices. Unfavorable actions in a state could thus influence investors’ decision to withhold their capital, leading to an indirect penalty on the state.
Instigating a rallying cry for alternative investments, O’Leary encouraged capital flow into states he sees as more hospitable business environments. He cited Florida, Texas, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and West Virginia as winners in this scenario. His argument is rooted in the belief that investments should be made in ‘winner’ states rather than ‘loser’ states like New York.
O’Leary forecasted a possibility for the judgment to be reassessed and potentially reversed in a superior court on appeal. The driving reason behind his prediction is the perceived threat the current ruling holds over business activities within New York. He iterated that if the ruling persists, it could be interpreted as a clear message to the investor community to steer clear of the Democratically governed state.
The TV personality distanced the impact of the ruling from the individual, Trump. Instead, he emphasized broader implications for all who wish to conduct business or speculative ventures within New York. His concerns revolve around the potential risk to investment capital in situations where legal judgments of this nature are made.
According to O’Leary’s interview as captured by Fox News, the arbitrary nature of Judge Engoron’s financial penalty in the ruling has created confusion and misunderstanding within the development community. From his perspective, the judge’s decision is hard to comprehend for most developers, who may see it as creating an unstable and unpredictable environment.
Wrapping up on the matter, O’Leary expressed strong sentiments about the ruling, describing it as an egregious affront to the real estate sector. As per his words, the judgment is not just a cause of concern, but a total embarrassment, echoing a sentiment of deep dismay and assault on the real estate market.
