Ownership Disclosure Form - State Of New Jersey: Fill & Download for Free

The New Jersey Money Transmitter License (NJMTL) is issued by the Department of Banking and Insurance. In New Jersey, no person can engage in the business of receiving and transmitting money within the U.S. or abroad, without a license.The following documents are required:· Certificate of Incorporation. Foreign (out-of-state) entities must attach a copy of the Certificate of Authority to do Business in New Jersey bearing the dated filing stamp of the Treasurer of the State of New Jersey.· Personal certification completed by all officers, directors, substantial stockholders, members, partners or owners.· A financial statement demonstrating net worth· Audited financial statements for the past two years prepared by a CPA· Copies of filings with SEC· Personal information of all key shareholder, executive officer, partner, owner, and each officer or manager to be in charge of applicant’s activities to be licensed in New Jersey.· List of the foreign countries to which money is to be transmitted.· Banking Information· Corporate structure· Description of business activities· Books and records locations (Agreement for maintenance of records at an out of state location)· Photo ID and photographs· Anti- Money Laundering Policy· Business Plan· Samples of documents and forms which will be used by the business for customers· Management Chart and Organizational Chart showing ownership percentage· Registration with FinCEN as a Money Services Business· Surety bondsThe application has to be made to the Department of Banking and Insurance. A License is issued for a period of two years and has to be renewed. Application Fee is $700 while Net worth requirement for the applicant is a minimum of $100,000. The requirements for a surety range between $100,000 and $1,000,000. The fees for license renewal cannot exceed $4000. Legal Fee varies between $8,000-$12,000.As a full-service Global Law Firm focused on global I-gaming, Financial Services, Licensing, Asset Management, Securities, International Business & Tax; we value hearing from you, no matter where in the world you are. If you have any question, get in touch with us anytime via email, or visit us at www.empireglobal.partnersE-mail: [email protected] Disclaimer:This website, or this blog post and its contents do not create and are not meant to offer any legal advice, and this is not an advertisement or solicitation but merely a legal-minded expression of fact or opinion meant for public consideration, not to be substituted for legal advice.Full Disclosure - Lionel Iruk, Esq is the principal attorney and manager at Empire Global Partners, PLLC and Iruke Legal, Inc.

Unlike most answers, I do think we have some “good gun laws”. The problem is twofold; those laws don’t (can’t) go far enough in scope, and they’re not enforced until after much more heinous crimes have occurred as a result. And not even then; the Parkland shooter violated the Gun Free School Zones Act, but he’s not being charged with that offense, because the 17 counts of premeditated murder he racked up in the next few minutes afterward are being treated quite rightly with much higher priority by prosecutors. You’re typically only charged with these kinds of malum prohibitum crimes when the investigators and prosecutors can’t find anything else to charge you with, which literally makes the law a way to turn people with no intention of committing a violent crime into felons anyway.On the other hand, the great majority of the laws we have, Federal and State, are either so anachronistic they no longer make sense, or are feel-good measures that never made any sense to begin with. Case in point, the aforementioned GFSZA; who in their right mind ever thought that a sign would have deterred the Stockton shooter? Or the Columbine shooters? Sandy Hook? Parkland? Santa Fe? They all walked right past one of these:And nothing happened until they started shooting.So, this list is gonna piss everybody off at some point or another, in that it will, in one single argument, call for more and less gun laws than our current status quo. You have been warned:Universalize and streamline background checks using updated technology. When NICS was conceptualized in the early 90s, the Internet as a public resource was still very young, and most people and businesses didn’t have access to it. 20-ish years later in 2015, 77% of Americans live in a home with broadband, 75% have a smartphone or other Internet enabled mobile device, and Internet access is a practical must-have for any retail businesses to run credit/debit cards, so even if you happen to not have Internet access, your local gun store will.As such, there’s really very little reason for NICS to still be a call center, at least not one of its current size. We can do the same job with a secure web application handling the overwhelming majority of the traffic. That would additionally allow that app to be accessible to people besides FFLs, and would be the most convenient option available for universalizing background checks.That also creates other possibilities, such as streamlining the 4473. This is actually a virtual necessity if you’re going to universalize background checks without requiring an FFL to run the check; the information on a 4473 is identity theft on a silver platter, and you’re going to be expecting the average Joe to not only not misuse that data, but to safeguard it for however long you want the provenance chain to be traceable. The REAL ID Act gives us some possibilities for uniquely verifying identity without traditional identifying information; name, address and “document discriminator” aka audit number off of an RIA-compliant ID would be enough to get any other information needed as of time of sale, and when actually running the background check, all you’d actually need to input is the DD code and state of issue and the app could retrieve anything else needed.The questionnaire is little more than a trap, and we can get rid of it; the idea is that if you are a prohibited person and filled the questionnaire out such that the FFL actually bothered to call it in, and NICS denied you, you have just made a materially false statement on a Federal government form. However, the Brady Act itself makes trying to buy a firearm while knowingly prohibited a crime in itself, so either way the Feds have to prove the offence was committed knowledgeably. All we really need to give background checks “teeth” is a very obvious “click-wrap” disclosure in the app that states unambiguously that if you fall into one of the listed prohibited categories and submit the form, you are committing a crime. We can capture a signature image if you really want, but no handwriting analyst will ever swear on oath that your signature drawn on a tablet with a stylus would match a signature sample written on paper.Once the check comes back clean, you have to give the seller the ability to prove beyond any doubt that he ran the check. Since centralization of records of gun sales is an extremely touchy issue, not to mention illegal under the 1986 FOPA, the proof has to be self-contained in the paper record of sale. You can do that by encoding a “digital signature” on the paper document, such as in a QR code (it’d be a large one, but the spec allows for up to 4K of data to be encoded in one QR which would be enough). NICS basically receives all the information on the form, makes sure the background check on the listed individual passed, then strings it together in a known order, hashes it with a secure hash function, then encrypts that hash using an “asymmetric key” algorithm like RSA or ECC. You don’t have to know the technical details, just that this “hash and encrypt” signature system is the backbone of secure communications on the Internet that most major websites now use for all their traffic, and it’s worked for a couple decades now, failing only when the human side of information security does.So, to prove you ran the background check, you produce a copy of the record of sale, the QR code can be scanned into a mobile version of the NICS app along with the plain text data of the form, and the plain text data is hashed the same way as the signature originally was. Then, the app decrypts the signature with the public key of the keypair that initially encrypted it, and if the hashes match, whoever’s asking knows the record is authentic, and the guy on the form is the next guy they need to talk to about why that gun ended up at a crime scene. They know it’s authentic because only the information on that form, encrypted using a key known only within the NICS system as of the date of sale (they have a lifespan; NICS could generate a new keypair every couple years, and the app would know all public keys and the date range each one was valid for), could have produced the digital signature in the QR code, which means NICS vetted the exact data on the printed form. If you don’t have a record of sale or other proof of dispossession (i.e. police record of theft, loss or destruction) and your gun shows up at a crime scene, you’re now a POI and guilty of a crime in itself (failure to maintain required records).A system like this would allow UBCs to be performed by anyone with a laptop or smartphone, and it would even allow buyers to avoid the three-day delay on an in-person private meetup by vetting themselves and obtaining a “pre-authorization”. And it would do so without requiring an FFL (though you could still use one and they’d become the custodian of the record of sale), and without centralizing these records in government hands (a de facto registry of gun owners).Increase the Federal minimum age to purchase semi-automatic long guns to 21, alongside the minimum for handguns. Psychologists are pretty clear that puberty, and the host of chemical, physical and mental changes that occur during it, really doesn’t wind down until the mid-20s for the average man; maybe a year or two earlier for women. Auto insurance companies know this; you can be totally accident free your entire driving career since the age of 16, and they don’t consider you “low-risk” until you’re 25. On that note, we as society grant the rights and privileges (and responsibilities) associated with adulthood to young adults gradually; most religions have an informal age of majority (such as the Age of Reason in Christianity, around 12 or 13), then from a more legal standpoint you can drive at 16, you’re criminally and civilly liable for your actions at 17 (though this varies by state), you can vote and own most guns at 18, and drink at 21. So, the “eighteen means eighteen” argument that when you’re legally an adult, you’re a full adult, just doesn’t fly. Any SDI in boot camp will tell you their 18-year-olds are just as immature as any other, the main difference is that along with their service rifle (and long before they touch one), they get a no-nonsense introduction to following orders as given without argument or discussion, designed to condition them to do exactly that when lives are on the line.So no, I do not think that an 18 year old, simply by virtue of managing to not piss off their parents or teachers long enough to attain said age, should be able to walk up to the firearms counter of a sporting goods store and buy absolutely anything under the glass or on the back wall. There’s legal adulthood and there’s physical adulthood, and the medical consensus is that those are currently separated by about 8 years. At least give them the three extra that we already do for alcohol and handguns, for them to realize that life actually does get better in many ways after high school, before we allow them to purchase a rifle that can end a life for each wiggle of their pointer finger with no other action required. At 18, you can buy and own break-action and repeating-action long guns; for semi-automatics and revolvers, it should be 21.Temporary firearm restraining orders. Oh yeah, we’re going here too. “Red Flag laws” have been the subject of serious debate in the U.S., with arguments against ranging from “the police can already do this if there’s a credible threat to someone’s safety” to “this is just an end run around the rights of the accused allowing vindictive individuals to use the government to indefinitely suspend a person’s RKBA without the burden of proof required for a criminal conviction“.Personally, I think it’s a good idea that needs very careful attention paid to its implementation. Whether or not society needs an actual law detailing a new process, we shouldn’t have to wait for a potential, specific threat to public safety to become an actual specific threat to public safety before action can be taken. At the same time, I recognize the very serious potential for evil, and it simply cannot be dismissed. Protective orders don’t require a unanimous jury verdict based on there being no reasonable doubt that one is needed. All the petitioner needs is to convince a judge it’s a good idea, and judges run the gamut on the topic, with most of the ones in New Jersey chomping at the bit to sign anything that comes across their desk that takes a gun away from a civilian.So, if we’re gonna use court orders to remove guns from a person who has not been convicted of any crime, we need to strike a very fine and specific balance between the law being too easily abused for government or personal gain, and the law being just as ineffective as waiting for a crime to be committed. There must be controls in place regarding who can “wave the red flag”, what criteria is valued in determining to grant the initial order, and a guaranteed maximum time for hearing the subject’s challenge to said order. In addition, a common criticism of the laws is that is that the restraining orders target the guns based on a need for mental health care, but don’t provide mental health care. If we’re really worried about someone’s mental state, that sounds like the obvious place to start. We can talk about these orders as an exception to being “involuntarily committed to a mental health institution”; if the care was the result of a temporary restraining order it doesn’t trigger the permanent Federal prohibition, provided the care has some measure of success (or doesn’t find a problem).I’ve also floated the idea of a “yellow flag”, an indication that someone is in need of a refresher on firearms safety due to demonstrated complacency or ignorance of basic safety rules, but is unwilling to get the training themselves. A court order to force the training based on a description of the unsafe behavior, in lieu of any possible criminal charges for said behavior, might have a significant effect on reducing negligent discharges and unintended access by children while protecting gun owners from rabid prosecution for first-time offenses. Similar safeguards would be needed to avoid this being used as a nuisance or a backdoor to indefinite loss of gun rights with no criminal conviction.Now, having agreed in a very big way to a few major recent demands of the myriad gun control groups, I must in all seriousness ask, what do gun owners get in return for being limited to single-shots and repeating-actions for three years, having to defend against repeated aspersions on our mental health from a vindictive ex-spouse or your in-laws, plus being required to Federally vet anyone they pass a gun to, and then maintain proof of that check for years or even indefinitely?While I think the conclusion of the “cake analogy” - “I want my whole damn cake back now” - is unhelpful and even counterproductive, the position is sound; gun owners have been agreeing to allow their right to keep and bear arms to be restricted in the name of public safety for over 80 years, and all that’s happened is that those who are against gun ownership in the first place come back wanting more restrictions.This is in fact the stated goal of gun control activists like Josh Sugarmann; to restrict, piece by piece, the RKBA in the U.S., like boiling a frog, until the 2A is effectively dead because those still willing to jump through the regulatory hoops are a superminority, and/or because the only weapons still available for civilian purchase have little practical use for self-defense (which is what 60% of gun owners give as a major reason they are gun owners, compared to just 36% for hunting). They get impatient from time to time and make big pushes, but after most of the major players favoring gun control “outed” themselves as to their end goal in the early 90s, resulting in the Republican Party’s first bicameral Congressional majority in 40 years, most have walked back their public positions. Can those new stated end goals for gun control be trusted? Only the GCAs really know for sure, but history is not on their side.So, if we’re going to call UBCs and an increased minimum age a “compromise”, it should fit the definition; both sides should leave the table angry with the agreement they reached. To that end, gun control advocates do not get it all their own way; policies proven to be counterproductive or ineffective since their passage need to be rolled back, along with additional measures that become possible once it’s that much more obvious that the guys who legally own guns are not the problem in our country:Repeal the Federal Gun-Free School Zones Act, and all government-level policies restricting the possession of guns on any publicly-owned or managed land or building where entry is not contingent on passing through an armed security checkpoint where all entrants are searched for weapons. If the government and/or property owner is serious about people not having guns in a particular place, you know it before you get five feet inside. We have the technology and the process. The question is whether it’s worthwhile to implement these in any given place. If it’s not, hanging up a sign forcing those breaking no other law to disarm not only doesn’t solve the problem, it makes it worse.I will, in this discussion, give private property owners the benefit of the doubt; its your property, you’re a legal entity just like I am, it’s your prerogative to restrict entry as you wish based on any fact not explicitly protected under Federal law. I personally like to at least know someone else in my home besides me has a gun, and I won’t begrudge you the same. But had you caught me on any other day I’d be insisting on landowner liability for owners/controllers of “places of public accomodation” posted as “no guns allowed” for victims of violent crime in such venues. You are imposing a restriction on my entry into your otherwise publicly-accessible place, which places me and everyone else there at any give time at greater risk of harm, and you take no additional steps to mitigate that risk; that makes your policy a contributing factor to any criminal violence I might become a victim of while on your property.Repeal the Hughes Amendment, and allow purchase and registration of new automatic firearms in the United States. Yeah, you heard me right. The NFA, in itself, was sufficient to virtually end the violence committed with legally-owned automatic weapons; it gave the precursor organizations to the BATFE and FBI the legal tools they needed to dismantle the Mafia gangs of the 1920s, and since it passed, not one violent crime was committed with a legally-owned, NFA-registered machine gun. The only two crimes committed with any legally-owned machine gun involved police-issue machine pistols, and the crimes that actually prompted the Hughes Amendment, mainly in the Miami area among rival drug gangs, were committed with illegal weapons smuggled into the country alongside the drugs. The most notable shootout involving automatic weapons since the passage of the NFA, the North Hollywood Shootout, happened 10 years after the passage of the Hughes Amendment, and involved illegally-modified AKMs that would have landed the robbers in prison for 20 years each even without the Hughes Amendment in effect.Once again, the law is only a restriction on those inclined to follow it in the first place. The Hughes Amendment was passed in response to a spate of crimes in Miami, representing less than 3% of the total homicide count in Miami-Dade County, committed with weapons the ATF didn’t even know about in the first place. The ability of people to legally buy machine guns didn’t figure into it in the slightest. The Hughes Amendment also gave us the current political climate regarding guns and any registration thereof; in 1986, the Feds proved that they were willing to use registration as a first step to an outright ban. It had been done at lower levels before (DC’s handgun ban dated to 1976 and was legislated a similar way; you had to register all firearms to possess them in DC, and beginning in 1976 you couldn’t register handguns unless they were already there), but the Hughes Amendment brought the tactic to national attention, poisoning any attempt at actual compromise ever since. If gun control advocates want gun rights advocates to ever sit down at a negotiating table and assume good faith ever again, this strategy needs to be demonstrably off the table as a gun control tactic.Deregulate suppressors and short-barreled firearms. The NFA was passed 80 years ago, and was originally intended to restrict access to “concealable” firearms by union labor protesters, while not being an insurmountable hurdle to the labor bosses putting down the strikes, nor the police who are specifically exempted by the law and for whom the factory or mine was the primary taxpayer in the locale. In the works for most of the Roaring 20s, the NFA finally passed early in FDR’s term, due to a combination of the increasing publicity of mafia violence in the media involving fully-automatic weapons, and an attempted assassination of then-President-elect Roosevelt making gun control an early personal priority of FDR’s.That was 84 years ago. In more recent times, we wear less clothing in general, making these same types of weapons harder to conceal, meanwhile even illegal use of weapons and devices subject to NFA restrictions (registered or otherwise) is very low. Hunters and homeowners want to use suppressors to save their hearing and reduce the disturbance inherent in a rifle shot to those nearby, and for proof they’re not dangerous in themselves, one only has to look at the UK, where they’re sold off the shelf in any sporting goods store, and hunters are encouraged by police to use one. Homeowners also want access to short-barreled rifles as home defense weapons, easier to aim than a handgun while easier to maneuver through a home than a 16″ barreled rifle. For both SBRs and SBSes, workarounds to the law have been found and vetted by the ATF, and have become very popular, making the additional NFA restriction of short-barreled weapons useless in practice.National carry permit reciprocity, and a Federal pre-emption of “may-issue” permitting policies among State governments. Totally within the Feds’ purview under provisions of the Full Faith and Credit Clause (giving Congress the power to legislate the manner in which legal instruments of one state are to be recognized and honored by any other), Federally-enforced national reciprocity would force all 50 states, D.C. and all Federal territories to recognize a valid concealed-carry permit issued by any state - or the government-issued resident ID card of any state that does not require a permit - as if it were a valid concealed carry permit in their jurisdiction, subject to the laws of the state in which the person is currently located. So if it’s illegal to enter a bar in Texas with a concealed weapon (and it is, a felony in fact), it’s just as illegal to do so with a Tennessee permit as a Texas one. But, if it’s legal to walk around Central Park while strapped if you have an NYC carry permit, it’s just as legal to do it with a Texas permit, or a Tennessee permit, or a driver’s license from the State of Vermont.Now, national reciprocity, especially when it includes nonresident licenses, will accomplish an effective end to “may-issue” policies anyway, but I wanted to be explicit about this. The majority of the states in this country recognize a right to carry, typically subject to state regulation on the manner of the wearing of arms. As of 2018, the remaining few states that exercise subjective discretion in permitting, typically along the lines of requiring “good cause”, do so for the sole and express reason of limiting permits to a privileged few. It’s codified in Maryland’s version of the good cause requirement; applicants must have a reason to carry that “distinguishes the applicant from the general gun-owning public”; a desire to defend oneself is not distinguishing, as 60% of gun owners have their guns for that reason.This is unconstitutional, and to date the only credible reason SCOTUS has not heard a case on this topic is that the Court, and Roberts as Chief Justice, is unwilling to be seen as a tool to overturn state gun laws in a series of lock-step ideologically-polarized 5–4 decisions. They want the existing decisions in Heller and McDonald to be digested and mixed into lower court case law, and once that settles to a backwash of a few notable disagreements among Circuit Courts and State Supreme Courts, they’ll entertain the question. It’s well-known in legal circles that Gorsuch and Thomas are already chomping at the bit for another 2A case, but as of when Peruta was denied cert in 2016, the popular theory was that Alito and Roberts were unsure of Kennedy’s vote (on top of the whole “tool to overturn state laws 5–4” thing), and so took the out that with Moore v. Madigan not having been appealed by Illinois, there was no active Circuit Court split pending SCOTUS review.That’s compromise. I give you, you give me. Gun owners began the 20th Century with zero Federal restrictions on gun purchase or ownership, and many fewer State restrictions than most of the more problematic states for gun owners currently impose. The original position of this debate is that Americans have free and easy access to whatever firearms were available, and therefore “keeping some of my gun rights for now” is not a “compromise position”. That’s like me telling you “give me all the money you have now and all your future earnings”, you refusing, and then me saying “let’s compromise; you give me half of your money and 75% of your future earnings”.Would you agree to that “deal”? Yeah, didn’t think so.

Donald John Trump born (14-June-1946) and raised in the New York City borough of Queens. He is the 45th and current President of the United States Of America. Before entering politics, he was a businessman and television personality but before we dive into “how he became wealthy ?” a little bit of background.Trump's paternal grandfather, Frederick Trump, first immigrated to the United States in 1885 at the age of 16 and became a citizen in 1892. He amassed a fortune operating boomtown restaurants and boarding houses in the Seattle area and the Klondike region of Canada during its gold rush. On a visit to Kallstadt, he met Elisabeth Christ and married her in 1902. The couple permanently settled in New York in 1905. Frederick died from influenza during the 1918 pandemic. Trump’s father Fred Trump started working with his mother in real estate when he was only 15, shortly after his father's death. Their company, "E. Trump & Son", founded in 1923, was primarily active in the New York boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn. Fred Trump eventually built and sold thousands of houses, barracks, and apartments. In 1971, Donald Trump was made the president of the company, which was later renamed as the Trump Organization. Trump's mother Mary Anne MacLeod was born in Tong, Lewis, Scotland. At age 18 in 1930, she immigrated to New York, where she worked as a maid. Fred Trump and Mary Anne MacLeod married in 1936 and raised their family in Queens.Education-: Initially Trump attended the Kew-Forest School from kindergarten through seventh grade. At age 13, he was enrolled in the New York Military Academy, a private boarding school, after his parents discovered that he had made frequent trips into Manhattan without their permission.In 1964, Trump enrolled at Fordham University. After two years, he was transferred to the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. While at Wharton, he worked at the family business, Elizabeth Trump & Son.He graduated in May 1968 with a Bachelor of Science degree in economics.Business Career-:In 1968, Trump began his career at his father Fred's real estate development company, E. Trump & Son, which, among other interests, owned middle-class rental housing in New York City's outer boroughs. Trump worked for his father to revitalize the Swifton Village apartment complex in Cincinnati, Ohio, which the elder Trump had bought in 1964. The management of the property was sued for racial discrimination in 1969; the suit "was quietly settled at Fred Trump's direction."The Trumps sold the property in 1972, with a vacancy on the rise. When his father became chairman of the board in 1971, Trump was promoted to president of the company and renamed it The Trump Organization.Manhattan Developments-:In 1978, Trump launched his Manhattan real estate business by purchasing a 50 percent stake in the derelict Commodore Hotel, located next to Grand Central Terminal. The purchase was funded largely by a $70 million construction loan that was guaranteed jointly by Fred Trump and the Hyatt hotel chain. When the remodeling was finished, the hotel reopened in 1980 as the Grand Hyatt Hotel.The same year, Trump obtained the rights to develop Trump Tower, a 58-story, 664-foot-high (202 m) skyscraper in Midtown Manhattan.In 1980, repairs began on Central Park's Wollman Rink, with an anticipated two-and-a-half year construction time frame. Because of design flaws and numerous other construction problems, the project remained unfinished by May 1986. In June the same year rump was awarded a contract as the general contractor to finish the repairs by December 15 with a cost ceiling of $3 million, with the actual costs to be reimbursed by the city. Trump hired an architect, a construction company, and a Canadian ice-rink manufacturer and completed the work in four months, $775,000 under budget. Trump managed the rink from 1987 to 1995.In 1994, Trump's company refurbished the Gulf and Western Building on Columbus Circle with design and structural enhancements turning it into a 44-story luxury residential and hotel property known as Trump International Hotel and Tower.From 1994 to 2002, Trump owned a 50 percent share of the Empire State Building. He intended to rename it "Trump Empire State Building Tower Apartments" if he had been able to boost his share.In 1996, Trump acquired the Bank of Manhattan Trust Building, which was a vacant seventy-one story skyscraper on Wall Street. After an extensive renovation, the high-rise was renamed the Trump Building at 40 Wall Street.In 1997, he began construction on Riverside South, which he dubbed Trump Place, a multi-building development along the Hudson River. He and the other investors in the project ultimately sold their interest for $1.8 billion in 2005 in what was then the biggest residential sale in the history of New York City.In 1988 Trump acquired the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan for $407 million and appointed his wife Ivana to manage its operations. They sold it in 1995He received another contract in 2001 which was extended until 2021In 2001, Trump completed Trump World Tower.In 2002, Trump acquired the former Hotel Delmonico, which was renovated and reopened in 2004 as the Trump Park Avenue; the building consisted of 35 stories of luxury condominiums.Palm Beach Estate-:In 1985, Trump acquired the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, for $10 million, $7 million for the real estate and $3 million for the furnishings. His initial offer of $28 million had been rejected, and he was able to obtain the property for the lower price after a real-estate market "slump".In addition to using a wing of the estate as a home, Trump turned Mar-a-Lago into a private club. To join, prospective members had to pay an initiation fee and annual dues. The initiation fee was $100,000 until 2016; it was doubled to $200,000 in January 2017.Atlanta City Casino-:After New Jersey legalized casino gambling in 1977, Trump went to Atlantic City to explore new business opportunities. Seven years later, he opened Harrah's at Trump Plaza hotel and casino; the project was built by Trump with financing from the Holiday Corporation who also managed its operation. It was renamed "Trump Plaza" soon after it opened. The casino's poor financial results exacerbated disagreements between Trump and Holiday Corp., which led to Trump's paying $70 million in May 1986 to buy out their interest in the property.Trump also acquired a partially completed building in Atlantic City from the Hilton Corporation for $320 million; when completed in 1985, that hotel and casino became Trump Castle,Trump acquired his third casino in Atlantic City, the Taj Mahal, in 1988 while it was under construction, through a complex transaction with Merv Griffin and Resorts International. It was completed at a cost of $1.1 billion and opened in April 1990. The project was financed with $675 million in junk bonds and was a major gamble by Trump. The project underwent debt restructuring the following year, leaving Trump with 50 percent ownership. Facing "enormous debt", he sold his airline, Trump Shuttle, and his 282-foot (86 m) mega yacht, the Trump Princess, which had been indefinitely docked in Atlantic City while leased to his casinos for use by wealthy gamblersIn 1995, Trump founded Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts (THCR), which assumed ownership of Trump Plaza, Trump Castle, and the Trump Casino in Gary, Indiana.THCR purchased Taj Mahal in 1996 and underwent bankruptcy restructuring in 2004 and 2009, leaving Trump with 10 percent ownership in the Trump Taj Mahal and other Trump casino properties. Trump remained chairman of THCR until 2009.Golf Courses-:Trump began acquiring and constructing golf courses in 1999; his first property was the Trump International Golf Club, West Palm Beach in Florida.By 2007, he owned four courses around the U.S.Following the financial crisis of 2007–2008, he began purchasing existing golf courses and re-designing themAs of December 2016, the Trump Organization owns or operates 18 golf courses and golf resorts in the United States and abroad. According to Trump's FEC personal financial disclosure, his 2015 golf and resort revenue amounted to $382 million, while his three European golf courses did not show a profit.Bankruptcies-:Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, but his hotel and casino businesses have been declared bankrupt six times between 1991 and 2009 in order to re-negotiate debt with banks and owners of stock and bonds. Because the businesses used Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they were allowed to operate while negotiations proceeded. Trump was quoted by Newsweek in 2011 saying, "I do play with the bankruptcy laws – they're very good for me" as a tool for trimming debt.The six bankruptcies were the result of over-leveraged hotel and casino businesses in Atlantic City and New York:Trump Taj Mahal (1991).Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino (1992),.Plaza Hotel (1992).Trump Castle Hotel and Casino (1992).Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts (2004).Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009).Side Ventures-:After Trump took over the family real estate firm in 1971 and renamed it The Trump Organization, he expanded its real estate operations and ventured into other business activities. The company eventually became the umbrella organization for several hundred individual business ventures and partnerships.Sports-:In September 1983, Trump purchased the New Jersey Generals—an American football team that played in the United States Football League (USFL).He hosted several boxing matches at the Trump Plaza in Atlantic City, including Mike Tyson's 1988 heavyweight championship fight against Michael Spinks. He also acted as a financial advisor to Mike Tyson.In 1989 and 1990, Trump lent his name to the Tour de Trump cycling stage race, which was an attempt to create an American equivalent of European races such as the Tour de France or the Giro d'Italia.Trump also operates golf courses in several countries.Miss Universe-:From 1996 to 2015, Trump owned part or all of the Miss Universe pageants. The pageants include Miss USA and Miss Teen USA. His management of this business involved his family members—daughter Ivanka once hosted Miss Teen USA. He became dissatisfied with how CBS scheduled the pageants and took both Miss Universe and Miss USA to NBC in 2002.Trump University-:Trump University was a for-profit education company that was founded by Trump and his associates, Michael Sexton and Jonathan Spitalny. The company ran a real estate training program and charged between $1,500 and $35,000 per course.In 2005, New York State authorities notified the operation that its use of the word"university" was misleading and violated state law. After a second such notification in 2010, the name of the company was changed to the "Trump Entrepreneurial Institute".Trump was also found personally liable for failing to obtain a business license for the operation. Ronald Schnackenberg, a sales manager for Trump University, said in a testimony that he was reprimanded for not trying harder to sell a $35,000 real estate class to a couple who could not afford it. Schnackenberg said that he believed "Trump University was a fraudulent scheme" which "preyed upon the elderly and uneducated to separate them from their money."In 2013, New York State filed a $40 million civil suit against Trump University; the suit alleged that the company made false statements and defrauded consumers. Also, two class-action civil lawsuits were filed in federal court relating to Trump University; they named Trump personally as well as his companies.During the presidential campaign, Trump criticized presiding Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel, alleging bias in his rulings because of his Mexican heritage. Shortly after Trump won the presidency, the parties agreed to a settlement of all three pending cases, whereby Trump paid a total of $25 million and denied any wrongdoing.Foundation-:The Donald J. Trump Foundation is a U.S.-based private foundation that was established in 1988 for the initial purpose of giving away proceeds from the book Trump: The Art of the Deal. The foundation's funds have mostly come from donors other than Trump, who has not given personally to the charity since 2008. The foundation's tax returns show that it has given to health care and sports-related charities, as well as conservative groups. In 2009, for example, the foundation gave $926,750 to about 40 groups, with the biggest donations going to the Arnold Palmer Medical Center Foundation ($100,000), the New York-Presbyterian Hospital ($125,000), the Police Athletic League ($156,000), and the Clinton Foundation ($100,000). From 2004 to 2014, the top donors to the foundation were Vince and Linda McMahon of WWE, who donated $5 million to the foundation after Trump appeared at WrestleMania in 2007. Trump later named Linda McMahon as Administrator of the Small Business Administration. In 2016, The Washington Post reported that the charity had committed several potential legal and ethical violations, including alleged self-dealing and possible tax evasion. Also in 2016, the New York State Attorney General's office notified the Trump Foundation that the foundation appeared to be in violation of New York laws regarding charities, ordering it to immediately cease its fundraising activities in New York. A Trump spokesman called the Attorney General's investigation a "partisan hit job".In response to mounting complaints, Trump's team announced in late December 2016 that the Trump Foundation would be dissolved to remove "even the appearance of any conflict with [his] role as President."According to an IRS filing in November 2017, the foundation intended to shut down and distribute its assets (about $970,000) to other charities. However, the New York Attorney General's office had to complete their ongoing investigation before the foundation could legally shut down, and in June 2018 they filed a civil suit against the foundation for $2.8 million in restitution and additional penalties.The suit names Trump himself as well as his adult children Donald Jr., Eric, and Ivanka.Wealth-:Trump is the beneficiary of several trust funds set up by his father and paternal grandmother beginning in 1949. In 1976, Fred Trump set up trust funds of $1 million (equivalent to $4.3 million in 2017) for each of his five children and three grandchildren; Donald Trump received annual payments from his trust fund, for example, $90,000 in 1980 and $214,605 in 1981. By 1993, when Trump took two loans totaling $30 million from his siblings, their anticipated shares of Fred's fortune were $35 million each. Upon Fred Trump's death in 1999, his will divided $20 million after taxes (equivalent to $29.38 million in 2017) among his surviving children. Trump said that he began his career with "a small loan of one million dollars" from his father.He appeared on the initial Forbes 400 list of richest Americans in 1982 with an estimated $200 million fortune shared with his father.Former Forbes reporter Jonathan Greenberg stated in 2018 that during the 1980s Trump had deceived him about his actual net worth and his share of the family assets in order to appear on the list.Trump made the Forbes World's Billionaires list for the first time in 1989, but he was dropped from the Forbes 400 from 1990 to 1995 following business losses.In 2005, Deutsche Bank loan documents pegged Trump's net worth at $788 million, while Forbes quoted $2.6 billion and journalist Tim O'Brien gave a range of $150 million to $250 million.In its 2018 billionaires ranking, Forbes estimated Trump's net worth at $3.1 billion(766th in the world, 248th in the U.S.)making him one of the richest politicians in American history.When he filed mandatory financial disclosure forms with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) in July 2015, Trump claimed a net worth of about $10 billion;however, FEC figures cannot corroborate this estimate because they only show each of his largest buildings as being worth "over $50 million", yielding total assets worth more than $1.4 billion and debt over $265 million. Trump reported a yearly income of $362 million for 2014 and $611 million from January 2015 to May 2016.A 2016 analysis of Trump's business career by The Economist concluded that his performance since 1985 had been "mediocre compared with the stock market and property in New York".A subsequent analysis by The Washington Post concluded that "Trump is a mix of braggadocio, business failures, and real success"