> Note that you also characterized the law as providing an upper bound on lease terms, when actually it's the opposite: > > such as ground leases must be 30 ye

> Note that you also characterized the law as providing an upper bound on lease terms, when actually it's the opposite: > > such as ground leases must be 30 years or more except a fixed-term ground lease, which must be 50 years or more I quote from the article I shared with you: > The initial period is 30 years, regardless of the building structure. The lease can then be renewed for 20 years at the first renewal, then ten years thereafter. This differs from the the Old Land Lease in that under the old law, the initial lease period is different depending on the building structure. and this for fixed-term ground lease: > The lease contract period is ten years or more and less than 50 years. Which means we have two articles that are in disagreement but that is irrelevant because again, I am not proposing to use Japanese law verbatim. > I disagree with most everything you say, and I am not sure further discussion would be productive. Yes, constantly defending straw man positions or needing to answer how many angels can dance on a pin is not productive for me either. > Aside from the minutiae:… Thanks for selling me all your land and making my descendants incredibly wealthy because you thought it was better to avoid taxes.