Is there a big problem with the Opportunity Zones program?
Thomas Morgan is a real estate developer, broker, and investor who specializes in impact investing and 1031 exchange strategies. On today’s episode, we discuss the recent New York Times article and the challenges of raising Opportunity Zone capital for projects in blighted locations.
Click the play button below to listen to my conversation with Thomas.
- Reaction to the recent New York Times article on Opportunity Zones.
- Opportunity Zones that probably shouldn’t have been designated as Opportunity Zones.
- The problems with and challenges of raising Opportunity Zone capital from market rate investors, namely location and complexity.
- How Thomas has changed his approach to raising capital for his impact fund, and why he is no longer going after Opportunity Zone capital.
- The mentality of passive stock investors versus entrepreneurial real estate investors, and how the distinction can come into play with raising capital for Opportunity Zone investments, or 1031 exchange DST investments.
Featured on This Episode
- Thomas Morgan on LinkedIn
- Episode #11: 1031 Exchanges vs. Opportunity Zones
- Episode #12: Income, Impact, and Return in Opportunity Zones
- 1031 Navigator
- COMPOUND Global
- New York Times: How a Trump Tax Break to Help Poor Communities Became a Windfall for the Rich
- Aaron Seybert (Kresge Foundation): What Should Unite Opportunity Zones Backers and Detractors
Industry Spotlight: COMPOUND Global
Founded by Thomas Morgan in Aspen, Colorado, COMPOUND is an impact investment studio that creates, sources, and manages global impact investments in real estate. Thomas also specializes in 1031 exchange strategies.
Learn more about COMPOUND Global
- Visit COMPOUND.global
- Call Thomas: (970) 618-4086
About the Opportunity Zones Podcast
Hosted by OpportunityDb.com founder Jimmy Atkinson, the Opportunity Zones Podcast features guest interviews from fund managers, advisors, policymakers, tax professionals, and other foremost experts in opportunity zones.
Jimmy: Welcome to the Opportunity Zones Podcast. I’m your host, Jimmy Atkinson. And returning to the show today is Thomas Morgan. Thomas, as you may remember, is a commercial real estate developer, broker, and investor. And he was previously on my podcast back in February to discuss Opportunity Zones versus 1031 exchanges, and how Opportunity Zones present an alternative to 1031 exchange strategies. And we also discussed impact investing as well. And I’ll have links to these episodes in the show notes for today’s episode, which you can find at opportunitydb.com/podcast. Thomas joins us today from the road in Glenwood Springs, Colorado. He’s outside of his office, which is normally in Aspen. So Thomas, thanks for taking the time to join us on the road today. Welcome back.
Thomas: Hi, Jimmy. Great to be with you again.
Jimmy: Yeah, you bet, man. It’s good to catch up. For those who may have missed the episodes with you back in February, could you tell us a little bit about yourself and just a quick intro and what you’re up to in the Opportunity Zone and impact investing space?
Thomas: Yeah, Jimmy. My main business is 1031navigator.com, which is a national 1031 exchange replacement property service. We mainly broker triple net properties, passive income properties, and help people defer taxes using the 1031 section of the Internal Revenue Code. And then I do have several of my own development and investment projects. I’ve done a bunch of mobile home parks and multifamily apartment buildings, small subdivisions, a couple mixed-use historic projects, stuff like that. And then we’re also working on our impact investment fund, which is called Compound Global, and that’s essentially a triple bottom line, you know, financial return environmental return and some sort of social return in addition. You know, we’re trying to hit all three of those returns behind that.
Jimmy: Good. Good. And I know that the Opportunity Zones component there is gonna help form some of your capital stack, at least that’s the hope. I’m gonna ask you a little bit more about that a little bit later in the show. But to start us off today, I want to talk about that “New York Times” article that ran a little bit more than a week. I mean, a couple weeks ago now, August 31st I believe, is big news in our community and in the Opportunity Zones industry. It’s not every day that “The New York Times” covers the Opportunity Zones industry on the front page above the fold. It was pretty big here, and it created a lot of discussion among us in the Opportunity Zone space.
The article pointed out some successes of the program in Erie, Pennsylvania, and Birmingham, Alabama, specifically. But overall, the article was largely critical of the program and, you know, it referred to it as, “A once in a generation bonanza for elite investors.” And then it went on to mention how this program was doing a lot of good for folks like former Governor Chris Christie, Jared Kushner’s family, Anthony Scaramucci, to name a few. And the article even presented a rather pessimistic view from Aaron Siebert, who was the social investment officer at the Kresge Foundation. He was quoted as saying that, “The capital is going to flow to the lowest-risk, highest-return environment, perhaps 95% of this is doing no good for the people we care about.” I should point out that Aaron, a couple days later, kind of clarified his remarks and, you know, he’s not totally pessimistic about the program. And I’ll link to the article that he posted separately in the show notes for this podcast.
But overall, the article was fairly critical of the program. You know, it basically made the argument that, you know, this was benefiting just a very small group of elite investors and it wasn’t really doing what it was meant to do or what it is meant to do. Thomas, what did you make of the article overall? What were your thoughts on it?
Thomas: Well, you know, I agree mostly with the entire article to a certain extent. And case in point, you know, I happen to be coming to you today from Glenwood Springs, Colorado, which is just outside of Aspen, Colorado, and just outside, you know, just down the highway from Vail, Colorado where both places that, you know, homes are $10 million, $20 million, even $40 million. And Glenwood Springs, for example, most of it is an Opportunity Zone. But by all practical purposes, you know, it doesn’t fit the Opportunity Zone mold. You know, it’s low income for this area, but not anywhere close to most of the country or most of the Opportunity Zones.
So, I think the article when, you know, pointing to gentrification and different communities that maybe should have not been designated as Opportunity Zones, this community is case in point when, you know, $350,000 to buy just a normal like two-bedroom condo here, or $450,000, or even $600,000 or $700,000 to buy a single-family house in Glenwood Springs. It doesn’t really fit the mold of Opportunity Zone. And there’s really not much real estate that’s even for sale here. And there’s really not much vacancy. You know, if you drive through Opportunity Zones in most of the country, you’re gonna see 50% vacancy, 70% vacancy, you’re gonna see, you know, vacant homes, abandoned homes, and stuff like that, whereas this community is, you know, totally not what you would think of as an Opportunity Zone.
So, I tend to agree with the article that it’s kind of a land grab to a certain extent. And you and I have talked about it in the past. It was written for a stock market boom, so people can take their gains off the table from the stock market or other investments and now they can move it into real estate and or other types of equity investments where there was previously, to my knowledge, there was no other way to defer taxes doing that. Like, you can’t sell stock and 1031 exchange into real estate, you have to go like-kind real estate to real estate, and the Opportunity Zone program is the rare thing that allows you.
You know, right now, the stock market at all-time high, allows people to take their gains and their winnings off the table and defer taxes and then potentially ride any future gains tax-free. So I kind of think it’s a land grab, I don’t wanna be too harsh on it, because the reason I got involved in the Opportunity Zone legislation in the first place was on the impact and the triple bottom line arena.
Jimmy: Yeah. No, I hear you and you bring up a good point. In a way, it is basically it kind of presents a 1031 alternative. It’s basically a 1031 exchange for stocks, right, you can think of it that way. So I hear a couple different things from you and I got a couple different things from the article. Well, first of all, I wanna point out, you know, I am obviously very pro Opportunity Zones. I created an Opportunity Zones website that’s very supportive of the program, I have a podcast and all we do in all of our episodes is point out how great the Opportunity Zones program is. But I will admit that “The New York Times” article made a lot of really valid points. And I think it is correct to say, in fact, it’d be foolish not to admit that, you know, to date, the Opportunity Zones program has basically just been a tax break for projects that probably already would have happened anyway without the Opportunity Zones program.
You know, it cites the elite investors that this program is helping put up, you know, luxury condominiums and hotels and there’s a few other examples throughout the article of types of projects in areas that don’t really make much sense. And I will admit also that, you know, there are a handful of Opportunity Zones in the country. Of the over 8,700 Opportunity Zones, maybe 100 of them or so you kind of look at and you think, “Huh, I don’t really know if this should be an Opportunity Zone.” I think that area where, I forget the name of it now, that area were Amazon was putting its HQ 2 is one example, in New York City there. I think, possibly you’re bringing up Glenwood Springs, Colorado now is maybe another area that is kind of a head-scratcher, like, “Why is this an Opportunity Zone?” I would say, by and large, you know, the vast majority, the vast, vast majority of the 8,700-plus Opportunity Zones around the country really do have an economic need. But, of course, you know, market investors, market-rate investors are gonna cherry-pick the very best ones.
Thomas: Yeah, absolutely.
Jimmy: That said, you know, I would kind of like to echo what John Lettieri said in “The New York Times” piece. He’s the president of the Economic Innovation Group. He said something to the effect of it’s a little bit too early to judge the program. You know, that this is the first wave of investment. You know, it only makes sense that, you know, projects that were already penciled in Opportunity Zones happen to be the ones that are first taking advantage of this program. The fact the matter is, it takes a long time to build up momentum on some of these projects, on some of these deals. And I’m still optimistic that this is gonna play a role in transforming some of these really economically-distressed communities around the country. Am I 100% sure it will? No I’m not, but I’m optimistic it will. And I recognize that there are problems with the program as there are with any large sweeping economic policy like this.
But overall, I’m optimistic that, you know, hopefully, when we look back in a few years, we’ll view the first year of this program through a different lens. You know, maybe we’ll look at the first year as laying the groundwork and maybe the real impact investments won’t really come until years two or three, four, five, six. I mean, we still have several years before this program really sunsets at the end of 2026, so I think the jury’s still out and we’ll have to just kind of…we’re in a wait-and-see mode a little bit. At least me, sitting on the sidelines, I’m in a wait-and-see mode. I know that there are real operators out there actually, you know, getting project shovel-ready and doing good around the country and I look forward to hearing from them in future articles in “The New York Times” and “Wall Street Journal” and elsewhere that may cover this program in future years.
Thomas: Yeah. And Jimmy, I agree with you wholeheartedly that, you know, in the investing world, money flows, you know, to where the projects work, to where the projects pencil out. And, you know, that’s something we see in the impact space when things don’t pencil out, it’s harder to do deals. And, you know, a lot of times financial returns or mitigating financial risk is the most important thing. So those deals don’t, you know, get done or they’re harder to do. So it makes perfect sense what you’re saying and/or, you know, some of your initial guests that, you know, had echoed this at the very beginning, they predicted that the deals, you know, the original deals that happen under this program are gonna happen in areas that were already gentrifying, or that were, you know, already up and coming, you know, they’re already near an upscale or luxury area.
And in “The New York Times” article, they talk about the Virgin project, you know, the Richard Branson project. That project was already underway, to my understanding, before the Opportunity Zones legislation, and it’s kind of just like icing on the cake for those projects. They’re just gonna make those projects look better and easier to get done.
Jimmy: Exactly. Yeah. I think that’s exactly right, Thomas. I think this first wave is gonna be one type of investment and hopefully, we’ll have second, third, fourth, and so on waves that will bring more real needed impact and affect the people that this program is trying to target. I want to shift our focus now to you. I wanna hear a little bit more about what you’re doing. I mean, we were just talking about, you know, some of the challenges of the Opportunity Zone program. You know, obviously it’s not a perfect program. It’s been a little bit slow-going for some and, you know, there’s been some criticisms of it, obviously.
But, you know, part of the reason why I wanted to have you back on the show, Thomas, was to hear from someone in the trenches, you know, I consider you to be in the trenches, how this program is actually going. And maybe you can impart a little bit of wisdom on our listeners. So, when we last spoke in February, you know, you were about to launch the Compound Opportunity Fund. Six or seven months have passed since then now. What have been some of the biggest lessons you’ve learned about the Opportunity Zone space and specifically about raising capital in the Opportunity Zone space and including Opportunity Zone capital as part of your capital stack?
Thomas: I think, you know, hype is hype. And, you know, initially on the onset, there was a lot of buzz and there still is today about Opportunity Zones. And, you know, coming from the 1031 Exchange space, my clients and investors, you know, have always been…the focus has been to defer taxes and, you know, defer capital gains while making a good investment. And so, you know, one of my passions has been impact investing and trying to make an impact in the world and do something positive, you know, leave a legacy, you know, things and that.
And so the Opportunity Zone legislation caught my interest or piqued my interest for that reason because it’s like, “Oh, I can do something good.” I can, you know, work with historic buildings. We can create conservation type investments. We can create, you know, environmental protection investments. We can create, you know, different kinds of passive income in affordable housing and, you know, different types of investment that makes them easier to structure that have those triple bottom lines. It’s fairly easy for an investment to have a financial return and then, you know, maybe have a social impact, but it’s hard to lead with one of those other two and then, you know, back it up with a financial.
So my interest in the Opportunity Zone legislation was, “Okay, it’s gonna make these deals easier to do.” But what I found is that, well, you know, it goes back to location, location, location. And, you know, obviously, I like to set big goals and I like to talk a big game and, you know, but when going out and talking to investors, a lot of them say, “Well, okay, where’s the deal?” And you start to talk about the demographics and the unemployment rates and the poverty rates and the caliber of the housing stock and, you know, the vacancy rates, and things like that. And the investor is like, “No, no. You know, I don’t think I wanna make…you know, deferring tax is the most important thing.” You know, it goes back to the location. You know, I would just do a 1031 in that case, and I can buy anywhere in the country, I don’t have to be limited to one of, you know, the Opportunity Zones by inherent in the definition is lower income or higher poverty rate.
So, you know, that’s been the pushback I’ve received. But luckily for me, like I said, the reason to get into it wasn’t just for the tax benefits or to be focused in Opportunity Zones. You know, we were focused on the impact first. And we’ve actually, you know, through some of our Opportunity Zone marketing, have reached new types of investors who really what they wanted were truly impact investments, or let’s say sustainable-type investments, and they’re still on board. And so we’re moving forward with our impact fund 100%, but we had to put the brakes on the Opportunity Zone Fund because I only got about a 10% commitment or even less of the initial funds. You know, we didn’t hire a third-party fundraiser or anything, we’re just doing this through networking and making sure we follow the securities laws and whatnot, pre-existing relationships. So, you know, we could have hit the ground harder and probably raised more money, but…
Jimmy: Okay, Thomas, so what were some problems with selling investors on Opportunity Zones specifically and then how has your approach changed since then?
Thomas: So I think, Jimmy, there was two main push backs. One was the location of the deals. And, you know, we were focused on impact-first type projects. And, you know, we didn’t hire a third-party fundraiser and we weren’t trying to go into the gentrified areas where deals were gonna get done already like we previously talked about. We were trying new areas or, you know, projects that we thought would work, you know, in more of, you know, the intended goal of the program. But when people started asking about the locations and the demographics, there’s a lot of pushback on the unemployment rates, the poverty levels, the vacancy rates, high vacancy rates, stuff like that, caliber of the buildings, the housing stock. And people just, you know, the location, location, location, they just didn’t, you know, or don’t wanna put their money in a true Opportunity Zone.
You know, I think if it’s Glenwood Springs or Boulder, Colorado or Austin, Texas or, you know, San Francisco, New York City, Miami, like, you know, big, big, big markets, people are fine with that. But when you say, you know, I have a deal south of Charlotte, North Carolina, you know, population 8,000 people, you know, it doesn’t really pique their interest. It’s not sexy, for lack of a better word.
And then the second objection is just the complexity of the tax code and trying to explain to them what the tax benefits are, when they’re gonna get them. You know, I’ve had pushback on the capital gains rate. In 2026, what’s that gonna be if a democratic administration comes into power? You know, so they can defer the taxes now, but what rate are they gonna have to pay the taxes then? So, you know, two main objections. One, location, and two, just the complexity of the tax benefits.
Jimmy: Yeah, those are big objections. I mean, this is, you know, 1031s, in some way, are a lot less flexible than Opportunity Zones. You know, it doesn’t have to go real estate to real estate. You know, you can take some money off the table if you want to with Opportunity Zones. But in other ways, it’s more flexible because you can pick a property anywhere in the country, it’s not restricted by geography. And then yeah, certainly the regulatory aspect of the Opportunity Zones program is fairly complex. In fact, it’s actually highly complex and the rules still aren’t 100% finalized yet. And you’re absolutely right, there’s a tax rate risk. We don’t know what that capital gains tax rate is gonna be in 2026, and we’re not gonna find out for another 6, 7, 8 years or so. And, yeah, kind of depends who the president is then, or who’s running the show and what type of administration we have.
Thomas, another thing we were talking about on the phone last week when we were chatting was about the mentality of different investors, the mentality of passive stock investors versus entrepreneurial real estate investors. Can you talk a little bit about that for our listeners and tell us how that comes into play when it comes to raising OZ capital?
Thomas: You know, my history, Jimmy, is with high-net-worth investors that have either been successful business operators in their own right and/or successful real estate company operators, you know, hands-on in either scenario. And so, one, you know, when we were raising money our Opportunity Fund, we were probably barking up the wrong tree because all the people, you know, we were talking to through our pre-existing relationships were hands-on operators. They like to roll up their sleeves, do their own deals, they like to control the deal. They don’t like partners. You know, a lot of them say, you know, “Two partners is one too many.” You know, so they just they weren’t really the right fit.
And, you know, my 1031 clients have kind of been the same way. They like to come in and buy a property outright. And I’ve had a lot of discussion with people not only on the fundraising side to invest in the fund, but also people looking to just buy an Opportunity Zone property outright with, you know, those same clients and they don’t typically wanna take…you know, it goes back to they don’t wanna take that location risk. So even if they weren’t investing in our Opportunity Fund…let’s say I found them a really good deal. We’ll use that deal just outside of Charlotte, North Carolina.
You know, 6,000-square foot medical building, distressed seller, it appraised for almost a million bucks, could have bought it or sold it to somebody for like $750,000, $800,000, so you’re already making money, you know, on the front end, and then you spend some time leasing it or rehabbing it, it’s easily gonna be worth $1.2 million. You know, if you’ve got an urgent care clinic or some other kind of medical clinic in there, there’s $300,000, $400,000 worth of profit in the deal, like, really with not much risk. It’s a busy highway location just down the street from the hospital. But at the end of the day, a lot of investors, they’re like, “I don’t wanna have to, you know, mess with the substantial improvement requirement. I don’t wanna have to wait for the capital gains tax rate risk.” You know, so I have pushed back on the fund, but also just even, you know, that’s just one deal example of, you know, people just, you know, not wanting to buy a property outright.
Where on the flip side, and I think kind of what you’re alluding to, is if people have invested in stocks, they’re accustomed to giving up control and letting the, you know, CEO or the marketing team or, you know, the company owner, so, you know, the company manager, excuse me, managing the company and the investment. And then there’s maybe some professional management along with the executive team. And that, I think, is much more suited for Opportunity Zone Fund investing. If you’re sitting there and you have $500,000 of gain, you really can’t get too many good Opportunity Zone properties outright, and frankly, you can’t get too many 1031 Exchange properties outright. So it makes sense if you have, let’s say, $50,000, $250,000, maybe even up to $1 million cash or, you know, gain from the stock market and you’re okay with other people managing your money and you probably are already comfortable with that, then, you know, Opportunity Zones present a real great opportunity for people.
Jimmy: Yeah. And I thought that was an interesting conclusion that we reached the other day. I don’t know how much truth there is to it, but it’s certainly interesting to think about the mentality of passive stock investors used to, you know, just putting their money with a wealth advisor or into a mutual fund, or a basket of index ETFs and just kind of letting it ride very passively versus, you know, someone who is wheeling and dealing in real estate and used to exerting a lot of control over their investments down to all the last details. You know, those two types of people are gonna behave a lot differently and have a lot of different mentality when it comes to taking capital gains off the table. What do they do with it next? I think your point is that those passive stock investors might be better suited for Opportunity Zone Fund investing, whereas an entrepreneurial real estate investor may be better suited to a 1031. I mean, is that basically what your takeaway has been?
Thomas: Yeah. And, you know, Jimmy, in the 1031 space, one of the rare things you can do without having to buy a property, if you’re going from property to property, you know, you typically have to sell a property you own and then buy a property that you’re gonna own outright, you can’t typically invest in LLC units, you can’t invest in funds, you can’t invest in REITs, but the one exception is what’s called a Delaware Statutory Trust or a DST. And you can actually buy percentage ownership. You know, it used to be called a tenant in common, which is a type of, you know, deeded ownership in a property. And a lot of the investors I’ve worked with in the 1031 space, if they sold a property and they own a property, they won’t do the DST. You know, we say, “Look, you have $200,000 left over from your exchange, you’re gonna pay tax on it. You can do the DST to take up the difference.” And it’s like, “No. I’m not gonna give my money, you know, to an outside manager to control.”
However, if I work with doctors or lawyers who are more accustomed to the stock market, they actually prefer DSTs. So they come to me and say, “Look, I have $1 million from a 1031, I wanna buy a property.” And we go down that road of, “Okay, this is what the property looks like. You know, it’s a 10-year net lease. It’s a seven cap, you know, 7% return. It’s investment-grade credit, but you might have to take care of the roof, you know, occasionally.” All of a sudden, those types of investors say, “Whoa, whoa, whoa. I don’t wanna have to do anything. I don’t wanna have to manage anything. So what else do you have?” And, you know, I’m not a securities broker, so I can’t sell DSTs, but then they go to a DST provider and they can invest in, let’s say, you know, they can buy 10% of a $10 million building or 5% of a $20 million building, things like that, they can buy a percentage ownership.
And I think those types of investors who are accustomed to that, they don’t wanna have to have any day-to-day management. They don’t wanna have to have any remodel expertise. They don’t wanna have to have any redevelopment risk. Those are perfect for 1031…excuse me. Those are perfect for Qualified Opportunity Funds. And I think that’s where one of the main benefits I think a lot of people still haven’t realized, as the stock market is getting shaky, people say, “Okay, I wanna take my gains. What can I do with it?” And I think the Opportunity Zone program is yet to see that influx of capital. So I think that’s where some of this redeeming, you know, the redemption could come from, and deals getting done all over not just in the, you know, top 5% of Opportunity Zones.
Jimmy: Yeah. So, you know, before we wrap up the episode today, where do you see this going over the next several years? It sounds like, from what I’m hearing, there has been a struggle to tap into that channel for a lot of funds, for a lot of real estate developers to reach that smaller investor.
Thomas: Yeah, I agree. Yep.
Jimmy: What do you think may or may not change there? Do you have a pessimistic view, or do you have an optimistic view? What do you think is gonna end up unfolding here over the next few years? If you can look into your crystal ball for us.
Thomas: You know, I don’t think it’s a, you know, real estate problem or a tax code problem. I think it’s more of an education and a marketing problem for guys like you and me and, you know, all of the other guests on the episode is to educate investors who have gains and who don’t want to do a 1031 or can’t do a 1031 because they’re in the stock market or they’re in a privately held business. You know, let’s say their families owned a car dealership for 20 years and they’re selling it and they wanna defer the taxes. You know, like people can put their tax money to work in other ways besides paying Uncle Sam, and that’s what this program is set up for. And I think it’s a matter of educating those stock market investors, the equity investors, and the private business owners, you know, who aren’t in the elite, you know, aren’t in that subset, that original tax code.
You know, I think the tax code, Jimmy, was written for the elite, and then it was championed by the true recipients with, you know, Cory Booker, and then also the senator in South Carolina. Their constituents were the ones that are supposed to receive the benefits of this. And so I think it’s just an education problem that, you know, if you don’t have a top-tier law firm or accounting firm, and you have a lot of stock market gains from the last 10 years, “Okay, how could I defer taxes?” And, you know, and how do you structure it and I think fund managers and, you know, I think real estate brokers and property owners in Opportunity Zones, I think is a real opportunity on that. And then I still think there’s a huge opportunity on the impact side of, you know, what’s happening with global warming and social justice and refugees and immigration and whatnot. And, you know, whether we disagree or agree on that stuff, there’s a huge investment opportunity in all of those things and I think Opportunity Zones are uniquely qualified, you know, to fulfill that niche.
Jimmy: I hope you’re right. So well, overall, you know, we started off with kind of some down news about Opportunity Zones and a realistic view of what has transpired here over the course of the first year-plus of the program and the types of investments we’ve seen come in, and the lack of investment we’ve seen from certain investors, and the struggle that some funds have had getting investors on board. And I agree with you, I think there is an education gap that needs to be filled. And we’re working on it one day at a time, one podcast episode at a time, right? So, Thomas, thanks for joining me today. Before we go, can you tell our listeners where they can go to learn more about you and anything that you’re working on?
Thomas: I think, you know, similar to what we talked about, the Opportunity Zone legislation has become secondary for us and we’re, you know, going all-in on the impact space, so compound.global, that’s the URL. The word compound.global, there’s no .com or anything. Just go there if you’re interested in hearing about triple bottom line impact investing, you know, different types of investments and, you know, alternative categories.
Jimmy: Compound.global. Good. Well, for our listeners out there, I’ll have the show notes for today’s episode. You can find all of the links that Thomas and I discussed on today’s show, I’ll have a link to that “New York Times” article and more. You can find those show notes at opportunitydb.com/podcast. Thomas, thanks for joining me again, and hope to chat with you again soon.
Thomas: Well, thanks, Jimmy, for having me. I really appreciate you having me back on. I love what you’re doing. I think there’s plenty of runway left in the Opportunity Zone program for, you know, opportunity DB and all the different resources you provide to investors and fund managers and other people in the Opportunity Zone space.
Jimmy: Absolutely, Thomas. All right. Take care.