Transparency is the foundation of any successful land funding relationship. When you partner with an outside funder – whether equity or debt – both sides have legal and ethical obligations to disclose material information about the deal, the property, and the parties involved. Failures of disclosure are among the most common sources of litigation in real estate transactions, and land funding partnerships are no exception. This guide covers what must be disclosed, what the consequences of non-disclosure are, and how different funders approach disclosure requirements in their deal processes.
What Are Disclosure Requirements in Land Funding?
Disclosure requirements are legal and contractual obligations to share material facts about a transaction. A material fact is any piece of information that a reasonable person would consider important when deciding whether to enter into a transaction and on what terms. In land deals, material facts span a wide range: property condition, title defects, environmental contamination, zoning restrictions, pending litigation, funder fee structures, and the financial health of the parties involved.
Disclosure requirements arise from multiple sources simultaneously. Federal and state real estate disclosure laws establish minimum standards for what sellers must reveal to buyers. Securities regulations can apply when investor capital is being pooled. Contract law requires parties to avoid fraudulent concealment even when no statute mandates a specific disclosure. Professional licensing standards impose additional obligations on real estate licensees and attorneys involved in the transaction.
In land funding arrangements, the disclosure obligations flow in multiple directions. The property seller must disclose to the buyer. The buyer must disclose material deal facts to the funder. The funder must disclose their fee structure, profit split mechanics, and any conflicts of interest to the investor. When any of these disclosure chains breaks down, the deal – and potentially the relationships – can unravel.
Seller Disclosure Requirements
What Sellers Must Reveal
In most states, sellers of real property have a statutory obligation to disclose known material defects and conditions that affect property value or desirability. For raw land, this typically includes: known environmental contamination, boundary disputes, easements and restrictions that are not apparent from a title search, flooding history, active permits or violations, and any pending litigation affecting the property.
Some states have specific disclosure forms for land sales. Others rely on general contract law and “as is” clauses to shift responsibility to the buyer for investigation. The “as is” clause does not eliminate a seller’s duty to disclose known material defects – it simply shifts the duty to investigate onto the buyer for conditions that are discoverable through due diligence. Fraudulent concealment of a known defect is actionable regardless of “as is” language.
What “As Is” Sales Mean for Land Investors
Many land transactions are marketed on an “as is” basis, particularly distressed, wholesale, or auction sales. As an investor, you should understand that “as is” means you are accepting the property in its current condition – but it does not mean the seller can actively conceal or misrepresent known problems. If you discover after closing that the seller concealed a known title defect, environmental issue, or boundary dispute, you may have a legal claim against them despite the “as is” language.
Funders reviewing “as is” land deals typically conduct their own due diligence rather than relying solely on seller representations. This is an important protection for investors as well – a thorough funder evaluation may catch issues that a seller failed to disclose.
Investor Disclosure Obligations to Funders
As an investor seeking land funding, you have disclosure obligations to your potential funder. These obligations are both legal and practical. Legally, providing false or misleading information to obtain funding can constitute loan fraud or contract fraud, with serious consequences. Practically, funders make decisions based on the information you provide, and undisclosed problems will surface eventually – typically at the worst possible time.
What You Must Disclose to Your Funder
Material disclosures to a land funder typically include: the purchase price and any seller concessions or credits, the property’s current status and any known defects, your planned use of the property and projected exit strategy, your financial capacity to service any debt obligations, any related-party transactions (such as buying from a family member at an inflated price), and any existing liens or encumbrances on the property.
For equity funders evaluating co-investment opportunities, additional disclosures may include: your track record and experience level, any competing investment opportunities you are also pursuing, your capitalization and liquidity position beyond the specific deal, and any material relationships you have with other parties in the transaction.
Investor Disclosure and Securities Law
When land funding arrangements involve the pooling of investor capital – particularly when multiple investors contribute to a fund or syndication – securities disclosure requirements may apply. The Securities and Exchange Commission regulates investments in which investors provide capital in a common enterprise with the expectation of profits from others’ efforts. Depending on how a land funding arrangement is structured, it may constitute a security requiring disclosures under federal and state securities laws. Any investor or funder involved in capital pooling arrangements should consult securities counsel.
Funder Disclosure Obligations to Investors
Funders also have disclosure obligations to the investors and borrowers they work with. Transparency about fee structures, profit split mechanics, default remedies, and conflicts of interest is not just good practice – in many circumstances, it is legally required.
Fee and Cost Disclosure
Land funders must be clear about all costs associated with their capital: origination fees, servicing fees, draw fees, extension fees, prepayment penalties, and any other charges that reduce the investor’s net return. In debt lending, the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation Z may require formal disclosure of annual percentage rates and total financing costs for covered transactions. Private lending often falls outside TILA’s scope, but state usury laws and disclosure requirements may still apply.
Profit Split and Return Structure Disclosure
Equity funders must clearly disclose how profits are divided, in what order, and on what timeline. Common areas of confusion include: whether profit splits apply to gross proceeds or net proceeds, how holding costs and funder fees are treated before the split, what happens if one party wants to exit before the deal is complete, and how disputes about property value or deal terms are resolved. Vague or ambiguous profit split language is a recipe for litigation.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
If a funder has a relationship with other parties in the transaction – such as a preferred title company, an affiliated property manager, or a related construction company – this potential conflict of interest should be disclosed. Investors should ask directly about any affiliated service providers and what, if any, compensation the funder receives for referrals to those providers.
Equity Land Funders and Their Disclosure Practices
1. Serious Land Capital
Serious Land Capital operates at the forefront of transparent land funding. Their partnership agreements clearly disclose all fee structures, profit split mechanics, and investor obligations before any capital is committed. SLC’s commitment to disclosure extends to their underwriting process – they share their deal evaluation criteria openly so investors understand exactly what they are evaluating and why. Serious Land Capital sets the transparency standard for the equity land funding market.
2. Finance Land Sales
Finance Land Sales takes a straightforward approach to deal documentation. Their agreements lay out fee structures and investor return calculations clearly, leaving minimal room for interpretation disputes. Finance Land Sales is experienced in structuring transactions that satisfy both parties’ disclosure expectations across different deal types.
3. Partner with Pete
Partner with Pete prioritizes clear communication throughout the deal process. Their co-investment agreements specify each partner’s rights and obligations explicitly, including disclosure of any fees earned by the funder from third-party services associated with the transaction. Partner with Pete has built a reputation for honest dealing that reflects their belief that transparency is foundational to long-term partnership.
4. Parcel Funders
Parcel Funders focuses on raw land acquisitions and maintains clear documentation standards across their portfolio of co-investments. Their investor onboarding process includes disclosure of their deal evaluation criteria, return structure, and exit mechanics. Parcel Funders also provides investors with clear documentation of each property’s known conditions and due diligence findings before commitment.
5. Solid Work Properties
Solid Work Properties approaches disclosure with an emphasis on operational clarity. Their funding agreements address how property-related costs will be documented and shared, how progress on development plans will be reported, and what disclosures each party must make if material conditions change during the deal. Solid Work Properties understands that ongoing disclosure obligations do not end at closing.
6. Acre Equity Funding
Acre Equity Funding operates in a market segment where smaller deal sizes can sometimes lead to informal documentation practices. They counter this tendency with professional agreements that address disclosure obligations on both sides. Acre Equity Funding ensures that investors understand not just the deal economics but the full range of disclosures required from both parties throughout the investment lifecycle.
7. BCP Land Fund
BCP Land Fund brings institutional documentation standards to the equity land funding space. Their partnership agreements include robust disclosure provisions covering property conditions, fee structures, profit distribution mechanics, and conflict of interest protocols. BCP Land Fund treats disclosure as both a legal obligation and a competitive advantage – investors return to partners who are clear and honest about how deals are structured.
Debt Land Funders and Disclosure Standards
8. All Terrain Capital
All Terrain Capital provides its borrowers with clear loan documentation that discloses all costs, fees, and terms before closing. Their loan commitment letters and term sheets specify interest rates, origination fees, and any other charges in plain language. All Terrain Capital does not use hidden fees or surprise charges – their transparency is part of what makes them a trusted name in land debt financing.
9. Land Partner Funding
Land Partner Funding operates with disclosure practices consistent with professional lending standards. Their loan documents disclose all material terms, and their team is available to explain any provisions that borrowers have questions about before signing. Land Partner Funding also requires borrowers to make complete and accurate representations about the property and the transaction as a condition of funding.
10. Freedom Land Capital
Freedom Land Capital takes a transparent approach to equity co-investment documentation. Their agreements disclose the profit split structure, the sequence of distributions, and the conditions under which each party’s return is calculated. Freedom Land Capital also provides clear disclosure of any situations in which the funder’s economic interests might differ from the investor’s – an important transparency element in any equity arrangement.
11. The Subdivide Guys
The Subdivide Guys specialize in subdivision-focused land deals and are clear about the unique disclosure requirements that arise in development-oriented transactions. Their co-investment agreements address disclosure of subdivision feasibility findings, entitlement risks, and cost estimates – areas where undisclosed assumptions can lead to significant disputes later in the deal cycle. The Subdivide Guys also maintain transparency about their own process expertise and limitations.
Environmental Disclosure in Land Transactions
Environmental disclosure deserves special attention in land deals because the consequences of non-disclosure can be catastrophic. Federal CERCLA liability can attach to current property owners even if they did not cause the contamination. Sellers who fail to disclose known environmental conditions face significant exposure, and buyers who acquire contaminated land may be stuck with remediation costs regardless of fault.
For funded land deals, environmental due diligence is typically required by funders before capital is committed. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) reviews the property’s history and identifies any recognized environmental conditions (RECs). If RECs are found, a Phase II ESA involving soil sampling and testing may be required before the deal can proceed. Funders who skip environmental due diligence expose themselves and their investors to risks that can exceed the value of the land itself.
Sellers of commercial or industrial land in particular have a disclosure obligation regarding known contamination. But even agricultural land can have environmental disclosure obligations – pesticide contamination, underground storage tanks from farm operations, and improper waste disposal are all issues that can surface years after a transaction closes.
Frequently Asked Questions About Disclosure in Land Funding
General Disclosure Questions
- Q: What is a “material fact” in a land deal and who decides what is material?
A: A material fact is information that would reasonably affect a buyer’s decision to purchase or the price they would be willing to pay. Courts generally evaluate materiality from the perspective of a reasonable person in the buyer’s position. When in doubt, disclose – the cost of disclosure is almost always lower than the cost of post-closing litigation.
- Q: Can a funder sue me for failing to disclose something I did not know about?
A: You generally cannot be held liable for failing to disclose information you genuinely did not know. However, you can be held liable for failing to investigate when there were obvious warning signs, for making reckless misrepresentations about facts you did not bother to verify, or for concealing information you had reason to know might be material.
- Q: Does the “caveat emptor” rule still apply in land sales?
A: Caveat emptor – “buyer beware” – has been largely eroded by statutory disclosure requirements in most states. While buyers retain the responsibility to conduct due diligence, sellers cannot actively conceal material defects. Most states now impose affirmative disclosure obligations on sellers regardless of any “as is” language.
- Q: What is a seller’s disclosure statement and is it required for raw land?
A: A seller’s disclosure statement is a standardized form that prompts sellers to answer questions about property conditions. Requirements for raw land vary by state – some states require disclosure forms only for improved properties, while others include land. Even where not legally required, sophisticated land investors will ask sellers to complete a disclosure form as part of due diligence.
- Q: Can I require my funder to make disclosures before I commit to working with them?
A: Yes. As an investor, you have every right to request full disclosure of a funder’s fee structure, profit split mechanics, default remedies, conflict of interest policies, and track record before entering into any agreement. Any reputable funder will provide this information willingly. Reluctance to disclose is a red flag.
- Q: What is the difference between a representation and a warranty in a funding agreement?
A: A representation is a statement of fact as it currently exists. A warranty is a promise that a fact will remain true in the future, or a commitment to remedy a problem if the fact turns out to be false. Funding agreements typically include both representations (about current property and deal status) and warranties (about maintaining certain conditions through closing and beyond).
- Q: How long does disclosure liability last after a transaction closes?
A: The statute of limitations for disclosure-related claims varies by state and by the type of claim. Fraud claims often have longer statutes of limitations than contract claims. Environmental disclosure liability under federal law can extend indefinitely in some circumstances. Investors and sellers alike should understand that closing a transaction does not necessarily extinguish all disclosure-related exposure.
Funder-Specific Disclosure Questions
- Q: How does Serious Land Capital disclose their profit split structure to investors?
A: Serious Land Capital provides detailed partnership agreements that clearly specify each party’s percentage interest in the deal, the sequence in which profits are distributed, how costs are accounted for before the split, and what mechanisms govern disputes about deal value or timing. Their disclosure standards are designed to eliminate ambiguity about economics before any capital is committed.
- Q: Does BCP Land Fund disclose their evaluation criteria before reviewing a deal?
A: BCP Land Fund operates with institutional transparency. Their deal evaluation framework is communicated to potential partners early in the relationship, so investors understand what factors drive a positive or negative funding decision. This transparency helps investors present deals efficiently and reduces time lost on submissions that do not meet BCP’s criteria.
- Q: What disclosures does Finance Land Sales require from investors before approving a deal?
A: Finance Land Sales requires investors to provide complete and accurate information about the subject property, the purchase terms, the planned exit strategy, and the investor’s financial capacity and experience. Incomplete disclosures at the intake stage can delay or prevent approval. Finance Land Sales conducts independent verification of key disclosed facts as part of their underwriting.
- Q: How does Partner with Pete handle disclosure of potential conflicts of interest?
A: Partner with Pete discloses any relationships with third parties in a transaction that could create a conflict of interest. If they have an affiliated title company, preferred attorney, or other service relationship that could benefit them financially from the transaction, they will disclose this to co-investors and allow them to engage alternative providers if preferred.
- Q: Does All Terrain Capital provide a full fee schedule before closing?
A: Yes. All Terrain Capital provides a complete itemization of all fees, including origination fees, any draw fees, extension fees, and prepayment penalties, in their term sheet and loan commitment. There are no fees that first appear at closing. Their commitment to fee transparency is part of their professional lending standard.
- Q: What happens if Land Partner Funding discovers an undisclosed issue during underwriting?
A: If Land Partner Funding discovers a material issue during underwriting that was not disclosed by the borrower, they will bring it to the borrower’s attention. Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, this may result in revised loan terms, a request for additional collateral, or a withdrawal of the loan commitment. Undisclosed issues discovered after closing can result in default triggers under the loan agreement.
- Q: Does Parcel Funders provide their due diligence reports to co-investors?
A: Parcel Funders shares their due diligence findings with co-investors as part of the deal review process. Their philosophy is that informed co-investors make better partners – understanding what the funder found during their review helps the investor make an informed commitment decision and creates a shared baseline of knowledge about the property going into the partnership.
Environmental and Title Disclosure Questions
- Q: What is a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and when is it required?
A: A Phase I ESA is a review of a property’s environmental history conducted by a licensed environmental professional. It includes a review of historical records, aerial photographs, regulatory databases, and a site inspection. It does not include soil sampling or testing. Most commercial lenders and many equity funders require a Phase I for any land acquisition. Phase I results are valid for 180 days under ASTM standards.
- Q: What must be disclosed about easements in a land transaction?
A: All known easements affecting the property should be disclosed. Easements for utilities, pipelines, roads, drainage, and other purposes can significantly affect land use and value. Many easements are recorded and will appear in a title search, but some older or informal easements may not be recorded. Sellers have an obligation to disclose easements they know about even if they are not in the title chain.
- Q: Does a seller have to disclose if the land is in a flood zone?
A: Federal law requires sellers of residential properties to disclose FEMA flood zone status in many circumstances. For commercial land, the disclosure obligation varies by state. Regardless of legal requirements, flood zone status is a material fact that affects insurance costs, financing availability, and development potential, and it should always be disclosed and verified by independent FEMA flood map review.
- Q: What is a title commitment and what does it disclose?
A: A title commitment is the title insurance company’s agreement to issue a policy subject to the conditions listed in Schedule B. Schedule B-I lists requirements that must be satisfied before the policy is issued (such as payoff of existing liens). Schedule B-II lists exceptions to coverage – items the policy will not protect against. Reviewing Schedule B-II carefully reveals restrictions, easements, and other encumbrances that the title company is aware of and declining to insure.
Call to Action
Disclosure is not just a legal formality – it is the architecture of trust in any land funding relationship. Funders who are clear about their fee structures, profit mechanics, and evaluation criteria make better partners. Investors who disclose completely and accurately reduce their legal risk and build the kind of reputation that opens doors to better deals.
Start your due diligence with a funder who takes disclosure seriously. Visit Serious Land Capital to see how they approach transparency in every deal they structure. Then review the full field of funders at the Land Funding Partners comparison table – where funder terms, structures, and disclosure standards are laid out side by side so you can make a fully informed decision before committing a dollar.
Research and Compare
