Jared Kushner’s Family Business Subpoenaed Over Slumlord–esque Tactics

Last month, we learned that First Son-in-Law Jared Kushner’s complete and total inability to fill out a form properly the first time was a problem that long predated his time in the White House. In addition to omitting key pieces of information that forced him to amend his financial-disclosure forms at least 39 times, forgetting to mention more than 100 foreign officials he met with before joining the West Wing, and registering to vote as a woman, the Boy Prince of New Jersey’s family business routinely filed false paperwork that resulted in the company netting millions during a three-year period in which he was C.E.O. And now, Brooklyn prosecutors would like more information about how that situation came to pass, beyond no one here can fill out a form to save their lives.

The Wall Street Journal reports that in the wake of an Associated Press investigation, Kushner Cos. received a subpoena for information related to the scenario in which the family real-estate firm benefited from checking the wrong boxes time and time again. Presumably, investigators would like to know why in 2015, when the company bought three apartment buildings in Astoria, Queens, where the majority of tenants were protected by regulations designed to prevent developers from pushing them out, jacking up the rent, and turning a nice profit, the company filed paperwork claiming there were no such tenants in place. Or how Kushner Cos. just happened to make an error allowing them to circumvent strict oversight ensuring the company wasn’t harassing tenants or attempting to force them out.

They’re also likely interested in how, according to current and former residents, the company was able to “subject [tenants] to extensive construction, with banging, drilling, dust, and leaking water that they believe were part of targeted harassment to get them to leave and clear the way for higher-paying renters.” In addition, investigators probably want to know about a similar situation in East Village in 2013, wherein Kushner Cos. claimed that a six-story walk-up had zero rent-regulated tenants when, in fact, it had seven. In total, the company is said to have filed at least 80 false applications in 34 buildings in New York City from 2013 to 2016, a lucky turn of events that Aaron Carr, founder of the tenants’-rights watchdog, described as “barefaced greed” and “a sordid attempt to avert accountability and get a rapid return on its investment.” (Kushner Cos. is said to have sold the Queens properties for $60 million, almost 50 percent more than what the company paid to acquire them.)

So far, the company has blamed the situation on a third party to which it outsourced said paperwork, and has said that “if mistakes or violations are identified, corrective action is taken immediately.” A Kushner Cos. spokeswoman told the Journal, “Kushner Companies has nothing to hide and is cooperating fully with all legitimate requests for information, including this subpoena.” She added that the company believes the subpoena “was issued based solely on an article that appeared in the press the day before it was issued,” which wouldn’t exactly make the situation better.

On top of the inquiry from the Brooklyn U.S. attorney’s office, both the New York attorney general’s office, and the New York City Council have launched investigations into the matter. Separately, both Brooklyn federal prosecutors and the Securities and Exchange Commission have been reviewing Kushner Cos. use of an “investment-for-visa program.” On top of that, the Brooklyn U.S. attorney’s office is probing a $285 million loan the company received from Deutsche Bank just one month before the 2016 election. (The firm says it “has cooperated and will continue to cooperate with any reasonable request for information,” wile Deutsche Bank had no comment.)

In related news, earlier this week Bloomberg reported that 666 Fifth Avenue, the company Kushner bought on the eve of the financial crisis for $1.8 billion, had one of its worst years ever, losing $25 million in 2017, compared to $14.5 million the year prior. All in all, it’s a great situation for young Jared to return to, should his time in the executive branch be soon drawing to a close.