[Carry_Okie]

It’s consistent because there’s a difference between common areas of an HOA and publicly-owned areas. Physically they may be the same, but there is a huge difference between the two that based entirely on who holds the underlying title to the property.

That is a classic tautology of argument by definition. It is a legal distinction and not a functional distinction. That means it is internally consistent but not logically consistent.

[Alberta's Child]

Of course it's a legal distinction and not a functional one. We're talking about tax law here, so everything relates to legal distinctions.

If a city owns and operates a zoo, it's a non-profit entity by definition. If you build a zoo and charge admission, you pay taxes on your profits.

I'm not sure why this is so problematic.