two owns an apartment building two blocks away or who owns for that matter you know it duplex two blocks away and you rented out your subject to the sort of understood you are but this has an commerce when the properties are being offered for sale or when you have parties coming in hammond residents vs out of state prospective buyers coming into looking to purchase these properties it applies to everybody in indiana the same way it applies people in other states and on i'm not sure i agree with your characterization of the market but state that point well ok for example if you  analysis i understand but let me give you can we give you a clear cut example we have a landlord who is the out of state landlord owning a rental property in him it's a single family home and then you have a cam an owner occupant identical property those two properties are brought to the marketplace for sale over the life of ownership the landlord subject to higher carrying costs if they have to do repairing remodel you know what else can happen not the landlord deducts the cost of those repairs from the income received for that piece of property and the landlord gains tax advantage is that also o we are actually talking about still at the end of the day the cost basis for ownership of property that's not favored by hand in this case my clients landers but other forms of property that cost basis is higher as a result of the imposition of this licensing burden upon my upon my clients and others who are not favored were not using the property and in the in the method that stated by the city of him that represents the burden on interstate commerce and the district court misled the court focused on profit motive as the basis for determining that there is no competition between the favored in disfavor part to equally situated persons a ham and a resident and an out of state investor coming in and looking at the same property they approach it from a different perspective because the out of state property owner looks at this and recognizes community town of munster has a building contractor ordinance that that does not focus on ownership it focuses on persons that are in the business of providing contractor services and i owners and as a result his birth his property owners my clients are merely asking this court to level the playing field we're talking about investment property whether it's a single family home owners it is rather pointed out a duplex even if the owner is a hammond resident residing in that property that owner has a costly advantage when it comes time to do repair and remodel and that represents a burden on interstate commerce that  don't have to go through the hoops and just anybody else these ordinances are about but the exception is about simple economic protectionism in favor of banning residents and we believe that for those reasons th can think about further similarly situated to individual homeowners who work on the homes in which they reside and therefore the two groups cannot be compared with this critical point in mind the city's rational reasons for the ordinances justify their exis threshold inquiry as to whether the two groups are really comparable to a particular party set different noncompetitive products if they are similar products that are sold in different markets or if they are not in competition for some other reason than the dorm or commerce cl problem if you are a landlord making repairs or improvements or brick have you on a property that you're using for commercial purposes as opposed to an owner occupier namely the landlord is in it properties that make the least increases i'm certainly going to have an individual who has a home that has a home that they rent but this is far more likely to occur in situations where somebody has an apartment complex or multiple rental properties and in those situations the an interest in ensuring that the people that are making those repairs are aware of the code requirements and specific code provisions to ship as they are making them overtime and they come in they they check on those things  true they may already have gone through the process but the process is the same regardless whether you are from the county and whether you're from lake county whether you're from marion county and you know what that is the sense when you get one of these licenses are they good for they are good for a year and then at the end of the year they simply have to renew the license they don't have to take the test again they don't have to go to the contractor's board again or any of the other quarter message in a criminal background check again it's not on time it's all it's done wants and then homeowners differently in words the chief chief among them is that when you're buying a home your you tend to get a mortgage you're getting a large investment in money the ultimate goal and that you live in own a home in contrast the landlord is renting the property typically one project throughout the entire time they performed work they may not need to know the entire code they may not need to provide memorize every single cooperation in order to pass the test because they may only do they only may fix one window or repair  court relied on holding the government motors for the district court focused on the wrong aspect of these owners of ownership it focuses on the use of these properties whereas what we're talking about is an the favorable treatment it gives to its owner occupants and all the reasons that it is that they have an offer or reasons that would justify leveling the playing field in opposing those very same requirements upon all ours general no evidence of that the record again we're talking about a disparate impact on interstate competition and to the extent that the the city of hammond has been able to offer a rational basis we