How Real Estate Fund Managers Launch Tokenized Property Funds with Blockmaze
A practical guide for real estate fund managers, REIT operators, and family office property teams on launching institutional-grade tokenized property funds — with protocol-enforced compliance across SPV structuring, investor eligibility, cross-border access, and distribution waterfalls.
TL;DR — Key Takeaways
- ✓Institutional vs. Retail: Institutional tokenized real estate fund structures (Reg D / Reg S LP interests, REIT shares) are fundamentally different from retail fractional platforms like RealT — different exemptions, different compliance requirements, different investor bases.
- ✓Compliance Stack: SPV structuring, accredited investor verification, transfer restrictions, FATCA/FATF compliance, and distribution waterfall mechanics all require protocol-level enforcement — not application-layer promises.
- ✓Cross-Border Access: Blockmaze's investor registry enforces jurisdiction-specific eligibility rules (Reg D, Reg S, AIFMD, MAS) on every transfer, enabling European, Asian, and Middle Eastern investors to access US/EU real estate funds with compliant protocol enforcement.
- ✓Liquidity Engineering: Structured secondary market access — secondary window periods, transfer restrictions, qualified investor matching — can provide liquidity without triggering fund liquidity obligations that compromise investment strategy.
- ✓Automated Distributions: Rental income distributions, property sale waterfalls, and corporate actions (refinancing, asset sales) are programmable on-chain — eliminating manual fund administration for routine distribution events.
Why Real Estate Fund Tokenization Is Not the Same as Fractional Property Ownership
When most people hear "tokenized real estate," they think of platforms like RealT or Lofty — retail-accessible products that let small investors buy $50 fractions of rental properties. This is a legitimate market, but it has almost nothing in common with institutional real estate fund tokenization.
A real estate fund manager — running a $200M private equity real estate fund, a REIT, or a family office property vehicle — faces entirely different requirements. Their investors are qualified institutional buyers (QIBs), accredited high-net-worth individuals, and institutional allocators. Their fund structures are LP interests or REIT shares, not property fractions. Their regulatory exposure is Reg D / Reg S for private placements, AIFMD for EU distribution, and MAS licensing for Singapore — not Regulation A+ retail exemptions.
The search results for "tokenized real estate" are dominated by retail platforms. This creates a gap in institutional understanding: real estate fund managers who search for tokenization solutions encounter retail-focused content and conclude that tokenization isn't viable for institutional fund structures. It is — but it requires infrastructure designed for institutional compliance requirements, not retail accessibility.
“Tokenized real estate has reached $3.5 billion in on-chain value as of Q1 2026, but over 90% of that represents retail fractional platforms. The institutional fund tokenization opportunity — private equity real estate, REITs, family office vehicles — represents a significantly larger addressable market that is only beginning to develop.”
— Deloitte: Tokenized Real Estate Insights, 2025
This guide is written for real estate fund managers, REIT operators, and family office property teams evaluating tokenization for their fund structures — not for retail platform builders. The compliance requirements, fund structuring considerations, and infrastructure choices discussed here are specific to institutional fund tokenization.
The Compliance Stack for Tokenized Real Estate Fund Structures
Institutional real estate fund tokenization requires a compliance architecture that addresses multiple simultaneous requirements: fund structure and securities law compliance, investor eligibility, transfer restrictions, and tax structuring. Each layer interacts with the others, and the protocol infrastructure must enforce all of them simultaneously.
SPV Structuring and Legal Entity Design
Most institutional real estate fund tokenizations use an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) structure: a legal entity (typically a Delaware LLC or Cayman Islands exempted company) holds the real estate assets or the LP interests in the underlying fund, and the SPV issues tokenized membership interests or shares. The token represents a claim on the SPV, which has a defined legal relationship to the underlying property portfolio.
The SPV structure serves two purposes: it isolates the real estate assets from the token issuer's other liabilities, and it creates a clean legal wrapper for the tokenization. Token holders are investors in the SPV, not direct property owners — which means the SPV (and its fund documents) governs their rights to distributions, voting, and liquidation, not the blockchain protocol. The blockchain protocol enforces the transfer restrictions and distribution mechanics that the fund documents specify.
REIT vs. Non-REIT Treatment
Whether a tokenized real estate fund qualifies as a REIT has significant tax implications for US investors. REITs avoid corporate-level taxation by distributing at least 90% of taxable income annually, and investors receive dividends that qualify for favorable tax treatment under certain conditions. The REIT qualification tests — the 100-shareholder test, the 5/50 rule, the asset tests, and the income tests — must be maintained throughout the fund's life.
Tokenization can simplify REIT compliance in some respects. The 100-shareholder requirement is easily met with a tokenized structure that distributes interests to 100+ verified investors. The 5/50 rule — prohibiting more than 50% concentration in five or fewer individuals — is enforceable at the protocol level through the investor registry, which can track ownership concentration in real time and reject transfers that would push a single investor over a defined concentration threshold.
For non-REIT structures, the primary concern is ensuring that the fund's offering documents correctly classify the tokens as securities and that all applicable exemptions (Reg D, Reg S) are properly documented. Blockmaze's compliance architecture supports both REIT and non-REIT fund structures, with configurable rules for each.
Accredited Investor Verification and Transfer Restrictions
Private placement real estate fund tokens issued under Reg D require all investors to be accredited — individuals with $200K+ annual income ($300K joint) or $1M+ net worth excluding primary residence, or institutional entities with $5M+ assets. The verification process must be completed before any investor purchases tokens, and accreditation status must be re-verified at least annually.
Reg D Rule 144 imposes a 12-month holding period before resale of restricted securities to non-exempt parties. During this period, token transfers are restricted to specific categories of eligible buyers. Blockmaze enforces these restrictions at the protocol level: the token contract records each token's issuance date and applicable holding period, and transfer attempts during the restricted period are rejected unless the transferee qualifies for an exemption (e.g., another accredited investor in a private transaction, an institutional buyer).
For international distribution under Reg S, the compliance requirements flip: tokens must be offered and sold only to non-US persons in offshore transactions, with measures to prevent US persons from purchasing. Blockmaze's jurisdiction-aware investor registry enforces Reg S restrictions by verifying investor nationality and residence, and blocking transfers to US-resident investors during the Reg S distribution period.
1031 Exchange Considerations for US Real Estate Funds
Section 1031 of the US Internal Revenue Code allows real estate investors to defer capital gains taxes by exchanging one investment property for another "like-kind" property. For tokenized real estate funds, the question is whether token holders can access 1031 exchange treatment on their fund interests.
The answer for LP interests or REIT shares is generally no — securities (including tokenized fund interests) are not eligible for 1031 exchange treatment. Only direct real property ownership qualifies. However, a Delaware Statutory Trust (DST) structure, which holds real property and issues beneficial interests to investors, does qualify for 1031 exchange treatment. Several real estate tokenization platforms are developing tokenized DST structures specifically to capture the 1031 exchange market; Blockmaze's configurable compliance architecture supports DST structures with the additional investor eligibility requirements (beneficial interest limits, co-ownership caps) that DST regulations impose.
Key Insight
The compliance stack for a tokenized real estate fund isn't a checklist — it's a system of interacting constraints. A change in fund structure (REIT vs. non-REIT) cascades through investor eligibility rules, distribution mechanics, and transfer restrictions simultaneously. Protocol infrastructure that enforces these constraints as a coordinated system is significantly more reliable than application-layer compliance built for a single fund structure.
How Blockmaze Handles the Institutional Real Estate Fund Compliance Stack
Blockmaze provides five infrastructure components that together address the compliance and operational requirements of an institutional real estate fund tokenization. The components are configurable for different fund structures — REIT, LP fund, DST — without requiring custom engineering for each.
1. Investor Registry with Jurisdiction-Aware Eligibility
The Blockmaze investor registry is the core of real estate fund compliance. Each registered investor has a profile that includes: verification status (KYC/AML completed, accreditation verified, sanctions screened), applicable regulatory exemptions (Reg D, Reg S, AIFMD Article 4(1)(a), MAS Section 304), holding period data (Reg D 12-month lock-up), and jurisdiction-specific restrictions. Every token transfer is validated against both the sender's and recipient's profiles before execution. This is described in detail in best practices for compliant RWA issuer registries — the same architecture applied to the specific constraints of real estate fund interests.
For a fund targeting investors across the US (Reg D), Europe (AIFMD), and the Middle East (Abu Dhabi ADGM, Dubai DIFC), the registry maintains separate eligibility profiles for each jurisdiction and enforces the correct rules for each investor based on their registered residence and the applicable offering exemption. A UAE family office buying into a US Reg D offering is verified as an accredited investor under both US and UAE standards; a Reg S restriction on transfers to US persons is automatically enforced without requiring the fund manager to manually track investor nationality.
2. Transfer Restrictions with Holding Period Enforcement
Reg D Rule 144 holding periods, REIT concentration limits, and fund-specific lock-up periods are all enforced at the protocol level. The token contract records the issuance date and applicable holding period for each token; transfer attempts during the restricted period are rejected with a specific error code that identifies the restriction type and expiry date. For fund custodians managing compliant RWA transfers, this protocol-level enforcement eliminates the compliance review step for routine transfers — the protocol handles the check automatically.
When the holding period expires, the token's transfer restriction is lifted and secondary market transfers become available — subject to the transferee's eligibility verification. The fund manager can configure the secondary market window: open secondary trading, quarterly liquidity windows, or restricted transfers to specific approved counterparties only.
3. Distribution Waterfall Mechanics
Real estate fund distributions are structurally complex: rental income, capital gain from property sales, and return of capital flow through the fund's waterfall in a specific priority order defined in the fund documents. Preferred return thresholds, catch-up provisions, and carried interest calculations are typically handled manually by fund accountants and attorneys — a time-intensive process prone to calculation errors and disputes.
Blockmaze implements the distribution waterfall as a programmable on-chain mechanism. The fund manager configures the waterfall parameters at fund setup — preferred return rate, catch-up provision, carried interest percentage, distribution priority between classes (e.g., Class A preferred vs. Class B common). When the fund administrator submits a distribution event (monthly rental income, property sale proceeds, refinancing proceeds), the protocol calculates each investor's entitlement based on their token class, balance at the record date, and the waterfall parameters, then executes distribution atomically.
The complete distribution history — every distribution event, calculation, and payment — is recorded on-chain, providing investors with an auditable record without requiring annual fund administrator reports.
4. Cross-Border Capital Access with FATCA/FATF Compliance
One of the most compelling use cases for tokenized real estate funds is cross-border capital access: enabling European, Asian, and Middle Eastern investors to allocate to US or EU real estate fund exposure without the friction of traditional offshore fund distribution. This requires FATCA compliance (US withholding tax reporting for non-US investors in US funds), FATF compliance (anti-money laundering for cross-border transactions), and jurisdiction-specific distribution compliance in each target market.
Blockmaze's identity verification layer includes FATCA classification for each investor (US person, non-US person, US-owned foreign entity), sanctions screening against OFAC, EU, and UN consolidated lists, and PEP (Politically Exposed Person) database screening. For non-US investors in US real estate funds, the protocol automatically applies the correct withholding tax rate (0% for treaty countries, 30% for non-treaty, 10-15% for FIRPTA withholding on real property gains) and generates the required W-8 certification records. This is particularly relevant for the sovereign wealth fund, pension fund, and family office investor base in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region, which has seen significant interest in US real estate fund exposure combined with FATCA-compliant structures.
5. Corporate Action Handling: Asset Sales, Refinancing, and Fund Extensions
Institutional real estate funds regularly face corporate actions that require investor notification, consent solicitation, and distribution mechanics: property sales, debt refinancing, fund life extensions, and asset acquisitions. Each event has implications for token holders — distribution of sale proceeds, modification of debt service obligations, extension of the investment period — that must be handled with precision and auditability.
Blockmaze's corporate action module handles each event type as a structured workflow: the fund manager initiates the corporate action, specifies the applicable parameters (proceeds amount, distribution date, consent threshold for extensions), and the protocol manages investor notification, consent collection (via on-chain vote or off-chain signature), and execution. The on-chain record of each corporate action — including investor votes and consent signatures — provides an immutable audit trail for regulatory review.
Investor Registry
Jurisdiction-aware eligibility for Reg D, Reg S, AIFMD, MAS — enforced on every transfer.
Transfer Restrictions
Rule 144 holding periods, REIT concentration limits, and fund lock-ups enforced at protocol level.
Distribution Waterfall
Programmable preferred returns, catch-up provisions, and carried interest — executed automatically.
FATCA/FATF Compliance
Withholding tax classification, sanctions screening, and PEP checks for cross-border investor access.
Corporate Actions
Asset sales, refinancing, fund extensions — structured workflows with on-chain consent and audit trail.
Investor Reporting
Automated capital account statements, distribution records, and tax documents from on-chain data.
Liquidity Engineering: Secondary Market Access Without Compromising Fund Strategy
One of the most cited advantages of real estate tokenization is liquidity — the ability for investors to exit their position before fund maturity. But for institutional real estate funds, unrestricted liquidity is actually a problem: a fund that must liquidate assets to meet redemption requests cannot execute a long-horizon property investment strategy. The challenge is structuring secondary market access that gives investors meaningful liquidity options without creating fund liquidity obligations that compromise the investment mandate.
Structured Secondary Windows
The most common institutional approach is a quarterly or semi-annual secondary window: a defined period during which token holders can list their interests for sale, matched against verified eligible buyers. The fund manager facilitates matching but does not guarantee liquidity — if no buyer is found, the seller retains their interest. This structure provides meaningful liquidity access without creating a fund-level obligation to redeem.
Blockmaze implements secondary windows as a configurable parameter: the fund manager sets the window dates, eligible buyer criteria (accredited investors only, minimum purchase amount), and any price constraints (minimum price as percentage of NAV, maximum discount). During the window, token holders can list interests for sale; buyers can submit offers; and the protocol matches, validates buyer eligibility, and executes transfers atomically.
Approved Counterparty Transfer Lists
For smaller funds or family office vehicles, a more restrictive approach is an approved counterparty list: secondary transfers are only permitted to a pre-approved list of institutional investors who have already completed the KYC/AML and eligibility verification process. This provides a controlled liquidity option for investors who need to exit while maintaining the fund manager's oversight of the investor base composition.
This approach aligns with the model described in how global banks drive compliant real estate RWA tokenization — where institutional participants in a controlled network can trade fund interests among themselves without opening secondary market access to unvetted investors.
NAV-Based Redemption for Open-End Structures
For open-end real estate fund structures (common in core and core-plus strategies), periodic redemptions at NAV are the standard liquidity mechanism. Blockmaze supports NAV-based redemption with configurable parameters: redemption frequency (quarterly, semi-annual), notice period (30-90 days), redemption gates (maximum percentage of NAV redeemable per period), and NAV calculation methodology (internal valuation vs. third-party appraisal). The combination of gates and notice periods ensures that the fund manager has time to arrange property-level liquidity before token redemptions are settled.
“Tokenized real estate fund structures that implement structured secondary windows with qualified buyer matching provide 3-5x better secondary market execution than traditional private equity real estate fund secondary markets, where pricing transparency and counterparty discovery are major friction points.”
— VARA (Dubai Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority): Real Estate Tokenization Framework, 2025
Integrating Existing Real Estate Infrastructure with Blockmaze
A common concern for real estate fund managers evaluating tokenization is the integration burden: their existing property management, fund administration, and custody infrastructure was not built with blockchain in mind. Blockmaze is designed to integrate with existing financial infrastructure rather than replace it.
Fund Administration Integration
Real estate fund administrators (Alter Domus, SS&C, Citco, NAV Consulting) maintain the authoritative records for investor capital accounts, NAV calculations, and distribution calculations. Blockmaze integrates with fund administrators through a structured API: the administrator's existing fund accounting system remains the system of record; Blockmaze receives NAV attestations and distribution records from the administrator's system and records them on-chain. The blockchain provides the audit trail and transfer enforcement; the fund administrator provides the financial calculations.
This integration model means that tokenization doesn't require replacing the fund administrator or migrating to a new fund accounting system. The Blockmaze API layer connects to the administrator's existing workflow, adding blockchain attestation and transfer enforcement without disrupting the fund's operational infrastructure.
Property Management Integration
Rental income from property management flows through the fund's existing bank accounts before it reaches investors. Blockmaze doesn't change this: property managers collect rent, transfer it to the fund's operating account, and the fund administrator calculates the distributable amount after expenses. What Blockmaze adds is the distribution execution layer: once the administrator certifies the distributable amount, the protocol handles investor-level distribution calculations and settlement — either through the blockchain settlement layer (stablecoin distributions) or through traditional wire transfer with on-chain settlement confirmation.
Custody and Title Integration
Real property title remains with the SPV or fund entity in traditional custody — real estate isn't held on-chain. What Blockmaze provides is a cryptographic reference layer: property title records, appraisal reports, environmental assessments, and legal documents are referenced in the token's metadata, with cryptographic hashes recorded on-chain to verify document authenticity. Investors can verify that the property documents they were provided at investment match the on-chain references, without requiring direct access to the title registry or custody system. This is the same verification approach described in how cryptographic proofs underpin compliant RWA attestation.
Key Insight
Blockchain doesn't replace real estate infrastructure — it adds a compliance and auditability layer on top of existing systems. Real estate fund managers who frame tokenization as "replacing our fund administrator" are evaluating the wrong question. The question is: does the blockchain layer make the investor experience better and the compliance burden lower? On Blockmaze, the answer is yes — without requiring replacement of existing operational infrastructure.
Investor Reporting: On-Chain Automation vs. Traditional Fund Reporting
Institutional real estate fund investors receive quarterly capital account statements, annual K-1 or Schedule B income reports, and periodic NAV notices. Generating these reports is a time-intensive fund administration function: data from multiple property management systems, bank accounts, and legal documents must be consolidated into investor-specific reports.
For tokenized real estate funds on Blockmaze, the on-chain transaction history provides the authoritative data source for investor-level reporting. Every capital contribution, distribution, and transfer is recorded on-chain with a timestamp and transaction identifier. Blockmaze's reporting module generates investor capital account statements directly from this on-chain data, formatted for each investor's jurisdictional reporting requirements.
Tax reporting remains the responsibility of the fund administrator (for K-1 generation) and the fund's tax advisors — tax calculations are complex and jurisdiction-specific in ways that on-chain automation can't fully handle. But the source data for tax calculations — distributions paid, capital contributions received, transfer history — is available from the on-chain record, reducing the data extraction burden on the fund administrator.
For asset managers managing multiple tokenized fund structures, the reporting automation benefit compounds: a single reporting infrastructure covering multiple funds, each with their own investor base, distribution schedule, and reporting requirements, versus manual fund-by-fund report generation.
The Deloitte Tokenized Real Estate Framework: Where Blockmaze Fits
Deloitte's 2023 and 2025 reports on tokenized real estate identified five critical infrastructure requirements for institutional-grade tokenized real estate funds: legal structure clarity, investor eligibility enforcement, asset custody and verification, distribution mechanics, and regulatory reporting. The reports noted that most existing tokenization platforms address two or three of these requirements adequately but fail on the others, creating compliance gaps that prevent institutional adoption.
Blockmaze's architecture is designed to address all five requirements simultaneously:
- Legal structure clarity: Configurable SPV structure support (Delaware LLC, Cayman Islands, DST) with fund document hash references on-chain
- Investor eligibility enforcement: Protocol-level investor registry with jurisdiction-aware rules enforced on every transfer
- Asset custody and verification: Cryptographic reference layer for property documents, appraisals, and title records — verifiable without custodian blockchain integration
- Distribution mechanics: Programmable waterfall with preferred return, catch-up, and carried interest calculations — executed automatically
- Regulatory reporting: On-chain transaction history as the source data for investor statements and regulatory filings across multiple jurisdictions
The Singapore MAS tokenized real estate guidance (2024) and the Abu Dhabi ADGM Virtual Asset Framework (2025) both identify similar requirements, with additional emphasis on cross-border AML compliance for Gulf capital flows into US and EU real estate. Blockmaze's FATCA/FATF compliance layer addresses the MAS and ADGM requirements for funds seeking to distribute to GCC investors.
Ready to Launch Your Tokenized Real Estate Fund?
Blockmaze provides the compliance infrastructure for institutional real estate fund tokenization — investor eligibility enforcement, distribution waterfall mechanics, FATCA/FATF compliance, and automated reporting — without replacing your existing fund administration infrastructure.
Conclusion: Institutional Real Estate Fund Tokenization Is Ready — The Infrastructure Exists
The regulatory frameworks for institutional real estate fund tokenization — Reg D/Reg S in the US, AIFMD in Europe, MAS guidelines in Singapore, ADGM framework in Abu Dhabi — are sufficiently mature for fund launches in 2026. The custody, fund administration, and property management infrastructure is unchanged: tokenization adds a compliance and auditability layer on top, not a replacement.
What has been missing is a compliant protocol layer that makes institutional real estate fund tokenization accessible to fund managers who aren't building bespoke blockchain infrastructure. Blockmaze fills that gap: investor registry enforcement, programmable distribution waterfalls, cross-border FATCA/FATF compliance, and structured secondary market access — configured for each fund structure, without custom engineering. Real estate fund managers who want to capture cross-border institutional capital and improve investor reporting now have the infrastructure to do it.
Frequently Asked Questions
How is institutional tokenized real estate different from retail fractional ownership platforms like RealT?
Retail fractional real estate platforms like RealT and Lofty focus on individual property ownership fractions sold to retail investors in small denominations ($50-$1,000). They use Regulation A+ or similar retail exemptions and don't require accredited investor status. Institutional tokenized real estate funds are structured as investment vehicles — LP interests or REIT shares — targeting qualified institutional buyers (QIBs) or accredited investors under Reg D / Reg S exemptions. The compliance requirements are fundamentally different: institutional funds require investor accreditation verification, transfer restrictions that prevent secondary market transfers to non-eligible investors, and corporate action handling for distributions, asset sales, and refinancing events. Blockmaze is designed for institutional fund structures, not retail property fractions.
Can a tokenized real estate fund qualify as a REIT?
Yes, but the REIT qualification requirements impose constraints on the tokenized structure. A REIT must distribute at least 90% of taxable income annually to shareholders, maintain specific asset and income tests, and have at least 100 shareholders with no more than 50% concentration in five or fewer individuals (the '5/50 test'). Tokenization can actually make REIT compliance easier in some respects — automated dividend distribution and on-chain ownership records simplify the 100-shareholder and 5/50 tests. However, the transferability of tokenized REIT interests must be designed carefully: while REIT shares are generally freely transferable, a tokenized REIT must ensure that only qualified investors can hold the tokens to maintain compliance with securities exemptions used for the initial offering.
How does Blockmaze handle cross-border investor access for tokenized real estate funds?
Cross-border access is handled through the investor registry at the protocol level. Each investor's verified status includes their jurisdiction, applicable regulatory exemptions (Reg D, Reg S, AIFMD, MAS), and any jurisdiction-specific restrictions. When an investor attempts a transfer, the protocol validates the transfer against both the sending and receiving investor's jurisdiction profiles. For example, a US investor who purchased under Reg D cannot freely transfer to an EU investor — the transfer would require the EU investor to meet AIFMD eligibility requirements, which are verified before the transfer executes. FATCA and FATF compliance is handled through the identity verification layer, which screens against sanctions lists and PEP databases as part of the initial onboarding process.
How are rental income distributions handled for tokenized real estate funds?
Blockmaze supports programmable distribution mechanics for tokenized real estate funds. The fund administrator submits a distribution record specifying the per-token distribution amount and payment date. The protocol calculates each eligible token holder's distribution amount based on their token balance at the record date and executes payment through the Blockmaze settlement layer. Distributions can be paid in stablecoin (USDC), in-kind token distributions, or via traditional wire transfer with on-chain settlement confirmation. For REIT structures requiring 90% income distribution, the distribution schedule is configured at the fund setup level and executes automatically based on the income reporting cycle.
What happens to tokenized real estate fund tokens if a property is sold?
Property sale proceeds flow through the fund's existing distribution waterfall — defined in the fund's operating agreement or trust deed. Blockmaze implements this waterfall as a programmable corporate action: the fund administrator submits the sale proceeds amount and applicable waterfall parameters, and the protocol distributes proceeds to token holders in the correct priority (preferred return, return of capital, carried interest). The token itself may be redeemed, or the fund may acquire replacement assets and continue operating. The corporate action history is recorded on-chain, providing investors with a complete, auditable record of how sale proceeds were distributed.
Related Articles
How Family Offices Tokenize Alternative Assets
How family offices structure compliant tokenization of alternative assets, from real estate to private funds.
Institutional RWA Custody Solutions for Compliance
How institutional custody integrates with tokenized fund structures without replacing existing custodians.
RWA Tokenization Legal Opinion Requirements
What a defensible legal opinion for a tokenized fund offering must cover across US and EU exemptions.
REITs: Compliant On-Chain Dividends with Blockmaze
How tokenized REIT structures automate compliant dividend distributions while meeting the 90% payout test.