Private property versus Estate

[palani]

Originally Posted by ss_stealth

WHO grants the land? The town? What makes the town have the authority to grant land? Town's don't create the land. Do towns have permission from the creator of the land to grant the land to the rest of us?

Also, if I were to buy a house lot or parcel of land, am I purchasing a grant? I thought "grants" were free of charge. Or am I simply purchasing the "rights" to use the land?

Please do not take these questions as an attack, Palani, I'm just trying to figure out the logic here.


I'm beginning to think that the only way to truly get out of paying property tax is to convince the town to abolish the property tax all together.

The deed will (or should have) the phrase "granted, bargained and sold". The land is granted. No charge. Free. The appertances are bargained and sold. This would be the tile, septic, sidewalks, fences, trees, plastic flamingos, buildings et al. Any debt (bond issues, roads, sidewalk bonds, school bonds) would seem to be the buyers obligation. The only notification of the amount of these debts would be the amount of property tax the previous owner paid. This might be a good question to ask prior to buying.

George Gordon has a radio program in which he talks about a guy he knew who wanted shelter, had a plot of land and built the house on it for under $100 (never entered commerce, never needed a building permit, could not be given a street address, was never given a permit to occupy). Course the county/city didn't recognize this structure and so the lot property tax stayed the same. When the guy wanted to move no bank would finance the seller so it had to be done on a land contract.

While not eliminating property tax entirely there might be ways to limit it to something reasonable. I am considering an underground shelter based upon the $50 Underground House book. Things below ground aren't taxed.

[andrewmitch]

is that true? i was considering building a house underground for some other reasons but if no incremental property tax is another reason then perhaps it's a done deal for me?!???

can you document this?

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

Lawdog:

As to the tax issue: I defy anyone to cite me any legal authority (statute, case law, etc.) that stands for the proposition that the ability of the government to tax your land is contingent upon you first recording it with them.

Every statute that provides for:

establishing a roll
levying the tax
collecting the amount

in other word- every statute that creates this tax system at all.

Of course, the BAR would have us imagine and speculate:

the "Great Eye" in the sky sees and knows all, and doesn't need any information upon which to act...things just magically happen by emoting.

The world of random opinions- Roman Babylonian Zionist Catholicism. "The Order"

I defy you better: show any instance where a property is taxed w/o first being registered, with a #. Show us how a locality could ever be aware properties exist w/o first tracking them by:

parcel #
survey
address
location
etc.

It is the simple logic of administration and technical function. Even if everything and everyone gets a chip implanted, and there really is a global "Great Eye" satellite tracking system, there will always need to be a nexus: that chip- what is now merely conceptual will at that point be physical and high tech.

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by andrewmitch

At least in Connecticut, the term used in the statutes is "Personal Property" (something to the effect that all personal property is subject to taxation).

So define personal property and define personal. As far as I know, I am not a person; therefore I have no personal property.

You're not a person? Then what are you? An ape or other sub-human form of life that has learned to type?

If the crux of your argument in a legal matter is that you're not a person, not only are you going to lose, you might get yourself an involuntary commitment for a psychiatric evaluation.

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by gldskr

Note the statutory jurisdiction. I agree that this is how it works in these instances, but that has not been my point.


The recording acts provide the carrot and stick to statutory transactions, effectively circumventing the Law of Contracts and the Statute of Frauds. It must be so if the "government" is going to insure the title. My point stands though, that the main purpose of recordation is to indemnify the lenders, as the victims of fraud are on their own. To condone such a system is pure heresy from a de jure POV. Thankfully we have alternatives, regardless of what Lawdog or others may say to the contrary.

gldskr

Well gosh, son, where does one go to claim the benefits of things like contract law and the statute of frauds? That's right...the courts that the governments run. And those same governments sometimes have laws that, notwithstanding contract law or any other provision of law, not recording your deed might cause you to lose the property.

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

accidental post

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

If the crux of your argument in a legal matter is that you're not a person, not only are you going to lose, you might get yourself an involuntary commitment for a psychiatric evaluation.

Sadistic torturers. Careful about "arguing when corrected"...psychiatric evaluation=question of heresy.

[palani]

Originally Posted by andrewmitch

is that true? i was considering building a house underground for some other reasons but if no incremental property tax is another reason then perhaps it's a done deal for me?!???

can you document this?

Sure. They bury the dead. Show me where they are taxed. Like getting blood out of a turnip.

Actually, there was a ICBM silo in Washington state a year or so ago that sold on EBAY. Government must have put over 30 million in that hole. It sold for $100,000 but the property tax was only around a thousand or so. The asset is underground. Not seen. Don't even bring up the issue. Just stay out of commerce.

[palani]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

If the crux of your argument in a legal matter is that you're not a person, not only are you going to lose, you might get yourself an involuntary commitment for a psychiatric evaluation.

Hey, .. dog. You ever caught a rabbit?

Maybe you might want to sign up for this course
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:... k&cd=1&gl=us

The Law of Persons forms part of private law, and is concerned with the
determination of legal subjectivity, the rights and duties associated with legal
personality, and issues of legal status. Therefore the purpose of the course is:
• To provide students with an insight into the content, development and scope of
the Law of Persons;
• To familiarise students with the concept of legal personality, how this begins
and ends, what it entails, and the rights and duties associated with it;
• To introduce students to the legal principles that affect legal status, such as
domicile, age, insanity, etc.
• To examine the influence and impact that the Constitution of the Republic of
South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, has on the Law of Persons;
• To introduce students to the sources of the current Law of Persons and to assist
students in extracting principles from these;
• To assist students with the legal concepts and terminology commonly
encountered in the Law of Persons

[andrewmitch]

I am a man created by God.

Persons are fictions created by corporations.