"free and clear ownership" before land patent?

[gldskr]

jdogpupil

Once you understand the difference between land and real estate, will you then be able to understand how transactions regarding such are consumated.

Land Patents secure two property rights, hereditaments, which is the geographical boundaries and appurtenances, which is everything on the land; air, water, dirt, trees, buildings,etc. Land cannot be bought, sold or traded only granted. The appurtenances, since they are movable, are Real Estate which can be bought, sold or traded.

A typical real estate contract will contain verbiage thusly;
Seller does hereby grant (the land), bargain and sell (the real estate) the following property (legal description) with all its hereditaments and appurtenances etc. to grantee and buyer. Further in the contract there will usually be a clause that states buyer agrees to pay his pro rata share of this years property tax.

To avoid the property tax three things must be done.

1. The current years property tax must be paid.

2. The property must be sold without the taxing clause.

3. The title holder must not be a registered voter, as he would have the priviledge of voting to encumber others property while claiming an exemption himself.

For more info check the following site http://teamlawproductions.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=3

gldskr

[jdogpupil]

Madsen, if that's who the author is, also describes paying with money - proper coin. Does this mean paying with FRNs is not sufficient?

[Notorial dissent]

One teensy little problem, there is no taxing clause in a deed. The tax liability is inherent in all private property, and is a lien in favor of the local government created and set by statute.

Voting or not voting, or being a registered voter or not being registered has absolutely nothing to do with property tax.

[mrg]

If property has liability, how can it be privately owned, free and clear?

[theghost]

Originally Posted by Notorial dissent

One teensy little problem, there is no taxing clause in a deed. The tax liability is inherent in all private property, and is a lien in favor of the local government created and set by statute.

Voting or not voting, or being a registered voter or not being registered has absolutely nothing to do with property tax.

WRONG!! Being a registered voter has a lot to do with it. for one, it's an adhesion contract, that allows for an unknown amount of presumptions to be made about you by government (read Mercier's Invisible Contracts), all to your detriment, the worst one being that you are a U.S. citizen, because you checked the box that says so.

Second, where do you think they get jurors (US citizens, every one of em) from? The tax assessor also PRESUMES that you are a US citizen/14th Am., can't question the national debt, therefore you must pay all taxes just like the rest of the slaves.
As to your statement "The tax liability is inherent in all private property, and is a lien in favor of the local government created and set by statute", where the hell do you get this from? You are right about one thing, there is no taxing clause in a deed, the tax liability attaches the minute a homeowner unwittingly (without full disclosure of the ramifications of his act) signs the transfer tax stamp document. Read one, it will jump off the page and bite you in the ass. At this very moment, he converts his free and absolute ownership into that of a mere tenant, giving the state (and tax assessor) an interest in the property. Show me one statute at large, statute, rule, regulation, or code that even attempts to make property registration mandatory. I'll wait.

[gldskr]

Nd

If you would look at your state constitution, or any state constitution, you will find that it says that all land is held in allodium. I'll assume you know what that means. Therefore all land is exempt from any encumbrance. You couldn't encumber your land even if you wanted to, it is not possible. Real estate is another matter altogether.

Originally Posted by Nd

One teensy little problem, there is no taxing clause in a deed.

The taxing clause is a contractual agreement that the buyer generally assumes from the seller to pay the "pro rata" share of the present year's tax. Any further payment establishes an affirmative act extending the contract.

Originally Posted by Nd

Voting or not voting, or being a registered voter or not being registered has absolutely nothing to do with property tax.

In a constitutional republic you would be correct. We are not governed as such as a result of the corporate Fed gov. established in 1871 and subsequent states incorporation in the late 60's. We presently live under a democracy which has everything to do with voting.

gldskr

[Notorial dissent]

theghost
Being a registered voter or voting or not voting has exactly nothing to do with owning property or with the taxes laid thereon. Voting is a constitutional right subject to the laws of your state. property taxes are a result of state law, and you can find the one in your state by looking up the property tax statutes. Hate to burst your delusions bubbalah, if you were born within the boundaries of the united states, you are a US citizen, by law, and by custom, just as it has been since the founding of the Republic in 1789.

Congratulations, you are now aware of something that everyone else who didn’t sleep through Civics class has known since the 9th grade. Jurors have always been drawn from the voting list since the times of colonial government when you couldn’t vote or hold office unless you were a property owner. The 14th amendment has nothing to do with the paying of property taxes, or any other taxes for that matter.

The property tax lien is established in your state’s constitution and in your state’s statutes, you might try looking, it will be there, or you can always just ask the tax assessor, they will have the citations to the state law concerning property taxes. The tax liability always exists, regardless of what you are doing with the property. I think you maybe ought to read whatever the “transfer tax stamp document” is, we don’t have such things in my state, but we used to have a transfer tax, which was nothing more than a sales tax on land transfers, they no longer do it.

True, there is nothing that says you have to ever register title at all, but that won’t change the tax liability, it will just go to the former owner. The tax assessor assumes, by law, that whoever is the last listed owner of the property is the actual owner, and that is who they will notify. If the taxes aren’t paid the property will then be sold for taxes and you will lose it that way, whether you record the title or not. The last registered title takes precedence over any unregistered titles there may be.

Allodium as it is used in the context you are referring to means that it is held in fee simple not in feudal tenure, but that does not alter the State’s rights of eminent domain, or the tax liability that applies to all property. There is NO taxing clause in deeds, and there is no contractual agreement to pay taxes, it is all a matter of statute and always has been. If you will tell me what state you are in I will be happy to show you the property tax statutes.

Our government was and is a Republic as established by the Constitution in 1789, the voting base has changed over the centuries, but it still remains republican in format and makeup.

[mrg]

There are no "constitutional rights."

That is a term of propaganda.

The term "democracy," as the misanthropes engaging in mass ritual human sacrifice, are bandying about as a formal justification for ritualized mass human sacrifice (and "for-profit" commercial enterprise, as a by-product), is also a term of propaganda.

The terms "republic," and "republican form of government," are seldom, if ever, heard to emanate from the members of the soviet that has usurped the legislative Powers, the czars that now occupy the agency of executive Power, and the Inquisitors (cassocked in the vestment of parochial clergy, no less) who rule in place of judicial Power.

It is put forth that not only are we a democracy, but that we are the institutors and defenders of global democracy.

The effect of the propagandist employment of the term "democracy" is to color the concept and institution of republican forms of government.

Thus when one thinks "republican forms of government" (if one is still able to definitively and comprehensively do so), the term democracy attaches in representation of the former.

In reality, we are a bit beyond democracy, and are subject to that which inevitably results as a consequence of democracy .

"Ninth grade civics class" (in fact, there is no longer "ninth grade civics class," and there has not been for some time; there is, instead, "social studies") in a government controlled public school is also an exercise in national so******t propaganda ("social studies"), and compelled daily incarceration (from the fifth or sixth year of life through at least the fifteenth or sixteenth) in government "attendance centers" (an explicit statutory term for "public school"), for the purpose of behavior modification, (the "professional" term for "education"), is communist.

By statute, the only term of employment for a government school teacher is "taking attendance," as this is how "state," "federal," and "municipal," funding for their salaries, ("and for other purposes") is apportioned.

It would be unnecessary to apply the terms "format and makeup" to the term "republican" if indeed the Republic was functioning as such.

It is not.

There is no Constitutional apportionment of popular representation, and Senators have been substituted with un-apportioned popularly elected representatives.

There is no Constitutionally elected Vice President, and thus no checks and balances on the President.

Arguably, the executive Power is popularly determined (and/or popularly perceived to be so, again via propaganda), in contradiction to the republican form of government indicated by the authors of the document ordaining and establishing the constitution thereof.

The Supreme Law of the Land has been short circuited by a vulgar form of judicial legislation decreed by members of a private monopolistic professional guild.

The intent of "...this Constitution for the United States of America," was not to institute republican form of government, as that had already been accomplished, but was, in large part, intended as a remedial commercial agreement, contract, and perfection of Union, amongst the members of a confederation of independent nation-states.

One of the cornerstones of the commercial agreement justified here, by its author (with commentary), has been replaced by its opposite.

I await the apologistic propaganda, condescending personal ridicule, and sarcasm.

[theghost]

Originally Posted by Notorial dissent

theghost
Being a registered voter or voting or not voting has exactly nothing to do with owning property or with the taxes laid thereon. Voting is a constitutional right subject to the laws of your state. property taxes are a result of state law, and you can find the one in your state by looking up the property tax statutes. Hate to burst your delusions bubbalah, if you were born within the boundaries of the united states, you are a US citizen, by law, and by custom, just as it has been since the founding of the Republic in 1789.

Congratulations, you are now aware of something that everyone else who didn’t sleep through Civics class has known since the 9th grade. Jurors have always been drawn from the voting list since the times of colonial government when you couldn’t vote or hold office unless you were a property owner. The 14th amendment has nothing to do with the paying of property taxes, or any other taxes for that matter.

The property tax lien is established in your state’s constitution and in your state’s statutes, you might try looking, it will be there, or you can always just ask the tax assessor, they will have the citations to the state law concerning property taxes. The tax liability always exists, regardless of what you are doing with the property. I think you maybe ought to read whatever the “transfer tax stamp document” is, we don’t have such things in my state, but we used to have a transfer tax, which was nothing more than a sales tax on land transfers, they no longer do it.

True, there is nothing that says you have to ever register title at all, but that won’t change the tax liability, it will just go to the former owner. The tax assessor assumes, by law, that whoever is the last listed owner of the property is the actual owner, and that is who they will notify. If the taxes aren’t paid the property will then be sold for taxes and you will lose it that way, whether you record the title or not. The last registered title takes precedence over any unregistered titles there may be.

Allodium as it is used in the context you are referring to means that it is held in fee simple not in feudal tenure, but that does not alter the State’s rights of eminent domain, or the tax liability that applies to all property. There is NO taxing clause in deeds, and there is no contractual agreement to pay taxes, it is all a matter of statute and always has been. If you will tell me what state you are in I will be happy to show you the property tax statutes.

Our government was and is a Republic as established by the Constitution in 1789, the voting base has changed over the centuries, but it still remains republican in format and makeup.

ND, there are so many problems with your post, I don't know where to begin, so I will only affress the most obvious. First, it is obvious from your words that you are one of those that believes that because there are a bunch of men and women up on a hill somewhere, spewing out stuff they call legislation, that evry man, woman, and child is somehow subject to these edicts. You further promote this fantasy by suggesting that if one is born within the boundaries of the United States, that one is a US citizen. I'll stop you right there; to which "United States" are you refering? The supreme court has identified at least three. (Hooven v Alison). You obviously have no concept of what it means to be born free and sovereign. Here is the first line of article 1 of the International Covenat on Civil and Political Rights;

Article 1
1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their
political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

It is up to you to research the meaning and impact of this statement.

You are also wrong about the voters list. A voter of today is an entirely different animal than a sovereign elector form the early days before the legislative democracy infected our republic. Look at your voters registration card, see the box you check that says US citizen? Try to complete this "registration" without checking that box, and see if they allow you into the voting booth. This also is another massive fantasy, that anyone's "vote" actually places their candidate into office. I'm speaking here of the presidential "election". I suppose some of the smaller peons may actually get elected by the voters, they are only useless puppets anyway.

In one of your statements you state: "The tax assessor assumes, by law, that whoever is the last listed owner of the property is the actual owner, and that is who they will notify." Is this how it works in a lawful (constitutional) government?? Someone may just "assume" an obligation, and poof! you have an obligation? Are you serious? Do you actually read what you write? "Assumes, by law"?????

I will finish with one last comment (because I could go all day on this one) you may want to do some research on land patents, case history (not law!) on land patents, sovereignty, political status/rights, political jurisdiction (Eric WhoRU), and George Mercier's Invisible Contracts. Re-read your own post, and see if you can spot all the legal determinations you've made, not only for yourself, but for everyone else as well. What gives you the right?

[jdogpupil]

Anyone have a copy of this transfer tax stamp document ? It sounds like something I should read