Titles and Property Tax

[idknow]

Originally Posted by gldskr

You have to keep saying to yourself - Its only a contract, Its only a contract. Find the contract that makes you liable for the tax and the problem is solved. Unfortunatly those contracts are embedded in the numerous documents we've unwittingly signed over the years and are difficult to uncover.My guess would be that the deed is the culprit. Most real property is held with possessary title only and only warrants enjoyment of use. It is the use of the property that is being taxed not the ownership. Think of it like rental property. Doesn't the renter ultimately pay all the costs associated with his tenancy, including property taxes? The deed is the lease agreement that allows the state to charge their annual rent.

--

Reminds me of the famous wall-quote: you RENT the beer. ;)
lol

[idknow]

[quote=KiteKaze]I am currently in the process of selling my house and have been doing some digging to try to determine exactly how i should contest the excise tax of over 5 thousand dollars that the government is going to claim is due.

[snipt]

--[[ idknow: preface to the next concluding points. the presumption is that a corporation is acting in its legislatively-authorised *PRIVILEGE* and that the act is NOT done by a private citizen acting in their own birth-right. Corporations are not citizens (they cant vote, have no birth-rights from our heavenly father. that covers everything that is distinguishable between private citizens and corporations and govt) So, given this point, govt taxes legislatively-authorised-privileges and the default (presumed) condition of the actor being taxes is that they are corporate. private citizens are not corporations.
]]--

If uncontested, you should then be able to notice them that

(a) they are unlawfully taxing your lawfully [[see next note on this word, idknow.]] owned private property.

(b) doing so is (corruption of blood? theft? something else?)

(c) doing so violates their oath to the constitution

(d) this can be remedied by correcting your properties assessment to note that it is "private property" and not subject to tax.

--[[ idknow, on the word "lawfully" above. This word sticks out like a sore thumb with red flags, blinkin lightin and maniac jumping up and down!!!

--[[ The problem is that there is NONE, ZILCH, NADA money of substance in circulation to be used to "lawfully" pay in exchange for real property or chattle.

--[[ all that is available to us by fraud and coercion to use is the FRN's. And they are declared to be negotiable instruments, evidences of debt and they are used only for the transfer of debts to and from anyone who accepts them for the benefit of limited liability, since we cannot "PAY" off a debt with debt, we can ONLY discharge debt (which is only a transfer!) FRN's arent money.

So, no lawfulness of transfer of any kind of property can occur with FRNs! thus the word "lawful" is the incorrect word to use. The proper word is "legal"
]]--

[snip]
force the state to either (a) show itself to be the rightful owner (or have rightful claim) or (b) show the contract that it claims you gave your rights up in.

--[[ the STATE is a part in our private ownership of land in the same way they are a party in a marriage of two "persons"
It's tacit procuration because we dont realise they are a party, but shouldnt using their forms be a RED FLAG that they are participating in some supposedly private act? ]]--


[snip]
[amended]
If not rebutted in a timely manner, that shows admission that you are the lawful [idknow: legal not lawful] owner of said private property.


[snipt]
I am still digging currently, but it seems that there are quite a few lawful ways to contest the states assumptions while shifting the burden of proof onto them.

--[[ wouldnt this piss off, umm, have the same effect with the IRS?
]]--

I hope this adds something to consider.

your anointed brother idknow

[wisper]

This is an interesting mind jogger. The tax is certainly not a direct tax. If one could get out from under the requirement, I think that about the only way would be in a realty contract between the buyer and the seller.
This raises the concern of dealing in the fishbowl, *unless*, you carry the contract, or sell for cash only! If you bring in the Title and mortgage companies, they will make sure the taxes are paid, by instructions to the mortgage closing agent. The same logic can apply to another big hit--that being the R.E. agent commission. I sold a house just recently and the closing costs (mine) came to about $50,000. So like everything else, we'll have to do some study and due diligence, and we will still have some risk considerations.

I think that if one follows the standard way of doing business, you are stuck. So; first, how about sale by owner? Then you'll have to deal with cash buyers or get creative on the contract techniques. You will have to convince the buyer that what you are proposingis not going to be a risk to him. If he wants title insurance, show him the title trail (you will have to get the data from the assessor (save 1 to 2 thousand $). In doing the work yourself there won't be title company/ mortgage broker instructions for funds distribution.

The buyer will have to be educated as will you. He will want his title and deed, but if you get patent update, then he would only notify the recorder that it is private property under title # xxxxxx and the deed and title are basically nothing but paperwork to keep you or the buyer in the matrix, he doesn't need them, unless he plans on paying all the taxes etc. You provide a deed (quit- claim) and if he's afraid, make sure you have all the money for the taxes in your sales price. Your contract will make that a condition of sale (I've done this). I didn't realize it was so late, so i'll go to bed and think more about this tomorrow! The thing I am unsure of at this point is all the different state and county traps (taxes and assessments).

[gldskr]

Contracts may be entered into verbally or in written form, however some contracts, because of their nature or complexity are only enforcible if written. Transfers of land/real estate are of this type.

Whenever a transfer of land/real estate occurs numerous contracts are typically entered into that are outside the actual contract (deed) conveying the property. These will appear as settlement costs at closing i.e. recording fees, doc stamps, this, that, etc. These contracts attach to the deed itself and cannot be liened against the property. They are the fees imposed for the privilege of recording the documents measured by the net consideration.

You will undoubtably find a statute that imposes and requires the payment of the tax. However, the requirement exists only when the deed is presented for recording (the offer to contract). Can the state require that you record your documents and contract with them? Of course not. Is a contract less enforcible if it is in your actual possession rather than open to the world for its inspection through recording? Obviously not, it is the law within its jurisdiction regardless if it is known by two or two million people. If you want the contract noticed simply have it published in your local newspaper for a number of weeks and add these to your documents. The effect is the same albiet one is official recording (notice) and the other is not.

This is why contracts for deed and other executory contracts, when recorded, are exempt from the tax. The event that triggers the tax is the execution and recording of the deed.

The property tax is a completely different animal in that it is openly contracted for or assigned within the terms of the deed itself and the property can be liened against these assessments. It is not a part of the subject to clause which conditions title upon "restrictions,reservations, covenants and easements of record". These are the express terms of the deed that are knowable and do not change over time unless through the affirmative acts of the parties. The property tax is arbitrarily adjusted yearly so it cannot be included within that clause. Requirements regarding building permits, zoning, land use, etc. stem from the property tax in that the proceeds of the tax are used to administer these requirements.

The silver bullet we all seek is right under our noses, it is the deed itself. Stop contracting with the state and you eliminate the taxes.

gldskr

[idknow]

re hi and greets from the most high!

Wouldnt it be an easier matter to find the acts of legislature which changed the procedure back in the 30s (following HR192 and the Erie decision of SCOTUS)?

It seems to me that finding those Acts of Legislature which changed the judiciary procedures, Acts which had anything to do with Realty, Ownership, etc and see if they provide the doors we need to extricate ourselves from this current system.

See, here's the rub for me, Lately, i've been of the mind that surrepticious clauses/sections which put into such Acts for the purpose of allowing us, the Private Citizens to fix what it wrong!

Consider: we serve an awesome God.

2. God always has someone in a position to do something for His people

3. we know that there are inexplicable sections of some Acts which just don't seem to fit in the larger piture of the system being built - that is, The IMF owns it all and someone has control of their strings.

how is it that the system requires private citizens must agree to be per-/pro-secuted before the courts can do anything? This seems most out of place if the intent is win the game, "at the end, he wins who has the most toys" (or something like that

what say you all?

[idknow]

Originally Posted by wisper

This is an interesting mind jogger. The tax is certainly not a direct tax. If one could get out from under the requirement, I think that about the only way would be in a realty contract between the buyer and the seller.
This raises the concern of dealing in the fishbowl, *unless*, you carry the contract, or sell for cash only! If you bring in the Title and mortgage companies, they will make sure the taxes are paid, by instructions to the mortgage closing agent. The same logic can apply to another big hit--that being the R.E. agent commission. I sold a house just recently and the closing costs (mine) came to about $50,000. So like everything else, we'll have to do some study and due diligence, and we will still have some risk considerations.

I think that if one follows the standard way of doing business, you are stuck. So; first, how about sale by owner? Then you'll have to deal with cash buyers or get creative on the contract techniques. You will have to convince the buyer that what you are proposingis not going to be a risk to him. If he wants title insurance, show him the title trail (you will have to get the data from the assessor (save 1 to 2 thousand $). In doing the work yourself there won't be title company/ mortgage broker instructions for funds distribution.

The buyer will have to be educated as will you. He will want his title and deed, but if you get patent update, then he would only notify the recorder that it is private property under title # xxxxxx and the deed and title are basically nothing but paperwork to keep you or the buyer in the matrix, he doesn't need them, unless he plans on paying all the taxes etc. You provide a deed (quit- claim) and if he's afraid, make sure you have all the money for the taxes in your sales price. Your contract will make that a condition of sale (I've done this). I didn't realize it was so late, so i'll go to bed and think more about this tomorrow! The thing I am unsure of at this point is all the different state and county traps (taxes and assessments).

--
a sales tax, or properly, a indirect tax, is a tax on consumption, isn't it?

here's another rub, we need to limit ourselves to refer to the constitutional tax methods only

capitation == head
indirect == not the head but someone (it's always someone, not `something') perhaps transferring?

[idknow]

Originally Posted by gldskr

Contracts may be entered into verbally or in written form, however some contracts, because of their nature or complexity are only enforcible if written. Transfers of land/real estate are of this type.

Whenever a transfer of land/real estate occurs numerous contracts are typically entered into that are outside the actual contract (deed) conveying the property. These will appear as settlement costs at closing i.e. recording fees, doc stamps, this, that, etc. These contracts attach to the deed itself and cannot be liened against the property. They are the fees imposed for the privilege of recording the documents measured by the net consideration.

You will undoubtably find a statute that imposes and requires the payment of the tax. However, the requirement exists only when the deed is presented for recording (the offer to contract). Can the state require that you record your documents and contract with them? Of course not. Is a contract less enforcible if it is in your actual possession rather than open to the world for its inspection through recording? Obviously not, it is the law within its jurisdiction regardless if it is known by two or two million people. If you want the contract noticed simply have it published in your local newspaper for a number of weeks and add these to your documents. The effect is the same albiet one is official recording (notice) and the other is not.

This is why contracts for deed and other executory contracts, when recorded, are exempt from the tax. The event that triggers the tax is the execution and recording of the deed.

The property tax is a completely different animal in that it is openly contracted for or assigned within the terms of the deed itself and the property can be liened against these assessments. It is not a part of the subject to clause which conditions title upon "restrictions,reservations, covenants and easements of record". These are the express terms of the deed that are knowable and do not change over time unless through the affirmative acts of the parties. The property tax is arbitrarily adjusted yearly so it cannot be included within that clause. Requirements regarding building permits, zoning, land use, etc. stem from the property tax in that the proceeds of the tax are used to administer these requirements.

The silver bullet we all seek is right under our noses, it is the deed itself. Stop contracting with the state and you eliminate the taxes.

gldskr

no, wait, parol contracts, that is, the unwritten, is also fully enforcable. that is settled court opinion.

[georgealexander]

....in the three states I have been licensed as a real estate broker.....in matters pertaining to real estate / real estate law / earnest money agreements / buy-sell agreements.

I am, however, getting long in the tooth.

george alexander