[/quote]The "house" in question was owned by the man's business and it was not his personal residence... Also, the $8.41 underpayment was the interest on the tax that was not paid in 2011... [/quote]

ok, so he paid his late taxes but decided to tell them to FO with the $8 late fee and thats why they told him to FO and took the house

important lesson he learned is you dont get to decide if you pay tax penalties or not, thats not how it works and his refusal to pay $8 late fee cost him his house

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by imjustafatkid

Alabama

Member since Dec 2011

50647 posts

Posted on 12/18/18 at 5:06 pm to keakar

It's amazing how many think the government owns their personal property. There's no way to think this is okay otherwise.

This post was edited on 12/18/18 at 5:08 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Dale51

Member since Oct 2016

32378 posts

Posted on 12/18/18 at 5:31 pm to imjustafatkid

quote:
It's amazing how many think the government owns their personal property. There's no way to think this is okay otherwise.

I don't think they comprehend it. They just accept it without thought.

I've been pointing that out to people for years, and the most common response is .."Yeah...but ..you know..thats how it is."

This is nonsense. If you own any other thing.."own" defined as, you have paid for it free and clear and no one else has a partnership in it. If you have bought and completely paid for something and someone else can legally take it from you for no outstanding debt, then you don't own it. Period.

If you buy a car..pay it off on time and the finance company says...."You keep making monthly payments or we'll take it away." Then you don't own it.

How is this justified?

This post was edited on 12/18/18 at 5:33 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by SlapahoeTribe

Tiger Nation

Member since Jul 2012

12119 posts

Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:13 pm to Bestbank Tiger

quote:
Excessive Fines clause.

There’s some case the USSC is supposed to hear (or just did) about this very thing. Some guy got pulled over and had drugs in his car so the police seized his car and declared it theirs under civil asset forfeiture laws ... but the maximum legal fine for his crimes was significantly less than the value of his car.

Hopefully it’s one of those cases that changes this bullshite civil asset forfeiture for the better (and hopefully the court does the right thing).

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by imjustafatkid

Alabama

Member since Dec 2011

50647 posts

Posted on 12/19/18 at 8:25 am to SlapahoeTribe

quote:
There’s some case the USSC is supposed to hear (or just did) about this very thing. Some guy got pulled over and had drugs in his car so the police seized his car and declared it theirs under civil asset forfeiture laws ... but the maximum legal fine for his crimes was significantly less than the value of his car.

Hopefully it’s one of those cases that changes this bullshite civil asset forfeiture for the better (and hopefully the court does the right thing).

Yep. These practices need to end. It's one of the few things people on both sides of the aisle can agree on. Politicians on both sides of the aisle agree it should continue, while member of the general public at large on both sides of the aisle agree it should end.

Page 1 2 3