:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

Happy Thanksgiving!!!

Please remember our offices are always closed for the week of Thanksgiving;
therefore, our next Conference Call will be on Monday, November 27, 2017.

Have a happy and blessed holiday.

We generally hold Free Conference Calls every: Monday, Wednesday & Friday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time)
Join us on our next Conference Call and invite your friends.

Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;
use this link for more: contact information.


Please be aware that: The Way of Kings™ Forum is back online; however, they were not able to salvage their old database for that forum. Wherefore, all of the registrations and content that was on that forum is gone; which means that you will need to re-register on that forum to communicate with them and to receive their forum based services.


We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:

After reading this announcement, you may remove it by clicking the “X” in the upper right corner of the announcement's green background.

Property Taxes

The mystery of Land Patents unveiled.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

User avatar
Zeal
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 27
Joined: Friday June 17th, 2005 4:30 pm MDT

Property Taxes

Postby Zeal » Saturday June 18th, 2005 9:51 pm MDT

One question: Where would one start in researching the fact that Property Taxes

"are not constitutionally controlled, that is to say, they do not have to be uniform, apportioned or excise in their nature, because they are contractual. They are related to the Voter’s Registration contract."?

I've read some of the property taxing statutes and it has never jumped out at me. However, it has never been a pressing problem for me to date.

Thanks!
Steve

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Postby Admin » Tuesday June 21st, 2005 2:07 pm MDT

:h: Steve,
We have repeatedly presented all of the keys to such research in our presentations regarding the matter; we would start with the Standard for Review and when we got to the part where we discovered the nature of the parties related to the situation we would pay special attention to clarify the nature of the relationships involved. That study would at least with the following concise understanding:

The fact that Property Taxes“are not constitutionally controlled… they are contractual” comes both from history and the code.

Again, to understand any relationship you must first understand who the parties are, then you must understand the environmental nature of the relationship and only then do the terms of the relationship have any bearing on the relationship.
  1. The parties are man and the Corp. State formed by the State, which was formed under the original jurisdiction government of the United States of America:
    1. As a matter of fact and foundational law, we first notice the man is sovereign as per his creation and recognition in law.
    2. Man granted limited authority to government to exercise the man’s authority over the necessities of government in the Constitution of the United States of America; thus, setting this nation as a Constitutional Republic.
      • the national government enabled States as it grew
      • the States formed the separate Corp. States.
  2. The environment of the relationship includes:
    1. Man excluded the control over and/or ownership of land from the government in the Constitution’s 9th and 10th Amendments, with very few expressly limited exceptions.
    2. Land with its appurtenant property came to the people of the nation by treaty.
    3. In the Enabling Act for each State, the respective territory proposed to become a State and the people within that territory were all required to give up all right and title to the unappropriated public land lying within that territory to the dispossession of the United States.
    4. The State was accordingly formed, also not owning land, except for that which the United States granted it such that it could generate revenue by selling the same to meet its necessary expenses for schools, offices, buildings, armory’s, etc.
    5. The states followed that pattern to meet their expenses.
  3. The relevant terms (in brief) of the relationship are:
    1. people registered as voters to the Corp. State; thus, accepting the respective agreements to comply with whatever statutes were passed within the Corp. State purview.
    2. the Corp. State passed property taxation acts.
    3. the people accepted and paid respective property taxes as per the requirements of such acts.
Now, notice, and ask yourself:
  • Did the people ever individually grant authority over themselves to the body politic?
    • No! Our government was created as a Republic not a Democracy.
  • Did the people ever grant government authority to or over their private land?
    • No!
  • Does the State have the authority to usurp governmental authority over the people or over the Land if the people did not give them that authority?
    • No! That is forbidden in the Constitution of the United States of America.
Then the only thing left is contract; so we check the relationship to see if it contains a contract or an implied contract. To discover this we must know the elements that make up a contract, which are:
  1. a giver
  2. a receiver
  3. valuable consideration over time, and
  4. acceptance.
So, ask yourself if those elements are included in the relationship of property taxes with the Corp. State.

The Corp. State offers a legislative act to build a school, which will cost 25 million dollars, to be exacted through a mill levy collected through respective state property taxes. The act passes in the common vote of the registered voters of the Corp. State. So, is there a giver? Yes, the Corp. State. Is there a receiver? Yes, the registered voters. Was there a valuable consideration over time? Yes, it was plain in the offering, a 25 million dollar school (with its respective ongoing costs not yet proposed to the registered voters). Was there acceptance? Yes that’s what the vote was all about. Therefore, there was a contract implied by the voter’s registration and that passage of the act. The property tax is therefore lawfully binding as an implied contract of the registered voter. The rest of the elements in understanding this relationship were presented in Land 101 (our main announcement on the Land Patent topic in this forum).

There are those that argue: “But, I’m not a registered voter!” Our response to that is again found in our Land 101 mini course.
Steve wrote:One question: Where would one start in researching the fact that Property Taxes“are not constitutionally controlled… they are contractual”
In our previous presentations of this subject matter we thought this answer should be self-evident; so, if anyone is still wondering at this point, you go back through this review and notice all of the foundational documents referenced here, study those and remember what you learned then notice the effect of the relationship. If the people never gave authority to government over themselves or over their land or over their property (and they haven’t), then it must be something else; if it is legal, lawful (and it is). The only thing there is in that, “something else”, is the voter’s registration agreement and that which follows; which, as shown, does exemplify what is going on.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Carrie
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 9
Joined: Wednesday August 23rd, 2006 9:57 pm MDT

Property Taxes

Postby Carrie » Wednesday August 23rd, 2006 10:37 pm MDT

Do I understand this right? Reading this is seems to say that if we are registered voters, that is what makes it so the state can tax us? That makes it so we are paying dearly for the "Right " to vote which is suppose to be with no charge since it is a 'Right' !
Did I read and understand this right?
So the Land Patent makes no difference then- the state government can still come along, tax our land and have power over it. So what's the point?
I thought the government could not ever take land that is Land Patented for taxes or anything else? The Patent is supposed to protect the Land ownership. But if the state can tax it, it can also take it if taxes are not met. All those direct taxes are un-Constitutional to begin with. The so-called 'tax Amendment" of Lincoln's was never legally passed or ratified and 'his Amendments' all went against our original Founder's Constitution to begin with. We were founded a no-tax Free Republic nation!
So if we are a registered voter, then we can still be taxed to death?
We are being 'punished' or ‘taxed’ for being a registered voter? That is what it sounds like.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Property Taxes

Postby Admin » Monday September 11th, 2006 9:32 am MDT

:h: Carrie:
We recognize that you have made several posts to our site and that if you have followed through in reading and studying the suggested information provided in the responses to those posts you should not still have some of these questions.

Your initial question in this topical thread asks about the “registered voter” relationship as it relates to the right to vote. It should be obvious that the right to vote is intrinsically tied both to the venue and the outcome of the election in question; and, the democratic process of voting in a general election where a simple majority carries the vote and grants an obvious agreement to the outcome of the election by all that possess the right or privilege of so voting. This should certainly not be news.

The key to understanding elections in our country today rests not in the obvious process but in reviewing the matter with the Standard for Review presented in our Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole article. Such a review shows the Corp. State and Corp. U.S. are not our government; rather, they are private (now foreign) corporations. Thus, being registered voters in those organizations may not be what you may have thought. A review of Team Law’s Patriot Mythology page, specifically Myth 22, not only reveals the true nature of those private foreign corporations but also reveals the nature of the relationship people accept when they apply for and accept the responsibilities that go along with holding the Social Security card for Corp. U.S. Finally, Myth 22 expresses the actual relationships involved with most financial transactions that take place in our country today. Thus, if a person is familiar with those relationships, they will realize that the registered voter in most cases is not the sovereign man; rather, it is the Trust that was created by Social Security Administration. The man is something completely separate from that.

Thus, if the registered voter owns property that would be subject to property taxes so be it. Certainly being a registered voter in elections that twice a year adjust the mill rate levy at the basis of such property tax obligations would obligate such registered voters to such an obligation when applicable. Such elections also have no effect on those that are neither registered voters nor otherwise obligated to participate with property taxes. If you do not fall into one of these categories then it would likely be wise to develop a relationship with Team Law such that you could learn to properly secure land and property rights exclusive of such limitations.

Though in relation to our original jurisdiction government, there is no charge required to pay for the right to vote, the right to vote comes with obvious supportive obligations—at least one of those being the responsibility for knowing the law. Another obvious obligation to the right to vote is the obligation of support of the outcome of the election; which should also be understood by all of those that possess that right. However, that right to vote should not be confused with the privilege of voting in corporate elections. Such privileges are controlled both by the bylaws of the corporation as well as the terms and conditions of the contract that formed the relationship from which that voting privilege stems.

Thus, if you understand what we have already provided you will also understand that property taxes are not un-constitutional; rather, they are contractual (see Land 101). Respectively, land patents neither protect you from private contracts nor from your right to contract.

Still, the only thing government can take land for is eminent domain and then only if eminent domain applies; but, that is an entirely different subject that we already addressed elsewhere.

Respectively, we must both learn the difference between government and these private foreign corporations and understand how to privately properly secure land and property appurtenant to it so that it is not subject (by your own agreements) to property taxes and other such obligations that might compel you to give control over it to others against your will.

The key is learning the truth and applying it; Team Law helps. Team Law beneficiary support goes far beyond the general Land Patent Sandwich service Team Law provides to those that simply want to secure their acceptance of the rights secured by the land patent. The educational service Team Law provides its beneficiaries can help people learn how to properly provide such secure control over land and or property appurtenant to land that they can free themselves from ever again experiencing property taxes or any other kind of control over their domain; especially if you come to understand what The Way of Kings™ can provide as well and incorporate that to your management of your domain.

Your allegation that our founding fathers founded a tax free republic is simply unfounded in either history or law. They simply founded a Constitutional Republic that was free from certain kinds of (unfair) taxes. They also established the limitation from government control over the obligations of contracts and left that up to the people—to you. But, the real question is, how can you possibly take advantage of what they set up if you neither know the law nor know what your rights are? You cannot. That, again, is why Team Law exists; we help people learn how to learn the law so they can learn how to apply the law to keep their rights and the law secure.

The property taxes you deal with today are, in almost every case, purely contractual.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Victor
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 14
Joined: Tuesday September 5th, 2006 8:17 pm MDT

Property Taxes vs. Public School Attendence?

Postby Victor » Friday March 2nd, 2007 7:36 am MST

Dear Admin,
With a new year upon us, I am anticipating the notice from our local taxing authority concerning property taxes. I understand the relationships that you mentioned above concerning a giver, receiver, etc., but I was currious on an item. Let's say that the contractual agreement is terminated (voter's registration revoked); yet my children still attend the public school system. Would the children's attendance to public school possibly cause a binding relationship with me to the taxing authority in any way? I know that the children cannot be the receivers because they are not of the age of accountability and; therefore, they cannot contract. Right? I'm guessing that the valuable consideration over time would be "an education", but was their acceptance? Would the act of taking our children to the public school building or the bus picking them up be construed as an acceptance on my part? It appears to me that the children could still attend public school since there is no "receiver" in the above mentioned relationship.
Thanks again for all of the excellent posts.
Sincerely,
Victor

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Property Taxes vs. School Attendence

Postby Admin » Sunday March 4th, 2007 11:34 am MST

:h: Victor:
To answer your inquiry, please first notice that regardless of whether people have children in school taxpayers are still obligated to honor their agreement to pay property and other taxes. Thus, it should be clear from that nature that there is no relationship between the obgligation to pay property taxes and school attendence—unless in some venues such a thing is actually written in the property tax law.

Further, the answer to your question is Voter’s Registration is not the only way in to that relationship. Canceling a voter’s registration is like turning the electoral system in Corp. U.S. over to the VoteScam computers and giving up on any ability you may have had to compel Corp. U.S. to follow the law. The problem most of us have is we are so selfish that we do not see that the solution to the problems we face in America today are enhanced by both our ignorance of the law and our unwillingness to study it for ourselves and to awaken our neighbors to that same necessity. All we can see is how can we get out of property taxes so we can stop supporting the insanity we discover in the news. The only hope we have is we have to learn the true nature of the relationships we deal with every day and then separately learn how to take control of each of them. We must learn the difference between the person that has the Taxpayer Identification Number and ourselves. We must learn the law. Then we must apply the law. To understand the answer to your property tax question, as it relates to your children you must have first:
  1. Read and understood Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole article; then,
  2. Read and understand Myth 22; then,
  3. Read this topic again and see if you have the answer to your question.
That should give you a bit of a different perspective. If you once understand the true nature of the parties involved, that meaning that you understand the relationship Social Security Administration created, you should begin to understand, that person is not you. To delve into that topic any further would require Team Law beneficiary support. The Corp. U.S. Census system is also another way people volunteer into the Corp. U.S. support of the public education system and it is a reason many people today are starting to home school. Others make sure by other means that they pay their own way through their children’s education. You might want to also read the WARN newsletter volume 1 issue 1 article on starting on page 10, Family Ties. The children in the public school system are considered in that system as property of Parens Patria. Though, your children are too young to contract you are not and you may seriously want to consider the last referenced article. Again, having done that it will be important not to jump into action because you read third party information from Team Law or from any other source.

The entire point of all we have presented at every level is:
  • Do your own research!!!
  • Discover the Law!!!
  • Learn who the actors are!!!
  • And, prove the facts for yourselves from your own experience.
Then, and only then, will you be prepared to start applying the law to save our country and your family.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

OldModelT
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 5
Joined: Tuesday September 4th, 2012 9:24 pm MDT

Re: Property Taxes

Postby OldModelT » Thursday September 6th, 2012 12:55 am MDT

We bought our property in 1978 and I don't recall ever being required to submit a SSN for it. We homeschooled our children and are not registered voters. I don't even have a federal mailbox on the property. Outside of a possible agreement we might have signed to keep the taxes current, I see no nexus to be taxed which has increased 10 fold since we bought this place.

A number of years ago, I remember reading a section in NY's Real Property Tax Law that the tax is not levied against the landowner, it's levied against the property itself. Apparently it matters not who owns what or who agreed to what, the land gets taxed regardless. Is there a defense against that?

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Property Taxes

Postby Admin » Thursday September 6th, 2012 3:35 pm MDT

:h: OldModelT:
Delving further into this topic than we already have above will require Team Law beneficiary support, so we will proceed only a bit here to help you understand the elemental limitations necessary for understanding the nature of the relationships related to such real estate transactions and the related property tax obligations. Of course, we have already provided most of this elsewhere on our Open Forum system so even with the Land 101 and the Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole articles you should already have enough information to resolve your inquiry. So perhaps a review of those may help you understand what is going on in your situation.

Accordingly, regardless of what you submitted to qualify for funding or to purchase real estate, the terms and conditions of the sale of the real estate should be quite clear from the contracts and documents used in that acquisition (for us to review such instruments clearly requires Team Law beneficiary support). In most such transactions several things make the contractual obligations and the nature of the parties involved all too clear. For example:
  1. In the actual contract of sale for the property, the Seller usually provides that they will pay for the property tax up until the time of the sale and the Buyer will be responsible for the same from that time forward. Or, like in California’s Grant Deed system, the language of the agreement, or of the Warranty Deed, will be structured in such a manner that it invokes the State’s statutory Warranty Deed laws, wherein the elements of that contractual obligation are set certain by the law; or,
  2. Banking and/or insurance agencies, etc. will be involved in the real estate acquisition wherein the party/parties that invoked such relationships to secure, provide or receive funding was the social security cardholder (a Corp. U.S. agency trust) and whereas there was not likely any distinguishing documents that secured such an agency trust’s actions from your own personal actions or relationships (see the Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole article), all such matters in law would be reduced to a general partnership relationship that makes such an agency, and your own self, equally, collectively and severally obligated to all of the respective contractual obligations; and,
  3. Finally, the acceptance and payment of such a property tax liability would be the principle of Novation prove your liability to the respective obligations as they are established in accord with either the contracts or the respective laws.
However, even if none of that applied to your personal situation and as you wrote regarding a: “possible agreement we might have signed to keep the taxes current”, that, in and of itself, is a nexus that fits all of the requirements of law regarding such an applicable contractual obligation and binds you to the same, without question.

Also, you have to understand what a “levy” is and the difference between taxes being leviable against property vs. the law that imposes the tax in the first instance. That distinction is just like that contractual obligation to pay a mortgage in accord with the terms of a contract or the property can be levied. The levy applies to the already existent obligation to pay as recourse if the party so obligated by the terms does not pay. Again the Property tax is imposed against the contracting party (for which obligation property has no capacity); then if that party does not pay the tax can be levied against, and follows, the property.

Finally, You have to understand the distinction between “Land” and the “property appurtenant” to Land. Land, as the word applies to land patent secured “Land” is distinguished from the “property appurtenant” to land, wherein Land is the intangible “Domain” itself and the property appurtenant to it is the tangible property that sits within that domain. Again to delve further into these areas of review would require Team Law beneficiary support so any further responses on such points will have to move to the Team Law Beneficiary’s Private Forum and you will have to have also qualified for the Success Network.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.


Return to “Land Patents”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests