CLAIMS EXAMINED HEREIN are for a controversy involving parties to a series of like kind exchanges involving the election for cancellation of debt and involuntary conversion of liabilities to assets and real property to shares “chattel.”
Claims brought by PLAINTIFF are as the subject property occupant of real property and the address shown in the above entitled matter. The action file by plaintiff is by the “household” who pray this court hear the matter of determining proper characterization of the transactions to date involving the subject land and improvements referenced throughout and herein as “subject property.” .
Defendants are the notes holder at time of HUD I settlement, and its creditor the member bank by opposing counsel for the alleged foreclosing interests. It is discovered from findings to date and believed to be fact that the relationship of the creditor and the lender are such that he creditor holds the collateral in his possession at all time while holder is left with only the right to enforce. This includes enforcement of all lender and creditor terms and conditions for contracts among one another at all time throughout the life of the subject loan and mandatory for complying with the requirements for creditor UCC 1 filed against the entire lender holdings including receivables and balances owed outstanding to creditor.
Creditor is believed from discovery and it is held as fact to operate under the jurisdiction of the United States as instrumentality of the United States Government.
Defendants are named as creditor and creditors successors as nominee appointed by Plaintiffs at time the obligation and security “instruments” are executed.
Now where the method and means of originating a mortage under the reverse purchase and sale agreements, and as amended , are cause to believe the holder is the party to enforce and where the assignment is missing for the first 7 years into the life of loan the holder is believed to be in default of its reps and warranties to the creditor meaning and and all creditors successors and assigns For this reason the court is asked to consider with the “loan(s) secured by property” are not one in the same with “loan secured by the property” differentiating the entire balance outstanding on a commercial line of credit and the cost tor release the subject title as lenders successors to all rights and entitlements of such assignment.
A controversy arises under the fourteenth amendment where private sector parties act as agents of a government actor empowered for this purpose as IRS agents who engage in practices that include unlawful elections to breach a grantor trust regulatory requirements under the IRC title 26 of the US tax code and who fraudulently alter tax payers’ Individual Master Files (IMF) for the following purposes:
● Unlawfully Evading statutory time-barred tax assessments,
● Generating and providing fraudulent certifications of official records to the courts to support fabricated or contrived assessments,
● Unlawfully depriving tax payers interest legally owed them by the government,
● Levying upon tax payers’ Social Security benefits in direct violation of U.S. law,
● Willfully and intentionally creating fraudulent penalty and interest charges against
● Willfully and intentionally violating taxpayers due process rights by in part relying on an insiders code system for using Y2 K “dates starting in 1987 to back date and cancel out and or offset on a forward method the true or actual basis in assets held in dominion of a fiduciary for certain indentures falling under a pooling and servicing arrangement with aforementioned government actor .
Come now the I.R.S. claims for assessments owed by member banks for the withholding due from ordinary income paid to Plaintiff by defendants as a payee starting at time of the settlement and through date of alleged lawful foreclosure sale for the last 10 years.
Income paid to Plaintiff is alleged from the cancellation of debt owed by lender to creditor for accrued balance carried to date where the creditor is for this purpose the lone in counter party whereas the household at time of conveyance of title is converted to a passive investor.
The definition of investor here falls under the Securities Act of 1933 for exemption from registration and disclosure requirements for transactions “not involving any public offering.” However, in drafting the legislation, Congress did not clearly spell out what distinguishes a “public” from a “private” offering.
• In 1953, the Supreme Court ruled that availability of the exemption “should turn on
whether the particular class of persons affected needs the protection of the Act.”1
Specifically, the court stated, “An offering to those who are shown to be able to fend for
themselves is a transaction ‘not involving any public offering.’”
• Private offerings inherently have limited secondary market liquidity, and the pricing of
such securities is less transparent since they are not traded in the public securities market. In addition, the initial and on-going disclosure obligations of the issuers of such securities are not subject to the same Commission rules, but rather are determined exclusively by the issuer or are subject to negotiation and agreement between the issuer and the investor. These attributes make private investments more appropriate for sophisticated investors who understand these risks and have the ability to negotiate access to information.
• The Commission has adopted a number of regulations over the years seeking to clarify
when and how issuers can conduct offerings of securities without triggering the ’33 Act’s
registration and disclosure requirements. Today, the private securities markets rival the
public markets in size, and the vast majority of private offerings are conducted in reliance on Rule 506 of Regulation D.
• Rule 506 allows for sales to an unlimited number of “accredited investors” and, for
offerings that do not involve general solicitation, to a limited number of sophisticated
non-accredited investors. (These non-accredited investors must either possess sufficient
financial knowledge on their own or be advised by a purchaser representative who has the necessary sophistication.)
Investors are inherently left with the obligation to the IRS for income earned to date including all sources of income from whatever the source under section 61 (a) (1) This includes before tax paid in capital and cash retained from earnings as insurance or used to over-collateralize pooled assets as the case is with phantom income.
A party who invests as accrediteds are held to the withholding taxes for gains on sale to date treated as ordinary income. This may also include the time restraints for any back taxes due on esate taxes, property taxes due locally and capital gains taxes including taxes payable on the cancellation of debt.