Indebtedness to the seller not discharged at reacquisition , the basis of such indebtedness shall be zero!

THERE WAS NO MORTGAGE ORIGINATED AS YOU THINK/ Installment Sale. And in most every case we have seen the consumer is foreclosing on themselves. Under the operative tax payer code  If any indebtedness to the seller secured by such property is not discharged upon the reacquisition of such property, the basis of such indebtedness shall be zero.

(d) Indebtedness treated as worthless prior to reacquisition

The cause for your belief in fraud is because foreclosing attorneys rely on a computer systems to track back to a date prior to the loan origination . This is for an adjusted basis in asset .

The Y2 K Bug is so hidden and veiled, clandestine that there is NO CHANCE OF DISCOVERY

You need to have complete understanding of GAAP AND GAAS and alleged  reacquisition of real property with respect to the sale of which gain was not recognized under section 121 (relating to gain on sale of principal residence);

Then you need complete understanding of Sec 1038 [cite the mortage foreclosure and eviction is moot to the taxpayers claims in Sec 121 ]

Now read this for the bigger picture –Basis of reacquired real property.

In Sec 1038 (d) If subsection (a) applies to the reacquisition of any real property, the basis of such property upon such reacquisition shall be the adjusted basis of the indebtedness to the seller secured by such property (determined as of the date of reacquisition), increased by the sum of—
(1) the amount of the gain determined under subsection (b) resulting from such reacquisition, and
(2) the amount described in subsection (b)(2)(B).

If any indebtedness to the seller secured by such property is not discharged upon the reacquisition of such property, the basis of such indebtedness shall be zero.
(d) Indebtedness treated as worthless prior to reacquisition. If, prior to a reacquisition of real property to which subsection (a) applies, the seller has treated indebtedness secured by such property as having become worthless or partially worthless—
(1) such seller shall be considered as receiving, upon the reacquisition of such property, an amount equal to the amount of such indebtedness treated by him as having become worthless, and
(2) the adjusted basis of such indebtedness shall be increased (as of the date of reacquisition) by an amount equal to the amount so considered as received by such seller.
(e) Principal residences. If—
(1) subsection (a) applies to a reacquisition of real property with respect to the sale of which gain was not recognized under section 121 (relating to gain on sale of principal residence); and
(2) within 1 year after the date of the reacquisition of such property by the seller, such property is resold by him, then, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary,
subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section shall not apply to the reacquisition of such property and, for purposes of applying section 121, the resale of such property shall be treated as a part of the transaction constituting the original sale of such property
(f) [Deleted]
(g) Acquisition by estate, etc., of seller. Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, if an installment obligation is indebtedness to the seller which is described in subsection (a), and if such obligation is, in the hands of the taxpayer, an obligation with respect to which section 691(a)(4)(B) applies, then—
(1) for purposes of subsection (a), acquisition of real property by the taxpayer shall be treated as reacquisition by the seller, and
(2) the basis of the real property acquired by the taxpayer shall be increased by an amount e qual to the deduction under section 691(c) which would (but for this subsection) have been allowable to the taxpayer with respect to the gain on the exchange of the obligation for the real property.

MOTION TO SET ASIDE FORECLOSURE FOR GENERAL LEDGER WITHHOLDING AND TAX PAYER ACCOUNTING RULES

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR
Plaintiff,
v.
ABC MORTGAGE

MOTION TO VACATE FORECLOSURE,
COMPLAINT FOR EQUITABLE DAMAGES, PUNITIVE DAMAGES, AND REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
I. NATURE OF THE MOTION
1. Plaintiff is moving party _________________ “MOUVANT” who resides at _______________ in the county of ____________ for the state of ________________ files ex parte motion to “stay” scheduled unlawful detainer and eviction of occupant from the premises and above identified property.

POSSESSION FAILS UNDER § TAX PAYER I.R.C. SECTIONS (4–1–14 EDITION) VOLUNTARY CONVEYANCE

From the Purchaser and Abandonment to the Seller.

Come now moving party “MOUVANT” citing lack of court jurisdiction in Personaum for matter of “REM” condemnation and government and state right of possession by” threat or emenanance” under counter argument in IRS tax Payer Code and IRS Taxpayer Bill of Rights as “adopted” by National Taxpayer Advocate.

Motion to stay eviction cite a genuine tax payer conflict of law that arises under the protections afforded in the fifth and fourteenth amendments and with respect of taxpayers rights under the disguised FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTORS PROCEDURES ACT “FCPA” with respect to “APPOINTED AGENTS” ALL MATERIAL DISCLOSURES AND NOTICES UNDER THE SATES CODE which shall but do not include the very basic presentment of payroll and earnings and disclosure for general ledger income assets liabilities and expenses.

In possession the right to prerequisite withholding held in a tax payers “interest bearing account remain unaffected by foreclosure or fictitious sale upon which a “lender is a vendor and vendee is the NOMINEE and upon the assignment thereof to “PAYOR” for consideration owed and never recived by the Borrower as PAYEE.

Under cancellation of debt and involuntary conversion borrower and BORROWER DOES 1-10 are the PAYEE for obligations due the Internal Revenue Service for ordinary as a RENTER OR LESSOR but denied the mandatory withholding data where nominee is a LANDLORD LESSEE “PAYOR” for income phantom or otherwise “ORDINARY” but deemed a tax deferred “fiction” Herein the moving parties cite where the courts practice and procedures for holdover and unlawful detainer are strategically timed and calendered in court dockets to circumvent US Tax payer codes for state and member bank obligations where the proceedings collectively avoid general tax payer withholding in favor of the state levying and collecting a punitive tax at time of possession.

*** The entire case pleading and motion is available by request upon our engagement providing discovery for 1099 , withholding information from constructing the general ledger for your case.
NOT AN OFFER FOR LEGAL ADVICE AND FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY .
****** Sorry fee based service and not for free ****

“Linda Tirelli robo signer and Steve M ”

“Linda Tirelli robo signer” and you’ll find no less than eight hundred and forty hits highlighting my work as a consumer advocate exposing the fraud that is robo-signing and document fabrication.

That is the problem with false prophets and morons acting like foreclosure scribes. A Robo signor is anyone in the mortage bankers office with  a blanket POA allowed to sign a corporate officer’s name for purposes of the assignment and  blank endorsement. The instrument is for all  purposes and intent worthless as they are provided in file exclusive to the  Creditor.

Creditor not lender is the holder and in possession of the asset

Lenders originate loans and  commercial lenders  fund the mortgages which must be sold at 180 days. The ROBO signed document is valueless after the first 180 days and this is what we as experts want to get in front of the court for you .

Why is the court interested in hearing the assignment is valueless  as a staled date  instrument . Because the  foreclosing agents are using it as a tool to unwind loans  under a reverse purchase and sale scheme

For more info write us at  registerclaims@live.com