PDA

View Full Version : California Debt Sentences Commuted


AyatollahGondola
02-03-2009, 03:25 PM
No, it's not a misprinthttp://www.saveourstate.org/vforums/images/smilies/wink.gif,

I've obtained the most recent documents available from the state pertaining to the offer in compromise program at the State Tax Board. This program was designed to get bad debts off the state books, and presumably get the tax debtor back in the system as a payee instead of a continuing liability. There are restrictions. You have to divorce yourself from the old failing enterprise, and consign a portion of your income over the next few years to the state, or pay an offered amount in total right away. And you have to give the state all the info they ask for first, so they can make a decision...or come and get your assets if you have any. Do the taxpayers benefit? Hard to say. In nearly a years time, there's just not that many, as you can see. And we would never know what becomes of the tax debtors as far as future tax payments after they are released from the debt, unless of course, they become debtors again in a public venue. But, from another standpoint, if you get worked into a financial corner in which you don't seem to have the ability to ever pay off an incurred debt to the tax man, you are effectively in debtors prison. Any wages you earn, money you accumulate, property you acquire, business you operate, lottery winnings or death benefits you are willed are always subject to levy, siezure or lien. In California, that pretty much limits you to a 50,000 piece of land, and less than $7,500 worth of car, clothes, tools of the trade, household furnishings, food, and cash at any one time that you can call your own, and they can't take. and that of course doesn't mean you can have the 7500.00 in cash on you either. The amounts vary for each item. The car can't be worth more than 1500.00 for instance. So how productive would a tax debtor be if he could only have a house and land worth 50K, and a combined personal property aggregate of 7K? Wouldn't be much incentive to go out and get a job where your earnings are garnished to the point you couldn't pay the 50K house payment anyway, right? How useful would a 1500.00 car be? Not very....
Face it; You'd be a miserable wretch applying for every gimme program and healthcare subsidy there was in the state. So this may be an option. But is it fair? I don't know. I can see one case which seems really, really fair to the debtor, settling a debt of nearly 3/4 of a million for 25K. But who knows what the circumstances were. I'm trying to find out, but records requests and searches are time consuming and futile sometimes. But in a few of these cases, I gotta wonder why they even took the trouble. When the debt is less than a thousand, and you settle for 25%, you must be in dire straits or on a very fixed income and nearly bedridden for the next few years. Which is, what I presume, the situation in a case like that.

Anyway, here's a link to my website again so you can open the attached files and see what happens when you throw yourself on the mercy of the tax man

http://publicdocumentdistributors.co...?p=193#post193 (http://publicdocumentdistributors.com/forums/showthread.php?p=193#post193)


Quote:
Taxpayer Name

(listed on official documents)


Amount of Unpaid Tax, Penalties and Interest

$765,875.78

Amount Offered on Behalf of the Taxpayer

$25,000.00


Why the Compromise is in the Best Interests of the State of California


The amount of the accepted offer, $25,000.00, represents the most the
state can expect to collect from the taxpayer's assets or income within a
reasonable period of time. The taxpayer does not have reasonable
prospects of acquiring increased income or assets that would enable the
taxpayer to satisfy a greater amount of liability than the compromised
amount within a reasonable amount of time.

AmbuDriver03
02-03-2009, 06:03 PM
The Federal Government is doing this too... Either they settle for $0.10-0.20 on the dollar, or they essentially force the person into BK, in which case the creditor gets nothing...

As the economy is so poor right now, you're seeing this in everything... Tax Liens, Mortgages, etc etc etc...

The majority of people who owe taxes, aren't those that have 7 figures sitting in offshore bank accounts, and probably won't ever be able to pay back what they owe... It's sad... but true..

It's sad when our elected representatives (Representative Tom Daschle for example) can't afford to pay taxes on their Million dollar salary... [/sarcasm]

I mean c'mon! gimme a break!

AyatollahGondola
02-03-2009, 07:11 PM
The Federal Government is doing this too... Either they settle for $0.10-0.20 on the dollar, or they essentially force the person into BK, in which case the creditor gets nothing...

As the economy is so poor right now, you're seeing this in everything... Tax Liens, Mortgages, etc etc etc...

The majority of people who owe taxes, aren't those that have 7 figures sitting in offshore bank accounts, and probably won't ever be able to pay back what they owe... It's sad... but true..

It's sad when our elected representatives (Representative Tom Daschle for example) can't afford to pay taxes on their Million dollar salary... [/sarcasm]

I mean c'mon! gimme a break!
Bankruptcy doesn't usually absolve debtors from these types of taxes. I hear that there have been some successful challenges mounted to the SBOE taxes owed, but in the past, I believe the only way out was OIC. The feds are likewise pretty protective of their right to hold trust fund portions of witholding taxes over a debtors head for ten years or more if extended by agreement if they chose, and the only way out was the statute of limitations, which the state doesn't have by the way.
If you listen in to some of the SBOE's taped board meetings, you'd really get to wonder where the justice is. They'll beat a tax payer to death with hearings, paperwork, appeals, etc over 10K in disputed fines or taxes, but don't even discuss among themselves granting a $700K pardon to someone who just quits, as long as the recomendation is there from the committee to do so. I guess they know what they're doing though, eh?