To all Land Patent freaks thinking you don't have to pay state or county property tax for land to which you have some kind of allodial or patent title:ONLY the state constitution and laws provide you with exemptions from property taxation, and none that I know of grant any exemptions for allodial title or land patent once issued by the US government. Once the US Government releases land within the boundaries of a state to the public, state taxes apply according to law. Here is your proof, from the US Supreme Court (see the entire opinion attached).
"We hold the true principle to be this -- that whenever the question in any court, state or federal, is whether a title to land which had once been the property of the United States has passed, that question must be resolved by the laws of the United States; but that whenever, according to those laws, the title shall have passed, then that property, like all other property in the state, is subject to state legislation so far as that legislation is consistent with the admission that the title passed and vested according to the laws of the United States." Wilcox v Jackson 38 U.S. 498, 517, SCOTUSNumerous state courts have asserted the text quoted above in their holdings.
So, Land Patent and Allodial Title Freaks, please skulk home with your patriot myths and go silent on this subject forever. Stop hawking your bullshouts to ignorant people seeking to avoid property tax. You will only cost them more money in the end as they pay for your nonsensical advice and fight tax collectors over rights they don't have. If you want to refer them to something, give them the above court case AND your state Constitution's provisions on taxes and exemptions. For example, look here for those from Florida.
FYI, I have provide the above comments and case law to debunk the ridiculous assertions below.
On 2014-09-24 16:46, someone wrote:
DO YOU REALLY OWN YOUR PRIVATE LAND? The foundation of this nation was private land ownership. That's why the settlers came here. To insure private ownership of land, the nation's founding fathers made it unlawful for government to own land except for the ten square miles of Washington D.C., and such as may be needed for erection of forts, arsenals, dockyards, and other needed buildings. (The Constitution). ...A Land Patent is permanent and cannot be changed by the government after its issuance. "Where the United States has parted with title by a patent legally issued and upon surveys made by itself and approved by the proper department, the title so granted cannot be impaired by any subsequent survey made by the government for its own purposes." Cage v. Danks, 13 La.Ann 128. In the history of this county, no Land Patent has ever lost an appellate review in the courts. As a matter of fact, in Summa Corp. v California, 466 US 198, the Supreme Court ruled forever that the Land Patent would always win over any other form of title. In that case, the land in question was tidewater land and California's claim was based on California's constitutional right to all tidewater lands. The patent stood supreme even against California's Constitution...http://www.narlo.org/landpatent.html
 | Bob Hurt Blog 1 2 f t |
23 comments:
Read again - Nothing passes a perfect title to public lands, with the exception of a few cases, but a patent.
Where a patent has not been issued for a part of the public lands, a state has no power to declare any title less than a patent valid against a claim of the United States to the land or against a title held under a patent granted by the United States.
In other words only if the state has a patent can they even begin to declare a claim against land that is under patent granted by the United States.
Appears to be quite the pickle there. On the one hand the land is subject to state legislation while on the other hand they really have no valid claim against the Land patent. So while the state might have the ability to assess property taxes, enforcement of payment can't involve taking the Land as they have no valid claim against a United States Land Patent. OUCH!!!
If you read all the court opinions carefully, one will find they continually default to the term real estate Or real property. That is the trick of the lawyers. Patents were converted to real property. One must convert them back. And be sure the cards no it is not any longer real property. Only real property can be taxed. This was a trick of the banksters dating back to the eighteen hundreds. Retracted back to Savannah Georgia.
Jackson Dawson and "Unknown," both of you have no clue about the law. You'd do better asking questions instead of making stupid comments that have no legal foundation. The patent is the mechanism by which the government passes land ownership to a non-government entity. Thereupon, the land becomes taxable by the state in the manner of all other land taxation, with the exception of only such exemptions as the state constitution or laws identify.
The statement says 'title'. A Land Patent is not a 'title'. It is an ownership document granted by the government allowing for a piece or tract(s) of land to be privately owned by an individual. Therefore the statement by the Supreme Court does not relate to Land Patents. Maybe YOU need to study law.
What do you know any attorneys in Florida that have experience with Land patend cases that can help me...
Cimi and anyone else who wants to ask me questions, feel free to call me. I don't hide (yet). 727 669 5511
Meanwhile, LAND PATENTS to avoid taxes is an IDIOT's THEORY. A land patent is a nation's conveyance of title to property, but it does not immunize property from taxation. The owner must still pay taxes on it subject to assessed value and provisions in the state's constitution and laws. Florida's constitution and laws clearly describe what property gets taxed and under what circumstances, and how to get exemptions from part or all of the tax. If an exemption does not apply to you then you owe the tax and the circuit court will sell it out from under you if you don't pay with the lawful time limit.
Can you get land in the state of North Carolina. I pay my taxes. I just want to make sure my home goes to my son. Now that we have gentrification. I want make sure I did my best. Thank you. Margaret Collins
M Houston: If you want your heirs to have your land, and you want to avoid guardianships robbing your estate when you become senile, and avoid probate expense and haggling between heirs when you pass on, why don't you put the land in a trust and make your heirs beneficiaries, and stipulate who takes over as trustee upon your demise? Contact an estate attorney and get a trust document drawn up and executed.
Pay taxes with what exactly? Private central bank's debt instruments, called dollars, but remain undefined in US and state codes? Bob that's called fraud in the inducement.
It seems like all of this is being about paying land taxes or not I am not a big fan of paying the taxes but I'm fairly sure if you quit playing them they will eventually take your land
I have been to several tax auctions
I am more interested in getting a round the zoning
Building a building that the planning in zoning say I can build where I can build it what it can be build out of must meet uniformed building codes and standards with number two or better stamped lumber
I'll live in a log cabin me and my father built 40 years ago I would like to build a Nother one a little bigger than it
laws of zoning and planning says I cannot do on my property what I want to do
must be approved by them that is not land ownership in my opinion they own the land and not me I would like to change that if this is the mechanism to do it thank you
If federal reserve NOTES are debt instrument how can you pay a debt off with a debt. Why do I have a TAX EXEMPT I.D.# IF WE HAVE TO PAY TAXES! JOINT HOUSE RESOLUTION 192 SAY THE U.S. CORPORATION TAKES ON THE DEBT OF THE PEOPLE AND THE INDIGENOUS IS ALLOWED TO OWN CLEAR & FREE ALLODIAL LAND IT'S THEIR UNINALIENABLE RIGHT
If federal reserve NOTES are debt instrument how can you pay a debt off with a debt. Why do I have a TAX EXEMPT I.D.# IF WE HAVE TO PAY TAXES! JOINT HOUSE RESOLUTION 192 SAY THE U.S. CORPORATION TAKES ON THE DEBT OF THE PEOPLE AND THE INDIGENOUS IS ALLOWED TO OWN CLEAR & FREE ALLODIAL LAND IT'S THEIR UNINALIENABLE RIGHT
you can't taxes with legal tender. lawfull money is gold and siler coin or its equal.
Supreme Court decisions are not Law! Case Law is not Law! They are legal decisions made with regards to law. The Judicial branch does not have the power to make law. And the Legislative branch does not have the power to give another branch power. That would be effectively a breach to the separation of powers that our government is founded upon. Anything the Supreme Court does can be challenged because its not law. The judges do not get sovereign power here in America. This is not English Common Law, we have American Common Law which emphasizes Natural Rights, personal property and liberties. I don't know if the BAR association studies these distinctions but the legal system seems to be side-lining these facts. Anyways taxation was originally only on the imports to the US. After the Civil War, property titles vanished. Feudalism took over our country once again. Everything our fore-fathers fought against has been re-surrendered. You can still be legally taxed under a land patent I believe because not only is a patent a permission from the government which means you surrendered your right to land ownership and asked for it but also whatever citizenship you have has contracted laws and regulations that you must abide. Remedies: Claim your land under your own created lawful and legal instrument. Remove your contracts from the government that are prohibiting what you want out of life. Courts can't prosecute you without personal jurisdiction. I have the answers and I put them into practice and spend the majority of my time researching law, history and religion so that I can help others achieve success like myself. I'm also in the US Military and understand contracts with the government, the legality of oaths, jurisdictional restrictions, court procedure, etc.. too much to list or explain here. I'm organizing into a group to distribute what I know to every citizen in the US.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/466/198.html
SUMMA CORP. v. CALIFORNIA EX REL. LANDS COMM'N
The case you referenced isn't even relevant because the plaintiff had a register's certificate, not a land patent. Such a patent would convey perfect title enforceable against the government, at least according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilcox_v._Jackson
Not claiming to be a legal expert but Mr. Jackson DIDN'T have a land patent so your quote is entirely out of context and pointless in regards to the rights of land patent owners.
It's kind of funny how much you want "allodial title freaks" to stop, clearly it's the just and principled way that land ownership should work in this country regardless of whether it is currently possible for everyone or not. It's worth pushing for and talking positive changes that reduce corruption in government unless you enjoy injustice or have a special interest in your local municipality's tax income.
Derek Syroka How do I make contact with you? Please provide.
To Bob Hurt, If a land Patent Grant and or Contract was signed in 1788 by the President of the United States of America, George Washington, to John Cleves Symmes, before the United States of America ceded land to Ohio in 1803. So, by logic, if the land was granted in a Land Patent and or Land Grant, before the United States of America ceded land to OHio in 1803 does the State of Ohio have jurisdiction over land that was not ceded to the State of Ohio? How can the State of Ohio Constitution and or tax land that was not ceded to the State of Ohio? The State of Ohio Constitution would only cover ceded land ceded by the United States of America government.
It all goes to who actually owns the land and under what circumstances the land can be seized by ANYONE. Debt cannot used to pay a debt. The Promise to Pay cannot BE the Payment itself. Federal Reserve Notes ARE NOT DOLLARS and never were. They are legally defined as "Obligations of the United States" and are SUPPOSED to be redeemable in "Lawful Money". The term "DOLLAR" is also LEGALLY DEFINED by the Coinage Act of 1792 and the two definitions could not be further apart.
Now I offer for anyone's consideration that if Federal Reserve Notes were to be redeemed in Lawful money that they themselves CANNOT BE the lawful money they are to be redeemed for.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/411
If a State is following the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto and implementing the 1st plank which outlaws private ownership of LAND wherein a person RENTS the land from the STATE in the form of Property Taxation paid to the STATE, then all I can say KOMRADS is that you've been HAD BAD. And you STILL think you won the Cold War, I bet.
I suggest you all get read into the 10 Planks of Communism and get back to me on how the heck you think the United States is somehow NOT a Communist nation, seeing that Marx wrote the planks in 1848 as a TEST to determine the EXTENT to which nations at the time were ALREADY Communist. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm
Gold and Silver money is a construct of Capitalism due to the money having intrinsic value.
Fiat Money ie "Federal" "Reserve" notes are a construct of Communism (5th plank, Communist Manifesto) and have NO VALUE and are backed up by CONFIDENCE ONLY ie a CON GAME as the "Federal" "Reserve" (which is neither "federal" and "reserves" nothing) will NOT redeem them in Lawful Money, stating "Lawful Money has not been defined by Congress." https://www.financialsense.com/contributors/fs-staff/fed-president-confidence-game
Now, you don't have be brain dead to smell a rat here. It is MANIFESTLY APPARENT that FRAUD is at play. Remember the words of Frederic Bastiat - “When plunder [FRAUD] becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.”
And to end this, there's the old lie the Richard M. Nixon "got rid of the gold standard". The President cannot unilaterally change any provision of the US Constitution at his whim, he lacks UTTERLY that authority.
Now, if it WERE in FACT TRUE IN LAW that he "got rid of the gold standard" then the United States Constitution would need to be AMENDED assuming he HAD that power to alter it at his discretion.
So I give you the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 10. READ IT VERY VERY CAREFULLY boys and girls.
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
Did you catch that Boys and Girls? MAKE NO THING BUT GOLD AND SILVER COIN A TENDER IN PAYMENT OF DEBTS. Richard M. Nixon has long been dead and so has is the LIE that he divorced the nation from the gold standard. Because if he DID end the gold standard, THIS provision of the US Constitution would need to be amended. Debt cannot be used to pay debt. The Promise to Pay cannot be the Payment.
KNOW NOW that you live in a Communist nation. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
I am a little late to the game, but here it goes...some questions and observations:
1) Does your state constitution have in it that you have a right to own property, to use it as you will, to determine who can use it and only you have the right to dispose of it as you will? If so, and by all that is holy, it WILL say it, then you have the right to property(your automobile(it is not a motor vehicle, but that is a different post), your compensation for your labor, and any LAND that you purchase.
2) Does your state constitution state that the state has the right to tax corporations and persons? I bet you it does. Corporations are government creations. Persons...are also government creations. A person is a trust, partnership, LLC, or foreign person (company, LLC, trust, partnership).
3) Did you actually buy your land? If it says that you are a tenant, then you are renting and paying a privilege for it. A Deed is not a land patent in any way, shape or form. That is just saying that you have the privilege of being on the land.
Things to write to the county about in a FOIA request:
1) As the government cannot interact with anything, but corporations, the contracts between them and those that have signed contracts with the government, please provide the contract that I signed, with the signature of the representative for the state, that I declare myself a corporation or artificial person subject or am exercising a state privilege, and subject to a duty tax on property that I personally own.
2) As a human(as apposed to a corporation or artificial person), I have the unalienable right to own property. This property can only be taxed under a direct tax that must be apportioned, and not the current ad velorum (by value) indirect tax that is currently being levied. As there can only be a direct tax on a right and not an indirect tax, please provide factual evidence that I am engaged in a state privileged activity with my property.
3) If you cannot provide the above information, please provide the appropriate steps to remove my property from the tax roles as the indirect tax is unconstitutional and can be prosecuted under the law as fraud(telling you that you have to pay taxes on your property), mail fraud(they mail you statements each year), deprivation of rights under the color of law(the right to own property and be appropriately taxed), and theft(taking your money when they had no right to it).
Once you send it off by certified mail, never expect to get a response. I have done this in two states. Each time, they have 30 days to respond. Not necessarily provide information, but respond. I had the cards proving that it was received, but each time I wrote them, nobody ever got the letter. I did this three times in Colorado and twice in Utah.
Now, if an appropriately apportioned direct tax was ever levied, you would pay the same amount as your neighbor each and every time you received a tax statement. This would be completely constitutional! And I would be happy to pay it.
Now here is the kicker...the warranty or quit claim deed that you have in your mortgage packet is the state slipping in a contract to ensure that they retain ownership of the land. It does call you the tenant and not the owner. Your paperwork will have the county as trustee, in perpetuity, over your property. If you own it, why do you need a trustee? That is because the county holds all the land in a trust and you are actually only buying the buildings.
Now I also found some information that I still need to follow up on to check it out, but it said that anything, but a land patent is considered fraud when transferring ownership of land. I do not think that this is specifically called out, but I still need to do more research.
typical scum attorney, you don't study or have any degree in law you only know statutes and codes which are not law, well established. All so called "Judges" are mere administrators in inferior courts of contract. The supreme court only issues opinions as there is no federal common law. so scum attorney go fuck yourself for continuing to attempt at fraud and misinformation. you are a lair as all attorneys are. Lets see your so called license to practice law issued by sec of state, oh wait, there is no such thing. you are a BAR member, a foreign corporation so why don't you also produce your foreign agent registration to work in the US you fcking scumbag
Its not like the author checks these comments any more, but as a question of logic, not law...
The below quote is referring to article 1 section 8 clause 17 https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-8/clause-17/
On 2014-09-24 16:46, someone wrote:
> DO YOU REALLY OWN YOUR PRIVATE LAND? The foundation of this nation was private land ownership. That's why the settlers came here. To insure private ownership of land, the nation's founding fathers made it unlawful for government to own land except for the ten square miles of Washington D.C., and such as may be needed for erection of forts, arsenals, dockyards, and other needed buildings. (The Constitution).
and a section from the SCOUTS opinion that the author quoted
whether a title to land which had once been the property of the United States has passed, that question must be resolved by the laws of the United States; but that whenever, according to those laws, the title shall have passed, then that property, like all other property in the state, is subject to state legislation so far as that legislation is consistent with the admission that the title passed and vested according to the laws of the United States." Wilcox v Jackson 38 U.S. 498, 517, SCOTUS
How does the opinion debunk the constitution, if the United States can only be granted lands by Cession of States for the ten square miles of Washington D.C., and such as may be needed for erection of forts, arsenals, dockyards, and other needed buildings... yada, yada. So it seems to me like that opinion only applies if I'm buying a fort for example, not the land next to the fort.
Post a Comment