![]() |
|
|
|
Registered
|
Trust are a very good thing, there are many people who really don't have anything on paper, but there is "Trust".. And it is not just to save on taxes, but to protect yourself from many different things, including the government. I have many friends who do this and it is one way to avoid being cleaned out. I for-one look at it as protection..
Joe, I think you are being a it tough on webb, as a lawyer from anothere state, he may have a different view.. Does anyone really think that those guys at Rennfest actually own those cars... ![]()
__________________
Byron ![]() 20+ year PCA member ![]() Many Cool Porsches, Projects& Parts, Vintage BMX bikes too |
||
![]() |
|
Dog-faced pony soldier
|
I see NOTHING whatsoever wrong with this. The name of the game is rapidly becoming "us versus them". The "us" is the average working person in America out there who's trying to make a living, maybe support a family and collect a few trinkets and protect a modest amount of wealth along the way. The "them" is the government machine, headed by career politicians who are usually lawyers - professionally trained to do nothing but steal the wealth of others by whatever means possible. The "thems" are control freaks and want to destroy the wealth of all the "us-es" in order to use it as THEY see fit. This is the game. The battle lines are drawn.
Knowing this, I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with availing onesself of whatever legal tools, loopholes or clever interpretations of the existing laws exist in order to protect one's interests from the "thems". Trusts, corporations, shell companies, etc. are all fair game as long as done legally. I do not condone breaking the law, but doing everything and anything possible to avoid getting screwed is perfectly fair game and frankly to NOT do so is idiocy and a quick path to bankruptcy given the increasingly greedy demands of the "thems". This thread is well-timed. I have been doing a little research into this for purposes of an airplane I'm thinking about buying in the next 12-18 months. I want to make damn certain I've got the minimum associated tax liability and that my personal assets are protected in the event of an accident or incident. Again - I see nothing whatsoever wrong with this. There are 50 states. Whether they like it or not, they're in competition with each other. If the rules, regulations, laws, etc. are unacceptable in one there are 49 others to look at. I consider that a resource and to ignore it is folly. My auto registration and insurance are damn cheap where I currently am, but if there's a way to get it even better I'm all for it. There's a reason ships are all registered in Liberia, Budget trucks are all registered in Oklahoma, etc. Taxes my friends. They give you exactly a 0% return on investment and looking at these things as business decisions leads one to realize that money is FAR better invested/spent elsewhere.
__________________
A car, a 911, a motorbike and a few surfboards Black Cars Matter |
||
![]() |
|
You do not have permissi
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 39,912
|
It is a interesting idea.
A few shiping corporations are registered out of Oregon and pay no sales tax. Their equipment circulates throughout the country regularly. Where your friend might run into a problem is if the case goes before a judge who decides to dig deep into the matter. I believe Cali laws require the vehicle to be physically present in the state no more than x amount of time out of the year. (30 days? 60 days?) Trust or no trust, if the time limit is exceeded the vehicle must be registered in Cali. He may have to somehow prove the vehicle was not present in the state through parking tickets etc...which may be difficult. Just a caveate. The cure may be worse than the cause. Getting it registered under a "special use" clause may be easier in the long run. In a parrallel, Mike Tyson attempted to get reduced non-homestead taxes for his Ohio home, and lost. Apparently he couldn't "prove" his non-presence. Ohio Tax Board Rules Against Mike Tyson - News Story - WPXI Pittsburgh Last edited by john70t; 07-28-2010 at 02:47 AM.. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 10,339
|
Trusts are used to get around other issues, and to make other things easier - like owning spoons that are listed in the NFA registry if your local CLEO doesn't want to sign off, or if you want multiple people to be able to possess them.
I say if it is legal, do it.
__________________
“IN MY EXPERIENCE, SUSAN, WITHIN THEIR HEADS TOO MANY HUMANS SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN THE MIDDLE OF WARS THAT HAPPENED CENTURIES AGO.” |
||
![]() |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: N. Phoenix AZ USA
Posts: 28,943
|
It is legal, thats why many people are doing it.
I have had a trust for years now and started it for one reason. I was looking at getting married but being in my mid to late 50's do not want to lose 50% of everything should the marriage not work and we had to split up later on. That way the cars, house, airplane, motorcycles and so on would all be protected. I do not own them, the trust does. Once in the middle of this found that there are a lot of other very nice benefits to having a trust. Am not trying to break any law, but if there is a loophole that can be used to my benefit why not?
__________________
2013 Jag XF, 2002 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins (the workhorse), 1992 Jaguar XJ S-3 V-12 VDP (one of only 100 examples made), 1969 Jaguar XJ (been in the family since new), 1985 911 Targa backdated to 1973 RS specs with a 3.6 shoehorned in the back, 1959 Austin Healey Sprite (former SCCA H-Prod), 1995 BMW R1100RSL, 1971 & '72 BMW R75/5 "Toaster," Ural Tourist w/sidecar, 1949 Aeronca Sedan / QB |
||
![]() |
|