Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Prosecutors Ask Tax Evaders To Forfeit Property

Federal prosecutors are asking a court to seize the property of two convicted New Hampshire tax evaders. Prosecutors filed papers last week to begin taking the property.

A jury last month told Elaine and Ed Brown they must forfeit at least $215,000 in property. The Browns were convicted last month of failing to pay taxes on almost two million dollars in income and engaging in elaborate schemes to hide it. A jury also ordered the couple to turn over their Plainfield home or Elaine Brown's Lebanon dental office.


Read more here.

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has anyone in the Brown household studied private property law, especially for New Hampshire, or as a matter of common law? Or the NH constitution? Doesn't the state of NH have jurisdiction over their property, and not the feds?

How about a request for a TRO in local or state court? Or a cease & desist?

8:36 PM  
Blogger FredMarshall1937 said...

Humor me a minute while I use a little common sense logic here.

Browns were convicted, no matter how rightfully or wrongfully. The IRS claims they owe an approximate amount, which we all know is probably triple the amount they would owe if they had assessed themselves by filing.

They offered to pay several times, and it appears that they probably have the money, or had it at some time.

I have no idea what the fair market value of the Brown property is, but with the size of the house and the 100 acres with it, I'd bet it probably exceeds the amount of money Elaine's dental practice earned in ten years.

It appears now that the government's ploy is to have the property "seized" by evicting the occupants so the court can take possession. When they evict Ed, they will also arrest him. They can claim that Ed has no right to defend his property because it is no longer his property.

Clearly the government's interest here is not to collect a valid debt. The interest is in destroying Ed and silencing him, which they hope will also silence Elaine (by fear) in the process.

Observers, including the media, should be able to see that this is not about the law or about collecting anything that is due, it's about silencing people who refuse to lie down and roll over.

10:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Refusing to lie down?

Ed and Elaine didn't even put on a defense. Sheesh.

Federal law trumps state law via the supremecy clause. State law cannot prevent a federal foreclosure for taxes.

10:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Watch out Fred

The invisible police are watching you. Or is it the invisible feds?

Maybe its the man in the moon?

---

Looks like there will be some cheap property available in NH soon.

Fred "the armchair liberator" Marshall are you going to bid?

10:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is possible to use the process of foreclosure to fight the Feds in court as this allows additional Due process rights. Also Ed could buy the property back himself by coming to an arrangement with the government. By law the Bov must negotiate/arbitrate in good faith. This could be a good thing for the short term, but only if Ed is willing to give in on the actual debts owed.

11:49 PM  
Blogger Ryan Mann said...

Refusing to lie down?
Ed and Elaine didn't even put on a defense. Sheesh.
Federal law trumps state law via the supremecy clause. State law cannot prevent a federal foreclosure for taxes.
10:30 PM
Anonymous said...
Watch out Fred
The invisible police are watching you. Or is it the invisible feds?
Maybe its the man in the moon?
---
Looks like there will be some cheap property available in NH soon.
Fred "the armchair liberator" Marshall are you going to bid?
Hey Mr. anonymous. Since you think the American government is so great and the Browns are nuts, why do you have to be anonymous? Maybe deep down you know the government, especially the IRS is unfair. Perhaps, maybe the IRS just works for a mob bank called the federal reserve. Oh, we can't let all of those IRS agents lose their jobs. Then they would actually have to find something to do that helps society. So Mr. anonymous, if we're wrong, come on and use your real name and speek against us loudly and proudly. Unlike you I'll voice my opinion against the IRS and I'm not going to be a coward. I've posted about Ed Brown on my blog at http://libertyandaccessibility.blogspot.com
. Unfortunately for you, anonymous posting is disabled. You're welcome to register for a blogger account though.
d 10:54 PM

11:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

invisible:
1. not visible; not perceptible by the eye
2. withdrawn from or out of sight

ignorance:
:the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge,
learning, information etc

stupid
My definition
refusal to correct ones ignorance

A good start might be to look up the word "without" and ponder it for a while.

12:15 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

 

SITEMETER