Podcasts about franchise tax board

GQ LAW California Attorneys Gary Quackenbush and Rich Mathurin discuss how to solve FTB tax problems. Support the show: https://www.gqlaw.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Attention taxpayers! If you think calling the Franchise Tax Board on your own is a good idea, think again! In this casual conversation video, we discuss the dangerous consequences of calling the Franchise Tax Board without representation. Trust me, you don't want to be caught off guard by their tactics. Don't make the fatal mistake of giving away your hard-earned money to the Franchise Tax Board. We'll show you why you need a tax attorney on your side to protect your finances and avoid making common tax mistakes. So grab a cup of coffee and join us for an eye-opening discussion that could save you thousands of dollars. Don't miss out! Download my free book: http://TaxDebtBook.com Visit Me: TaxDebtConsultant.com TEXT ME!! +1 (909) 909-345-9215 Office: (909)570-1103 Book an Appointment: CallTaxEA.com --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/carlossamaniego/message

Audio of Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt (2019) Majority Opinion (States are immune from suit in the courts of other states)   Back in 1993, Gilbert Hyatt was an inventor, raking-in loads of cash from a patent he owned. When an auditor with the Franchise Tax Board of California learned about Hyatt's success, he decided to look into it. As you may have already guessed, the auditor found some discrepancies in Mr. Hyatt's accounting - so, he opened an audit on Hyatt's 1991 state tax return, finding even more discrepancies related to Hyatt's recent move from California to Nevada - so, he extended the audit to include California tax returns from 1992. As a result, the Franchise Tax Board of California found that Hyatt owed the state $1.8 million unpaid taxes, $1.4 million in penalties, and $1.2 million in interest for a total of $4.5 million for 1991. But, wait, there's more. The tax board also found Hyatt owed more than $6 million in taxes and interest for 1992, not including penalties. Of course, Hyatt challenged the results of the audit - first with the Franchise Tax Board of California (without any luck) and then in California courts. In 1998, he sued the tax board for damages in Nevada state court. Last episode, I read Nevada v. Hall (1979) a case in which the Court held that sovereign states can be sued in another state's courts without the first state's consent. So, when Hyatt's case finally worked its way before the Supreme Court, the Franchise Tax Board of California asked the Court to reconsider Nevada v. Hall. In doing so, the Court determined that states are indeed immune from suit in the courts of other states, overruling the Court's forty-year-old precedent in Nevada v. Hall.   Music by Epidemic Sound

Audio of Nevada v. Hall (1979) Majority Opinion (State immunity from suit in the courts of another state) Today I'll be reading the 1979 opinion of the Court in Nevada v. Hall in which respondents, residents of California, sued the State of Nevada for injuries that they sustained on a California highway when a Nevada-owned vehicle on official business collided with a vehicle occupied by the California respondents - killing the Nevada driver. The question before the Court in this case was whether a state is constitutionally immune from suit in the courts of another state. And, in a 6-3 decision, the Court  they are not- permitting sovereign states to be haled into another state's courts without the first state's consent. Forty years later, in 2019, in a 5-4 decision split along ideological lines, the Court overturned Nevada v. Hall in a case I'll be reading next episode - Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, which held that that states are indeed immune from suit in the courts of other states. Music by Epidemic Sound

https://www.facebook.com/CrossPolitic/videos/849469106279608/ - Play 26:41-27:11 Yeah that’s me everyone… and Knox… what the heck? Why are you so surprised I can be funny? Anyways… I just had to share that from our most recent show Darren Doane on Kinism (Kincest?), Racism, Christian Nationalism… you can find that in our Fight Laugh Feast App, on Youtube, Facebook, etc. But y’all, if you really want to help us in our fight against secular media, sign up for a club membership, at fightlaughfeast.com. We couldn’t do what we do, without your support, so again, that’s fightlaughfeast.com, and sign up for a club membership today. https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-policies-to-burden-american-businesses-with-higher-taxes-this-year_5006782.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Democrat Policies to Burden American Businesses With Higher Taxes This Year Businesses in the United States are set to face a bigger federal tax burden in 2023 due to Democrat policies and the phasing out of Republican tax overhauls, combined with an expected raise in corporate minimum tax for billion-dollar companies. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several changes due to which businesses will face higher taxes. In addition, some of the temporary provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted under the Trump administration are set to get phased out in 2023. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the total effect of these two developments would result in additional tax increases of $115 billion for businesses. The new corporate minimum tax charges a 15 percent levy on American businesses that make more than $1 billion in book income in a year for three consecutive years. As a result, the average effective tax rate on corporate income is expected to rise from 18.7 percent to 19.3 percent. Around 200 of America’s biggest companies with more than $1 billion in profits are likely to be affected by the corporate minimum tax. They usually pay less than the 21 percent tax typically charged on firms. In addition, the minimum tax rule will also apply to foreign firms that generate over $100 billion in book income in the United States. Companies that meet the conditions under this new tax policy must calculate their taxes in two ways: under the 15 percent corporate minimum tax rule and the 21 percent income tax rule. They must then pay the higher tax. Businesses operating in sectors like mining and real estate are expected to be the hardest hit by this change. The stock buyback tax levies a 1 percent charge on publicly traded firms when they repurchase stocks. Some experts estimate that this tax will end up forcing businesses to maintain more cash on their company books when the money could have gone for investment. Strategists at UBS calculate the two taxes will be a drag on company earnings this year, estimating a 1.5 percent decrease per share in firms listed on the benchmark S&P 500 Index. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/01/24/josh-hawley-to-propose-legislation-banning-tiktok-nationwide/ Josh Hawley to Propose Legislation Banning TikTok Nationwide Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said on Tuesday he will introduce legislation to ban TikTok nationwide, charging that it violates the privacy of Americans. Hawley for years has moved to rein in TikTok. Sens. Hawley and Rick Scott (R-F) proposed legislation in March 2020 that would ban TikTok from all federal government devices, citing cybersecurity concerns and possible spying by the Chinese government. Congress passed Hawley’s bill to ban TikTok, which was signed into law on December 29, 2022. The bill was included in the $1.7 trillion, 4,155-page omnibus spending bill. Hawley has questioned tech executives about their companies’ potential compliance with Chinese law that could provide the Chinese Communist Party access to data that could endanger Americans’ privacy. Public officials and pundits across the political spectrum have contended that TikTok amounts to a national security concern. https://twitter.com/i/status/1191863214096703489 - Play 0:00-0:50 Since Hawley and Scott proposed their legislation to ban TikTok on federal government devices, many states, such as Georgia, Montana, Alabama, and Iowa, have moved to ban the controversial Chinese social media app off of their state government devices. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-discovered-classified-documents-indiana-home Former Vice President Mike Pence discovered classified documents in Indiana home Former Vice President Mike Pence informed Congress on Tuesday that he discovered documents bearing classified markings from his time as vice president in his Carmel, Indiana, home on Jan. 16. Following the revelations that classified documents from President Joe Biden's tenure as vice president were found at the Penn Biden Center think tank and Wilmington, Delaware, Pence's team conducted searches of Pence's Indiana home and the office of his political advocacy group, Advancing American Freedom. According to his team, Pence informed the National Archives on Jan. 18 that a small number of potential classified documents were found in two small boxes. Another two boxes contained copies of vice presidential papers. The National Archives then informed the FBI, per standard procedure. Pence attorney Greg Jacob wrote on Jan. 18 to Acting Director Kate Dillon McClure of the White House Liaison Division National Archives and Records Administration to inform her of the papers "containing classified markings." After the documents with classified markings were discovered, they were immediately put into a safe, according to the Pence team. The documents were collected by the FBI at Pence's home in Carmel, Indiana, on Thursday evening, Jan. 19. Pence was in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life when the FBI collected the documents. Pence's team said that although the documents bear classified markings, the Department of Justice or the agency that issued the documents will need to make a final determination on whether the documents are considered classified or not. According to a letter from Jacob to Chief Operating Officer William Bosanko of the National Archives and Records Administration on Jan. 22, the DOJ departed from its standard procedures that it ran with Biden when it requested direct possession of the documents on Jan. 19. Other documents that were not identified as potential classified documents were driven from Indiana to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. No classified docs were found at Pence's Advancing American Freedom office. The House Oversight Committee confirmed to Fox News Digital that Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was notified by Pence's team Tuesday regarding the discovery of classified documents in his personal residence. Dime Payments Dime Payments is a Christian owned processing payment business. Every business needs a payment process system, so please go to https://dimepayments.com/flf and sign your business up. Working with them supports us. They wont cancel you, like Stripe canceled President Trump. They wont cancel you, like Mailchimp canceled the Babylon Bee. Check them out. At least have a phone call and tell them that CrossPolitic sent you. Go to https://dimepayments.com/flf. https://www.rt.com/news/570436-uk-excess-deaths-investigation-mps/ British MPs call for probe into massive spike in deaths Nearly 3,000 more Britons are dying than average on a weekly basis, and it’s not Covid-19 that’s responsible Troubled by national statistics showing 20% excess deaths per week, UK MPs have demanded an investigation, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Unlike the last time excess deaths reached such levels, during the second Covid-19 wave, few of these deaths could be attributed to the virus. Speaking before the House of Commons on Tuesday, Conservative MP Esther McVey skewered Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty for blaming the spike in non-Covid excess deaths on “patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic,” pointing out that the monthly figures for statin prescriptions had remained constant. “Where is the evidence? And if there isn’t one, what is causing these excess deaths?” she asked, demanding the minister “commit to an urgent and thorough investigation of the matter.” Labour shadow public health minister Andrew Gwynne described health secretary Steve Barclay as “part man, part ostrich” over his refusal to confront the issue, accusing PM Rishi Sunak’s government of “denial and buck-passing.” “There were 50,000 more deaths than we would have otherwise expected in 2022,” he told the House of Commons on Tuesday. “Excluding the pandemic, that’s the worst figure since 1951.” According to the Office for National Statistics, 2,837 more people died in the second week of January than normal in England and Wales, with just 5% of those deaths being attributable to Covid-19.e The last time excess deaths were so high, during the second week of February 2021, Covid-19 deaths made up 37% of the total. Nor is the statistic an outlier – the last two weeks of December saw 21% and 20% excess deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine reported as many as 500 people a week are dying because they cannot receive emergency treatment in time. A record 54,532 people waited more than 12 hours in emergency departments to actually be admitted to the hospital once the decision was made to admit them, according to NHS data, and only 65% of patients were seen within four hours. Last month, Whitty warned that “postponement of elective and semi-elective care and screening” due to lockdowns and NHS delays would result in another wave of mortality after Covid-19 had largely subsided, with undiagnosed cancers and other chronic conditions claiming a larger than usual number of victims. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democrats-consider-wealth-tax-people-moved-out-state California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country. Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%. Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest. The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass. The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere. Exit taxes aren't new in California. But this bill also includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of a wealthy taxpayer who doesn't have the cash to pay their annual wealth tax bill because most of their assets aren't easily turned into cash. This claim would require the taxpayer to make annual filings with California's Franchise Tax Board and eventually pay the wealth taxes owed, even if they've moved to another state. California was one of several blue states last week to unveil bills to impose new wealth taxes. The other states were Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Washington. Each state's proposal contained a different tax approach, but they all centered around the same basic idea: the rich must pay more. Lee's office didn't respond to a request for comment for this story. However, he's made public statements echoing the message that wealthier residents should pay higher taxes. https://www.facebook.com/CrossPolitic/videos/849469106279608/ - Play 26:41-27:11 Yeah that’s me everyone… and Knox… what the heck? Why are you so surprised I can be funny? Anyways… I just had to share that from our most recent show Darren Doane on Kinism (Kincest?), Racism, Christian Nationalism… you can find that in our Fight Laugh Feast App, on Youtube, Facebook, etc. But y’all, if you really want to help us in our fight against secular media, sign up for a club membership, at fightlaughfeast.com. We couldn’t do what we do, without your support, so again, that’s fightlaughfeast.com, and sign up for a club membership today. https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-policies-to-burden-american-businesses-with-higher-taxes-this-year_5006782.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Democrat Policies to Burden American Businesses With Higher Taxes This Year Businesses in the United States are set to face a bigger federal tax burden in 2023 due to Democrat policies and the phasing out of Republican tax overhauls, combined with an expected raise in corporate minimum tax for billion-dollar companies. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several changes due to which businesses will face higher taxes. In addition, some of the temporary provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted under the Trump administration are set to get phased out in 2023. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the total effect of these two developments would result in additional tax increases of $115 billion for businesses. The new corporate minimum tax charges a 15 percent levy on American businesses that make more than $1 billion in book income in a year for three consecutive years. As a result, the average effective tax rate on corporate income is expected to rise from 18.7 percent to 19.3 percent. Around 200 of America’s biggest companies with more than $1 billion in profits are likely to be affected by the corporate minimum tax. They usually pay less than the 21 percent tax typically charged on firms. In addition, the minimum tax rule will also apply to foreign firms that generate over $100 billion in book income in the United States. Companies that meet the conditions under this new tax policy must calculate their taxes in two ways: under the 15 percent corporate minimum tax rule and the 21 percent income tax rule. They must then pay the higher tax. Businesses operating in sectors like mining and real estate are expected to be the hardest hit by this change. The stock buyback tax levies a 1 percent charge on publicly traded firms when they repurchase stocks. Some experts estimate that this tax will end up forcing businesses to maintain more cash on their company books when the money could have gone for investment. Strategists at UBS calculate the two taxes will be a drag on company earnings this year, estimating a 1.5 percent decrease per share in firms listed on the benchmark S&P 500 Index. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/01/24/josh-hawley-to-propose-legislation-banning-tiktok-nationwide/ Josh Hawley to Propose Legislation Banning TikTok Nationwide Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said on Tuesday he will introduce legislation to ban TikTok nationwide, charging that it violates the privacy of Americans. Hawley for years has moved to rein in TikTok. Sens. Hawley and Rick Scott (R-F) proposed legislation in March 2020 that would ban TikTok from all federal government devices, citing cybersecurity concerns and possible spying by the Chinese government. Congress passed Hawley’s bill to ban TikTok, which was signed into law on December 29, 2022. The bill was included in the $1.7 trillion, 4,155-page omnibus spending bill. Hawley has questioned tech executives about their companies’ potential compliance with Chinese law that could provide the Chinese Communist Party access to data that could endanger Americans’ privacy. Public officials and pundits across the political spectrum have contended that TikTok amounts to a national security concern. https://twitter.com/i/status/1191863214096703489 - Play 0:00-0:50 Since Hawley and Scott proposed their legislation to ban TikTok on federal government devices, many states, such as Georgia, Montana, Alabama, and Iowa, have moved to ban the controversial Chinese social media app off of their state government devices. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-discovered-classified-documents-indiana-home Former Vice President Mike Pence discovered classified documents in Indiana home Former Vice President Mike Pence informed Congress on Tuesday that he discovered documents bearing classified markings from his time as vice president in his Carmel, Indiana, home on Jan. 16. Following the revelations that classified documents from President Joe Biden's tenure as vice president were found at the Penn Biden Center think tank and Wilmington, Delaware, Pence's team conducted searches of Pence's Indiana home and the office of his political advocacy group, Advancing American Freedom. According to his team, Pence informed the National Archives on Jan. 18 that a small number of potential classified documents were found in two small boxes. Another two boxes contained copies of vice presidential papers. The National Archives then informed the FBI, per standard procedure. Pence attorney Greg Jacob wrote on Jan. 18 to Acting Director Kate Dillon McClure of the White House Liaison Division National Archives and Records Administration to inform her of the papers "containing classified markings." After the documents with classified markings were discovered, they were immediately put into a safe, according to the Pence team. The documents were collected by the FBI at Pence's home in Carmel, Indiana, on Thursday evening, Jan. 19. Pence was in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life when the FBI collected the documents. Pence's team said that although the documents bear classified markings, the Department of Justice or the agency that issued the documents will need to make a final determination on whether the documents are considered classified or not. According to a letter from Jacob to Chief Operating Officer William Bosanko of the National Archives and Records Administration on Jan. 22, the DOJ departed from its standard procedures that it ran with Biden when it requested direct possession of the documents on Jan. 19. Other documents that were not identified as potential classified documents were driven from Indiana to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. No classified docs were found at Pence's Advancing American Freedom office. The House Oversight Committee confirmed to Fox News Digital that Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was notified by Pence's team Tuesday regarding the discovery of classified documents in his personal residence. Dime Payments Dime Payments is a Christian owned processing payment business. Every business needs a payment process system, so please go to https://dimepayments.com/flf and sign your business up. Working with them supports us. They wont cancel you, like Stripe canceled President Trump. They wont cancel you, like Mailchimp canceled the Babylon Bee. Check them out. At least have a phone call and tell them that CrossPolitic sent you. Go to https://dimepayments.com/flf. https://www.rt.com/news/570436-uk-excess-deaths-investigation-mps/ British MPs call for probe into massive spike in deaths Nearly 3,000 more Britons are dying than average on a weekly basis, and it’s not Covid-19 that’s responsible Troubled by national statistics showing 20% excess deaths per week, UK MPs have demanded an investigation, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Unlike the last time excess deaths reached such levels, during the second Covid-19 wave, few of these deaths could be attributed to the virus. Speaking before the House of Commons on Tuesday, Conservative MP Esther McVey skewered Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty for blaming the spike in non-Covid excess deaths on “patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic,” pointing out that the monthly figures for statin prescriptions had remained constant. “Where is the evidence? And if there isn’t one, what is causing these excess deaths?” she asked, demanding the minister “commit to an urgent and thorough investigation of the matter.” Labour shadow public health minister Andrew Gwynne described health secretary Steve Barclay as “part man, part ostrich” over his refusal to confront the issue, accusing PM Rishi Sunak’s government of “denial and buck-passing.” “There were 50,000 more deaths than we would have otherwise expected in 2022,” he told the House of Commons on Tuesday. “Excluding the pandemic, that’s the worst figure since 1951.” According to the Office for National Statistics, 2,837 more people died in the second week of January than normal in England and Wales, with just 5% of those deaths being attributable to Covid-19.e The last time excess deaths were so high, during the second week of February 2021, Covid-19 deaths made up 37% of the total. Nor is the statistic an outlier – the last two weeks of December saw 21% and 20% excess deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine reported as many as 500 people a week are dying because they cannot receive emergency treatment in time. A record 54,532 people waited more than 12 hours in emergency departments to actually be admitted to the hospital once the decision was made to admit them, according to NHS data, and only 65% of patients were seen within four hours. Last month, Whitty warned that “postponement of elective and semi-elective care and screening” due to lockdowns and NHS delays would result in another wave of mortality after Covid-19 had largely subsided, with undiagnosed cancers and other chronic conditions claiming a larger than usual number of victims. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democrats-consider-wealth-tax-people-moved-out-state California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country. Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%. Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest. The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass. The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere. Exit taxes aren't new in California. But this bill also includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of a wealthy taxpayer who doesn't have the cash to pay their annual wealth tax bill because most of their assets aren't easily turned into cash. This claim would require the taxpayer to make annual filings with California's Franchise Tax Board and eventually pay the wealth taxes owed, even if they've moved to another state. California was one of several blue states last week to unveil bills to impose new wealth taxes. The other states were Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Washington. Each state's proposal contained a different tax approach, but they all centered around the same basic idea: the rich must pay more. Lee's office didn't respond to a request for comment for this story. However, he's made public statements echoing the message that wealthier residents should pay higher taxes. "The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long," Lee wrote in a tweet. "The ultra-rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that." According to Lee, the tax would affect 0.1% of California households and generate an additional $21.6 billion in state revenue, which would go to the state general fund. California has among the highest taxes of any state in the country. Advocates argue that the money could boost funding for schools, housing and other social programs. Perhaps more importantly, however, Lee hopes it could help address California's massive $22.5 billion budget deficit. "This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Basically, we could plug the entire hole." However, experts counter that the bill will have the exact opposite effect through high administrative costs and by causing an exodus of people to flee the state. "The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long," Lee wrote in a tweet. "The ultra-rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that." According to Lee, the tax would affect 0.1% of California households and generate an additional $21.6 billion in state revenue, which would go to the state general fund. California has among the highest taxes of any state in the country. Advocates argue that the money could boost funding for schools, housing and other social programs. Perhaps more importantly, however, Lee hopes it could help address California's massive $22.5 billion budget deficit. "This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Basically, we could plug the entire hole." However, experts counter that the bill will have the exact opposite effect through high administrative costs and by causing an exodus of people to flee the state.

https://www.facebook.com/CrossPolitic/videos/849469106279608/ - Play 26:41-27:11 Yeah that’s me everyone… and Knox… what the heck? Why are you so surprised I can be funny? Anyways… I just had to share that from our most recent show Darren Doane on Kinism (Kincest?), Racism, Christian Nationalism… you can find that in our Fight Laugh Feast App, on Youtube, Facebook, etc. But y’all, if you really want to help us in our fight against secular media, sign up for a club membership, at fightlaughfeast.com. We couldn’t do what we do, without your support, so again, that’s fightlaughfeast.com, and sign up for a club membership today. https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-policies-to-burden-american-businesses-with-higher-taxes-this-year_5006782.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Democrat Policies to Burden American Businesses With Higher Taxes This Year Businesses in the United States are set to face a bigger federal tax burden in 2023 due to Democrat policies and the phasing out of Republican tax overhauls, combined with an expected raise in corporate minimum tax for billion-dollar companies. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several changes due to which businesses will face higher taxes. In addition, some of the temporary provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted under the Trump administration are set to get phased out in 2023. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the total effect of these two developments would result in additional tax increases of $115 billion for businesses. The new corporate minimum tax charges a 15 percent levy on American businesses that make more than $1 billion in book income in a year for three consecutive years. As a result, the average effective tax rate on corporate income is expected to rise from 18.7 percent to 19.3 percent. Around 200 of America’s biggest companies with more than $1 billion in profits are likely to be affected by the corporate minimum tax. They usually pay less than the 21 percent tax typically charged on firms. In addition, the minimum tax rule will also apply to foreign firms that generate over $100 billion in book income in the United States. Companies that meet the conditions under this new tax policy must calculate their taxes in two ways: under the 15 percent corporate minimum tax rule and the 21 percent income tax rule. They must then pay the higher tax. Businesses operating in sectors like mining and real estate are expected to be the hardest hit by this change. The stock buyback tax levies a 1 percent charge on publicly traded firms when they repurchase stocks. Some experts estimate that this tax will end up forcing businesses to maintain more cash on their company books when the money could have gone for investment. Strategists at UBS calculate the two taxes will be a drag on company earnings this year, estimating a 1.5 percent decrease per share in firms listed on the benchmark S&P 500 Index. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/01/24/josh-hawley-to-propose-legislation-banning-tiktok-nationwide/ Josh Hawley to Propose Legislation Banning TikTok Nationwide Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said on Tuesday he will introduce legislation to ban TikTok nationwide, charging that it violates the privacy of Americans. Hawley for years has moved to rein in TikTok. Sens. Hawley and Rick Scott (R-F) proposed legislation in March 2020 that would ban TikTok from all federal government devices, citing cybersecurity concerns and possible spying by the Chinese government. Congress passed Hawley’s bill to ban TikTok, which was signed into law on December 29, 2022. The bill was included in the $1.7 trillion, 4,155-page omnibus spending bill. Hawley has questioned tech executives about their companies’ potential compliance with Chinese law that could provide the Chinese Communist Party access to data that could endanger Americans’ privacy. Public officials and pundits across the political spectrum have contended that TikTok amounts to a national security concern. https://twitter.com/i/status/1191863214096703489 - Play 0:00-0:50 Since Hawley and Scott proposed their legislation to ban TikTok on federal government devices, many states, such as Georgia, Montana, Alabama, and Iowa, have moved to ban the controversial Chinese social media app off of their state government devices. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-discovered-classified-documents-indiana-home Former Vice President Mike Pence discovered classified documents in Indiana home Former Vice President Mike Pence informed Congress on Tuesday that he discovered documents bearing classified markings from his time as vice president in his Carmel, Indiana, home on Jan. 16. Following the revelations that classified documents from President Joe Biden's tenure as vice president were found at the Penn Biden Center think tank and Wilmington, Delaware, Pence's team conducted searches of Pence's Indiana home and the office of his political advocacy group, Advancing American Freedom. According to his team, Pence informed the National Archives on Jan. 18 that a small number of potential classified documents were found in two small boxes. Another two boxes contained copies of vice presidential papers. The National Archives then informed the FBI, per standard procedure. Pence attorney Greg Jacob wrote on Jan. 18 to Acting Director Kate Dillon McClure of the White House Liaison Division National Archives and Records Administration to inform her of the papers "containing classified markings." After the documents with classified markings were discovered, they were immediately put into a safe, according to the Pence team. The documents were collected by the FBI at Pence's home in Carmel, Indiana, on Thursday evening, Jan. 19. Pence was in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life when the FBI collected the documents. Pence's team said that although the documents bear classified markings, the Department of Justice or the agency that issued the documents will need to make a final determination on whether the documents are considered classified or not. According to a letter from Jacob to Chief Operating Officer William Bosanko of the National Archives and Records Administration on Jan. 22, the DOJ departed from its standard procedures that it ran with Biden when it requested direct possession of the documents on Jan. 19. Other documents that were not identified as potential classified documents were driven from Indiana to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. No classified docs were found at Pence's Advancing American Freedom office. The House Oversight Committee confirmed to Fox News Digital that Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was notified by Pence's team Tuesday regarding the discovery of classified documents in his personal residence. Dime Payments Dime Payments is a Christian owned processing payment business. Every business needs a payment process system, so please go to https://dimepayments.com/flf and sign your business up. Working with them supports us. They wont cancel you, like Stripe canceled President Trump. They wont cancel you, like Mailchimp canceled the Babylon Bee. Check them out. At least have a phone call and tell them that CrossPolitic sent you. Go to https://dimepayments.com/flf. https://www.rt.com/news/570436-uk-excess-deaths-investigation-mps/ British MPs call for probe into massive spike in deaths Nearly 3,000 more Britons are dying than average on a weekly basis, and it’s not Covid-19 that’s responsible Troubled by national statistics showing 20% excess deaths per week, UK MPs have demanded an investigation, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Unlike the last time excess deaths reached such levels, during the second Covid-19 wave, few of these deaths could be attributed to the virus. Speaking before the House of Commons on Tuesday, Conservative MP Esther McVey skewered Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty for blaming the spike in non-Covid excess deaths on “patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic,” pointing out that the monthly figures for statin prescriptions had remained constant. “Where is the evidence? And if there isn’t one, what is causing these excess deaths?” she asked, demanding the minister “commit to an urgent and thorough investigation of the matter.” Labour shadow public health minister Andrew Gwynne described health secretary Steve Barclay as “part man, part ostrich” over his refusal to confront the issue, accusing PM Rishi Sunak’s government of “denial and buck-passing.” “There were 50,000 more deaths than we would have otherwise expected in 2022,” he told the House of Commons on Tuesday. “Excluding the pandemic, that’s the worst figure since 1951.” According to the Office for National Statistics, 2,837 more people died in the second week of January than normal in England and Wales, with just 5% of those deaths being attributable to Covid-19.e The last time excess deaths were so high, during the second week of February 2021, Covid-19 deaths made up 37% of the total. Nor is the statistic an outlier – the last two weeks of December saw 21% and 20% excess deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine reported as many as 500 people a week are dying because they cannot receive emergency treatment in time. A record 54,532 people waited more than 12 hours in emergency departments to actually be admitted to the hospital once the decision was made to admit them, according to NHS data, and only 65% of patients were seen within four hours. Last month, Whitty warned that “postponement of elective and semi-elective care and screening” due to lockdowns and NHS delays would result in another wave of mortality after Covid-19 had largely subsided, with undiagnosed cancers and other chronic conditions claiming a larger than usual number of victims. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democrats-consider-wealth-tax-people-moved-out-state California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country. Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%. Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest. The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass. The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere. Exit taxes aren't new in California. But this bill also includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of a wealthy taxpayer who doesn't have the cash to pay their annual wealth tax bill because most of their assets aren't easily turned into cash. This claim would require the taxpayer to make annual filings with California's Franchise Tax Board and eventually pay the wealth taxes owed, even if they've moved to another state. California was one of several blue states last week to unveil bills to impose new wealth taxes. The other states were Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Washington. Each state's proposal contained a different tax approach, but they all centered around the same basic idea: the rich must pay more. Lee's office didn't respond to a request for comment for this story. However, he's made public statements echoing the message that wealthier residents should pay higher taxes. https://www.facebook.com/CrossPolitic/videos/849469106279608/ - Play 26:41-27:11 Yeah that’s me everyone… and Knox… what the heck? Why are you so surprised I can be funny? Anyways… I just had to share that from our most recent show Darren Doane on Kinism (Kincest?), Racism, Christian Nationalism… you can find that in our Fight Laugh Feast App, on Youtube, Facebook, etc. But y’all, if you really want to help us in our fight against secular media, sign up for a club membership, at fightlaughfeast.com. We couldn’t do what we do, without your support, so again, that’s fightlaughfeast.com, and sign up for a club membership today. https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-policies-to-burden-american-businesses-with-higher-taxes-this-year_5006782.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Democrat Policies to Burden American Businesses With Higher Taxes This Year Businesses in the United States are set to face a bigger federal tax burden in 2023 due to Democrat policies and the phasing out of Republican tax overhauls, combined with an expected raise in corporate minimum tax for billion-dollar companies. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several changes due to which businesses will face higher taxes. In addition, some of the temporary provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted under the Trump administration are set to get phased out in 2023. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the total effect of these two developments would result in additional tax increases of $115 billion for businesses. The new corporate minimum tax charges a 15 percent levy on American businesses that make more than $1 billion in book income in a year for three consecutive years. As a result, the average effective tax rate on corporate income is expected to rise from 18.7 percent to 19.3 percent. Around 200 of America’s biggest companies with more than $1 billion in profits are likely to be affected by the corporate minimum tax. They usually pay less than the 21 percent tax typically charged on firms. In addition, the minimum tax rule will also apply to foreign firms that generate over $100 billion in book income in the United States. Companies that meet the conditions under this new tax policy must calculate their taxes in two ways: under the 15 percent corporate minimum tax rule and the 21 percent income tax rule. They must then pay the higher tax. Businesses operating in sectors like mining and real estate are expected to be the hardest hit by this change. The stock buyback tax levies a 1 percent charge on publicly traded firms when they repurchase stocks. Some experts estimate that this tax will end up forcing businesses to maintain more cash on their company books when the money could have gone for investment. Strategists at UBS calculate the two taxes will be a drag on company earnings this year, estimating a 1.5 percent decrease per share in firms listed on the benchmark S&P 500 Index. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/01/24/josh-hawley-to-propose-legislation-banning-tiktok-nationwide/ Josh Hawley to Propose Legislation Banning TikTok Nationwide Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said on Tuesday he will introduce legislation to ban TikTok nationwide, charging that it violates the privacy of Americans. Hawley for years has moved to rein in TikTok. Sens. Hawley and Rick Scott (R-F) proposed legislation in March 2020 that would ban TikTok from all federal government devices, citing cybersecurity concerns and possible spying by the Chinese government. Congress passed Hawley’s bill to ban TikTok, which was signed into law on December 29, 2022. The bill was included in the $1.7 trillion, 4,155-page omnibus spending bill. Hawley has questioned tech executives about their companies’ potential compliance with Chinese law that could provide the Chinese Communist Party access to data that could endanger Americans’ privacy. Public officials and pundits across the political spectrum have contended that TikTok amounts to a national security concern. https://twitter.com/i/status/1191863214096703489 - Play 0:00-0:50 Since Hawley and Scott proposed their legislation to ban TikTok on federal government devices, many states, such as Georgia, Montana, Alabama, and Iowa, have moved to ban the controversial Chinese social media app off of their state government devices. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-discovered-classified-documents-indiana-home Former Vice President Mike Pence discovered classified documents in Indiana home Former Vice President Mike Pence informed Congress on Tuesday that he discovered documents bearing classified markings from his time as vice president in his Carmel, Indiana, home on Jan. 16. Following the revelations that classified documents from President Joe Biden's tenure as vice president were found at the Penn Biden Center think tank and Wilmington, Delaware, Pence's team conducted searches of Pence's Indiana home and the office of his political advocacy group, Advancing American Freedom. According to his team, Pence informed the National Archives on Jan. 18 that a small number of potential classified documents were found in two small boxes. Another two boxes contained copies of vice presidential papers. The National Archives then informed the FBI, per standard procedure. Pence attorney Greg Jacob wrote on Jan. 18 to Acting Director Kate Dillon McClure of the White House Liaison Division National Archives and Records Administration to inform her of the papers "containing classified markings." After the documents with classified markings were discovered, they were immediately put into a safe, according to the Pence team. The documents were collected by the FBI at Pence's home in Carmel, Indiana, on Thursday evening, Jan. 19. Pence was in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life when the FBI collected the documents. Pence's team said that although the documents bear classified markings, the Department of Justice or the agency that issued the documents will need to make a final determination on whether the documents are considered classified or not. According to a letter from Jacob to Chief Operating Officer William Bosanko of the National Archives and Records Administration on Jan. 22, the DOJ departed from its standard procedures that it ran with Biden when it requested direct possession of the documents on Jan. 19. Other documents that were not identified as potential classified documents were driven from Indiana to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. No classified docs were found at Pence's Advancing American Freedom office. The House Oversight Committee confirmed to Fox News Digital that Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was notified by Pence's team Tuesday regarding the discovery of classified documents in his personal residence. Dime Payments Dime Payments is a Christian owned processing payment business. Every business needs a payment process system, so please go to https://dimepayments.com/flf and sign your business up. Working with them supports us. They wont cancel you, like Stripe canceled President Trump. They wont cancel you, like Mailchimp canceled the Babylon Bee. Check them out. At least have a phone call and tell them that CrossPolitic sent you. Go to https://dimepayments.com/flf. https://www.rt.com/news/570436-uk-excess-deaths-investigation-mps/ British MPs call for probe into massive spike in deaths Nearly 3,000 more Britons are dying than average on a weekly basis, and it’s not Covid-19 that’s responsible Troubled by national statistics showing 20% excess deaths per week, UK MPs have demanded an investigation, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Unlike the last time excess deaths reached such levels, during the second Covid-19 wave, few of these deaths could be attributed to the virus. Speaking before the House of Commons on Tuesday, Conservative MP Esther McVey skewered Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty for blaming the spike in non-Covid excess deaths on “patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic,” pointing out that the monthly figures for statin prescriptions had remained constant. “Where is the evidence? And if there isn’t one, what is causing these excess deaths?” she asked, demanding the minister “commit to an urgent and thorough investigation of the matter.” Labour shadow public health minister Andrew Gwynne described health secretary Steve Barclay as “part man, part ostrich” over his refusal to confront the issue, accusing PM Rishi Sunak’s government of “denial and buck-passing.” “There were 50,000 more deaths than we would have otherwise expected in 2022,” he told the House of Commons on Tuesday. “Excluding the pandemic, that’s the worst figure since 1951.” According to the Office for National Statistics, 2,837 more people died in the second week of January than normal in England and Wales, with just 5% of those deaths being attributable to Covid-19.e The last time excess deaths were so high, during the second week of February 2021, Covid-19 deaths made up 37% of the total. Nor is the statistic an outlier – the last two weeks of December saw 21% and 20% excess deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine reported as many as 500 people a week are dying because they cannot receive emergency treatment in time. A record 54,532 people waited more than 12 hours in emergency departments to actually be admitted to the hospital once the decision was made to admit them, according to NHS data, and only 65% of patients were seen within four hours. Last month, Whitty warned that “postponement of elective and semi-elective care and screening” due to lockdowns and NHS delays would result in another wave of mortality after Covid-19 had largely subsided, with undiagnosed cancers and other chronic conditions claiming a larger than usual number of victims. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democrats-consider-wealth-tax-people-moved-out-state California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country. Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%. Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest. The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass. The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere. Exit taxes aren't new in California. But this bill also includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of a wealthy taxpayer who doesn't have the cash to pay their annual wealth tax bill because most of their assets aren't easily turned into cash. This claim would require the taxpayer to make annual filings with California's Franchise Tax Board and eventually pay the wealth taxes owed, even if they've moved to another state. California was one of several blue states last week to unveil bills to impose new wealth taxes. The other states were Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Washington. Each state's proposal contained a different tax approach, but they all centered around the same basic idea: the rich must pay more. Lee's office didn't respond to a request for comment for this story. However, he's made public statements echoing the message that wealthier residents should pay higher taxes. "The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long," Lee wrote in a tweet. "The ultra-rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that." According to Lee, the tax would affect 0.1% of California households and generate an additional $21.6 billion in state revenue, which would go to the state general fund. California has among the highest taxes of any state in the country. Advocates argue that the money could boost funding for schools, housing and other social programs. Perhaps more importantly, however, Lee hopes it could help address California's massive $22.5 billion budget deficit. "This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Basically, we could plug the entire hole." However, experts counter that the bill will have the exact opposite effect through high administrative costs and by causing an exodus of people to flee the state. "The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long," Lee wrote in a tweet. "The ultra-rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that." According to Lee, the tax would affect 0.1% of California households and generate an additional $21.6 billion in state revenue, which would go to the state general fund. California has among the highest taxes of any state in the country. Advocates argue that the money could boost funding for schools, housing and other social programs. Perhaps more importantly, however, Lee hopes it could help address California's massive $22.5 billion budget deficit. "This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Basically, we could plug the entire hole." However, experts counter that the bill will have the exact opposite effect through high administrative costs and by causing an exodus of people to flee the state.

https://www.facebook.com/CrossPolitic/videos/849469106279608/ - Play 26:41-27:11 Yeah that’s me everyone… and Knox… what the heck? Why are you so surprised I can be funny? Anyways… I just had to share that from our most recent show Darren Doane on Kinism (Kincest?), Racism, Christian Nationalism… you can find that in our Fight Laugh Feast App, on Youtube, Facebook, etc. But y’all, if you really want to help us in our fight against secular media, sign up for a club membership, at fightlaughfeast.com. We couldn’t do what we do, without your support, so again, that’s fightlaughfeast.com, and sign up for a club membership today. https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-policies-to-burden-american-businesses-with-higher-taxes-this-year_5006782.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Democrat Policies to Burden American Businesses With Higher Taxes This Year Businesses in the United States are set to face a bigger federal tax burden in 2023 due to Democrat policies and the phasing out of Republican tax overhauls, combined with an expected raise in corporate minimum tax for billion-dollar companies. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several changes due to which businesses will face higher taxes. In addition, some of the temporary provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted under the Trump administration are set to get phased out in 2023. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the total effect of these two developments would result in additional tax increases of $115 billion for businesses. The new corporate minimum tax charges a 15 percent levy on American businesses that make more than $1 billion in book income in a year for three consecutive years. As a result, the average effective tax rate on corporate income is expected to rise from 18.7 percent to 19.3 percent. Around 200 of America’s biggest companies with more than $1 billion in profits are likely to be affected by the corporate minimum tax. They usually pay less than the 21 percent tax typically charged on firms. In addition, the minimum tax rule will also apply to foreign firms that generate over $100 billion in book income in the United States. Companies that meet the conditions under this new tax policy must calculate their taxes in two ways: under the 15 percent corporate minimum tax rule and the 21 percent income tax rule. They must then pay the higher tax. Businesses operating in sectors like mining and real estate are expected to be the hardest hit by this change. The stock buyback tax levies a 1 percent charge on publicly traded firms when they repurchase stocks. Some experts estimate that this tax will end up forcing businesses to maintain more cash on their company books when the money could have gone for investment. Strategists at UBS calculate the two taxes will be a drag on company earnings this year, estimating a 1.5 percent decrease per share in firms listed on the benchmark S&P 500 Index. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/01/24/josh-hawley-to-propose-legislation-banning-tiktok-nationwide/ Josh Hawley to Propose Legislation Banning TikTok Nationwide Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said on Tuesday he will introduce legislation to ban TikTok nationwide, charging that it violates the privacy of Americans. Hawley for years has moved to rein in TikTok. Sens. Hawley and Rick Scott (R-F) proposed legislation in March 2020 that would ban TikTok from all federal government devices, citing cybersecurity concerns and possible spying by the Chinese government. Congress passed Hawley’s bill to ban TikTok, which was signed into law on December 29, 2022. The bill was included in the $1.7 trillion, 4,155-page omnibus spending bill. Hawley has questioned tech executives about their companies’ potential compliance with Chinese law that could provide the Chinese Communist Party access to data that could endanger Americans’ privacy. Public officials and pundits across the political spectrum have contended that TikTok amounts to a national security concern. https://twitter.com/i/status/1191863214096703489 - Play 0:00-0:50 Since Hawley and Scott proposed their legislation to ban TikTok on federal government devices, many states, such as Georgia, Montana, Alabama, and Iowa, have moved to ban the controversial Chinese social media app off of their state government devices. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-discovered-classified-documents-indiana-home Former Vice President Mike Pence discovered classified documents in Indiana home Former Vice President Mike Pence informed Congress on Tuesday that he discovered documents bearing classified markings from his time as vice president in his Carmel, Indiana, home on Jan. 16. Following the revelations that classified documents from President Joe Biden's tenure as vice president were found at the Penn Biden Center think tank and Wilmington, Delaware, Pence's team conducted searches of Pence's Indiana home and the office of his political advocacy group, Advancing American Freedom. According to his team, Pence informed the National Archives on Jan. 18 that a small number of potential classified documents were found in two small boxes. Another two boxes contained copies of vice presidential papers. The National Archives then informed the FBI, per standard procedure. Pence attorney Greg Jacob wrote on Jan. 18 to Acting Director Kate Dillon McClure of the White House Liaison Division National Archives and Records Administration to inform her of the papers "containing classified markings." After the documents with classified markings were discovered, they were immediately put into a safe, according to the Pence team. The documents were collected by the FBI at Pence's home in Carmel, Indiana, on Thursday evening, Jan. 19. Pence was in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life when the FBI collected the documents. Pence's team said that although the documents bear classified markings, the Department of Justice or the agency that issued the documents will need to make a final determination on whether the documents are considered classified or not. According to a letter from Jacob to Chief Operating Officer William Bosanko of the National Archives and Records Administration on Jan. 22, the DOJ departed from its standard procedures that it ran with Biden when it requested direct possession of the documents on Jan. 19. Other documents that were not identified as potential classified documents were driven from Indiana to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. No classified docs were found at Pence's Advancing American Freedom office. The House Oversight Committee confirmed to Fox News Digital that Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was notified by Pence's team Tuesday regarding the discovery of classified documents in his personal residence. Dime Payments Dime Payments is a Christian owned processing payment business. Every business needs a payment process system, so please go to https://dimepayments.com/flf and sign your business up. Working with them supports us. They wont cancel you, like Stripe canceled President Trump. They wont cancel you, like Mailchimp canceled the Babylon Bee. Check them out. At least have a phone call and tell them that CrossPolitic sent you. Go to https://dimepayments.com/flf. https://www.rt.com/news/570436-uk-excess-deaths-investigation-mps/ British MPs call for probe into massive spike in deaths Nearly 3,000 more Britons are dying than average on a weekly basis, and it’s not Covid-19 that’s responsible Troubled by national statistics showing 20% excess deaths per week, UK MPs have demanded an investigation, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Unlike the last time excess deaths reached such levels, during the second Covid-19 wave, few of these deaths could be attributed to the virus. Speaking before the House of Commons on Tuesday, Conservative MP Esther McVey skewered Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty for blaming the spike in non-Covid excess deaths on “patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic,” pointing out that the monthly figures for statin prescriptions had remained constant. “Where is the evidence? And if there isn’t one, what is causing these excess deaths?” she asked, demanding the minister “commit to an urgent and thorough investigation of the matter.” Labour shadow public health minister Andrew Gwynne described health secretary Steve Barclay as “part man, part ostrich” over his refusal to confront the issue, accusing PM Rishi Sunak’s government of “denial and buck-passing.” “There were 50,000 more deaths than we would have otherwise expected in 2022,” he told the House of Commons on Tuesday. “Excluding the pandemic, that’s the worst figure since 1951.” According to the Office for National Statistics, 2,837 more people died in the second week of January than normal in England and Wales, with just 5% of those deaths being attributable to Covid-19.e The last time excess deaths were so high, during the second week of February 2021, Covid-19 deaths made up 37% of the total. Nor is the statistic an outlier – the last two weeks of December saw 21% and 20% excess deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine reported as many as 500 people a week are dying because they cannot receive emergency treatment in time. A record 54,532 people waited more than 12 hours in emergency departments to actually be admitted to the hospital once the decision was made to admit them, according to NHS data, and only 65% of patients were seen within four hours. Last month, Whitty warned that “postponement of elective and semi-elective care and screening” due to lockdowns and NHS delays would result in another wave of mortality after Covid-19 had largely subsided, with undiagnosed cancers and other chronic conditions claiming a larger than usual number of victims. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democrats-consider-wealth-tax-people-moved-out-state California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country. Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%. Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest. The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass. The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere. Exit taxes aren't new in California. But this bill also includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of a wealthy taxpayer who doesn't have the cash to pay their annual wealth tax bill because most of their assets aren't easily turned into cash. This claim would require the taxpayer to make annual filings with California's Franchise Tax Board and eventually pay the wealth taxes owed, even if they've moved to another state. California was one of several blue states last week to unveil bills to impose new wealth taxes. The other states were Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Washington. Each state's proposal contained a different tax approach, but they all centered around the same basic idea: the rich must pay more. Lee's office didn't respond to a request for comment for this story. However, he's made public statements echoing the message that wealthier residents should pay higher taxes. https://www.facebook.com/CrossPolitic/videos/849469106279608/ - Play 26:41-27:11 Yeah that’s me everyone… and Knox… what the heck? Why are you so surprised I can be funny? Anyways… I just had to share that from our most recent show Darren Doane on Kinism (Kincest?), Racism, Christian Nationalism… you can find that in our Fight Laugh Feast App, on Youtube, Facebook, etc. But y’all, if you really want to help us in our fight against secular media, sign up for a club membership, at fightlaughfeast.com. We couldn’t do what we do, without your support, so again, that’s fightlaughfeast.com, and sign up for a club membership today. https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-policies-to-burden-american-businesses-with-higher-taxes-this-year_5006782.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Democrat Policies to Burden American Businesses With Higher Taxes This Year Businesses in the United States are set to face a bigger federal tax burden in 2023 due to Democrat policies and the phasing out of Republican tax overhauls, combined with an expected raise in corporate minimum tax for billion-dollar companies. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several changes due to which businesses will face higher taxes. In addition, some of the temporary provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted under the Trump administration are set to get phased out in 2023. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the total effect of these two developments would result in additional tax increases of $115 billion for businesses. The new corporate minimum tax charges a 15 percent levy on American businesses that make more than $1 billion in book income in a year for three consecutive years. As a result, the average effective tax rate on corporate income is expected to rise from 18.7 percent to 19.3 percent. Around 200 of America’s biggest companies with more than $1 billion in profits are likely to be affected by the corporate minimum tax. They usually pay less than the 21 percent tax typically charged on firms. In addition, the minimum tax rule will also apply to foreign firms that generate over $100 billion in book income in the United States. Companies that meet the conditions under this new tax policy must calculate their taxes in two ways: under the 15 percent corporate minimum tax rule and the 21 percent income tax rule. They must then pay the higher tax. Businesses operating in sectors like mining and real estate are expected to be the hardest hit by this change. The stock buyback tax levies a 1 percent charge on publicly traded firms when they repurchase stocks. Some experts estimate that this tax will end up forcing businesses to maintain more cash on their company books when the money could have gone for investment. Strategists at UBS calculate the two taxes will be a drag on company earnings this year, estimating a 1.5 percent decrease per share in firms listed on the benchmark S&P 500 Index. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/01/24/josh-hawley-to-propose-legislation-banning-tiktok-nationwide/ Josh Hawley to Propose Legislation Banning TikTok Nationwide Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said on Tuesday he will introduce legislation to ban TikTok nationwide, charging that it violates the privacy of Americans. Hawley for years has moved to rein in TikTok. Sens. Hawley and Rick Scott (R-F) proposed legislation in March 2020 that would ban TikTok from all federal government devices, citing cybersecurity concerns and possible spying by the Chinese government. Congress passed Hawley’s bill to ban TikTok, which was signed into law on December 29, 2022. The bill was included in the $1.7 trillion, 4,155-page omnibus spending bill. Hawley has questioned tech executives about their companies’ potential compliance with Chinese law that could provide the Chinese Communist Party access to data that could endanger Americans’ privacy. Public officials and pundits across the political spectrum have contended that TikTok amounts to a national security concern. https://twitter.com/i/status/1191863214096703489 - Play 0:00-0:50 Since Hawley and Scott proposed their legislation to ban TikTok on federal government devices, many states, such as Georgia, Montana, Alabama, and Iowa, have moved to ban the controversial Chinese social media app off of their state government devices. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-discovered-classified-documents-indiana-home Former Vice President Mike Pence discovered classified documents in Indiana home Former Vice President Mike Pence informed Congress on Tuesday that he discovered documents bearing classified markings from his time as vice president in his Carmel, Indiana, home on Jan. 16. Following the revelations that classified documents from President Joe Biden's tenure as vice president were found at the Penn Biden Center think tank and Wilmington, Delaware, Pence's team conducted searches of Pence's Indiana home and the office of his political advocacy group, Advancing American Freedom. According to his team, Pence informed the National Archives on Jan. 18 that a small number of potential classified documents were found in two small boxes. Another two boxes contained copies of vice presidential papers. The National Archives then informed the FBI, per standard procedure. Pence attorney Greg Jacob wrote on Jan. 18 to Acting Director Kate Dillon McClure of the White House Liaison Division National Archives and Records Administration to inform her of the papers "containing classified markings." After the documents with classified markings were discovered, they were immediately put into a safe, according to the Pence team. The documents were collected by the FBI at Pence's home in Carmel, Indiana, on Thursday evening, Jan. 19. Pence was in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life when the FBI collected the documents. Pence's team said that although the documents bear classified markings, the Department of Justice or the agency that issued the documents will need to make a final determination on whether the documents are considered classified or not. According to a letter from Jacob to Chief Operating Officer William Bosanko of the National Archives and Records Administration on Jan. 22, the DOJ departed from its standard procedures that it ran with Biden when it requested direct possession of the documents on Jan. 19. Other documents that were not identified as potential classified documents were driven from Indiana to the National Archives in Washington, D.C. No classified docs were found at Pence's Advancing American Freedom office. The House Oversight Committee confirmed to Fox News Digital that Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was notified by Pence's team Tuesday regarding the discovery of classified documents in his personal residence. Dime Payments Dime Payments is a Christian owned processing payment business. Every business needs a payment process system, so please go to https://dimepayments.com/flf and sign your business up. Working with them supports us. They wont cancel you, like Stripe canceled President Trump. They wont cancel you, like Mailchimp canceled the Babylon Bee. Check them out. At least have a phone call and tell them that CrossPolitic sent you. Go to https://dimepayments.com/flf. https://www.rt.com/news/570436-uk-excess-deaths-investigation-mps/ British MPs call for probe into massive spike in deaths Nearly 3,000 more Britons are dying than average on a weekly basis, and it’s not Covid-19 that’s responsible Troubled by national statistics showing 20% excess deaths per week, UK MPs have demanded an investigation, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Unlike the last time excess deaths reached such levels, during the second Covid-19 wave, few of these deaths could be attributed to the virus. Speaking before the House of Commons on Tuesday, Conservative MP Esther McVey skewered Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty for blaming the spike in non-Covid excess deaths on “patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic,” pointing out that the monthly figures for statin prescriptions had remained constant. “Where is the evidence? And if there isn’t one, what is causing these excess deaths?” she asked, demanding the minister “commit to an urgent and thorough investigation of the matter.” Labour shadow public health minister Andrew Gwynne described health secretary Steve Barclay as “part man, part ostrich” over his refusal to confront the issue, accusing PM Rishi Sunak’s government of “denial and buck-passing.” “There were 50,000 more deaths than we would have otherwise expected in 2022,” he told the House of Commons on Tuesday. “Excluding the pandemic, that’s the worst figure since 1951.” According to the Office for National Statistics, 2,837 more people died in the second week of January than normal in England and Wales, with just 5% of those deaths being attributable to Covid-19.e The last time excess deaths were so high, during the second week of February 2021, Covid-19 deaths made up 37% of the total. Nor is the statistic an outlier – the last two weeks of December saw 21% and 20% excess deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine reported as many as 500 people a week are dying because they cannot receive emergency treatment in time. A record 54,532 people waited more than 12 hours in emergency departments to actually be admitted to the hospital once the decision was made to admit them, according to NHS data, and only 65% of patients were seen within four hours. Last month, Whitty warned that “postponement of elective and semi-elective care and screening” due to lockdowns and NHS delays would result in another wave of mortality after Covid-19 had largely subsided, with undiagnosed cancers and other chronic conditions claiming a larger than usual number of victims. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democrats-consider-wealth-tax-people-moved-out-state California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country. Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%. Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest. The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass. The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere. Exit taxes aren't new in California. But this bill also includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of a wealthy taxpayer who doesn't have the cash to pay their annual wealth tax bill because most of their assets aren't easily turned into cash. This claim would require the taxpayer to make annual filings with California's Franchise Tax Board and eventually pay the wealth taxes owed, even if they've moved to another state. California was one of several blue states last week to unveil bills to impose new wealth taxes. The other states were Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Washington. Each state's proposal contained a different tax approach, but they all centered around the same basic idea: the rich must pay more. Lee's office didn't respond to a request for comment for this story. However, he's made public statements echoing the message that wealthier residents should pay higher taxes. "The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long," Lee wrote in a tweet. "The ultra-rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that." According to Lee, the tax would affect 0.1% of California households and generate an additional $21.6 billion in state revenue, which would go to the state general fund. California has among the highest taxes of any state in the country. Advocates argue that the money could boost funding for schools, housing and other social programs. Perhaps more importantly, however, Lee hopes it could help address California's massive $22.5 billion budget deficit. "This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Basically, we could plug the entire hole." However, experts counter that the bill will have the exact opposite effect through high administrative costs and by causing an exodus of people to flee the state. "The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long," Lee wrote in a tweet. "The ultra-rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that." According to Lee, the tax would affect 0.1% of California households and generate an additional $21.6 billion in state revenue, which would go to the state general fund. California has among the highest taxes of any state in the country. Advocates argue that the money could boost funding for schools, housing and other social programs. Perhaps more importantly, however, Lee hopes it could help address California's massive $22.5 billion budget deficit. "This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Basically, we could plug the entire hole." However, experts counter that the bill will have the exact opposite effect through high administrative costs and by causing an exodus of people to flee the state.

A roommate who survived the quadruple murders at the University of Idaho told police she saw a man in black clothes and a mask walking past her in her house on the night of the killings, as she stood "frozen" and in "shock. Bryan Kohberger, 28, the sole suspect in the gruesome stabbings of the 4 students was arrested in his home state of Pennsylvania on Friday and was extradited to Idaho on Wednesday. Kohberger, who was pursuing a PhD in criminal justice at Washington State University at the time of the killings, switched his license plates 5 days after the slaying. When the 28-year-old Ph.D. student was asked why he had been in Moscow on the nigh tof the killings – he allegedly retorted, "The shopping is better in Idaho."  California's self-imposed deadline to send out the Middle-Class Tax Refund is ticking down! By the end of 2022, the Franchise Tax Board had issued 7,020,930 direct deposits and 9,112,953 debit cards. The payments, which range from $200 to $1,050, amount to nearly $8.8 billion paid out so far. The state estimates 18 million payments will be issued by Jan. 14, meaning approximately 1.9 million payments remain. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A roommate who survived the quadruple murders at the University of Idaho told police she saw a man in black clothes and a mask walking past her in her house on the night of the killings, as she stood "frozen" and in "shock. Bryan Kohberger, 28, the sole suspect in the gruesome stabbings of the 4 students was arrested in his home state of Pennsylvania on Friday and was extradited to Idaho on Wednesday. Kohberger, who was pursuing a PhD in criminal justice at Washington State University at the time of the killings, switched his license plates 5 days after the slaying. When the 28-year-old Ph.D. student was asked why he had been in Moscow on the nigh tof the killings – he allegedly retorted, "The shopping is better in Idaho."  California's self-imposed deadline to send out the Middle-Class Tax Refund is ticking down! By the end of 2022, the Franchise Tax Board had issued 7,020,930 direct deposits and 9,112,953 debit cards. The payments, which range from $200 to $1,050, amount to nearly $8.8 billion paid out so far. The state estimates 18 million payments will be issued by Jan. 14, meaning approximately 1.9 million payments remain. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Fresno County Sheriff's Deputies are asking for help in locating a missing ‘at-risk' man who's been diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease. 86-year-old Ulysses Carr was last seen around 8:00 am on November 25, 2022 near the 3500 block of West Muscat Ave. Ulysses is described as black, male, 5'6”, 160 lbs., with gray hair and brown eyes. He was last seen wearing a black hooded sweatshirt, blue jeans and gray “Croc” shoes.  About half of those who qualify for California's Middle Class Tax Refund have received their payments. The Franchise Tax Board, says at least 6,739,880 direct deposits have been issued and 2,556,729 debit cards have been sent out, according to the latest numbers available. All those payments add up to more than $5 billion paid out so far.  Nina Jankowicz filed papers indicating that she is working for a British anti-disinformation group that takes funding from the U.K. government. Jankowicz “supervises research, executes business strategy, oversees the establishment of CIR's research, communicates with the media, and briefs individuals and officials on CIR's research.”  Kym Dildine, Central California Food Bank joins the show to talk about Giving Tuesday & how you can help the Central California Food Bank. Listeners can donate at ccfoodbank.org/givingtuesday  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Fresno County Sheriff's Deputies are asking for help in locating a missing ‘at-risk' man who's been diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease. 86-year-old Ulysses Carr was last seen around 8:00 am on November 25, 2022 near the 3500 block of West Muscat Ave. Ulysses is described as black, male, 5'6”, 160 lbs., with gray hair and brown eyes. He was last seen wearing a black hooded sweatshirt, blue jeans and gray “Croc” shoes.  About half of those who qualify for California's Middle Class Tax Refund have received their payments. The Franchise Tax Board, says at least 6,739,880 direct deposits have been issued and 2,556,729 debit cards have been sent out, according to the latest numbers available. All those payments add up to more than $5 billion paid out so far.  Nina Jankowicz filed papers indicating that she is working for a British anti-disinformation group that takes funding from the U.K. government. Jankowicz “supervises research, executes business strategy, oversees the establishment of CIR's research, communicates with the media, and briefs individuals and officials on CIR's research.”  Kym Dildine, Central California Food Bank joins the show to talk about Giving Tuesday & how you can help the Central California Food Bank. Listeners can donate at ccfoodbank.org/givingtuesday  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is a state government agency that collects taxes for the state of California. FTB Orders: Everything You Need to Know. The FTB is responsible for issuing wage garnishments and bank levies. A wage garnishment is an order from the FTB that requires an employer to withhold a certain amount of money from an employee's paycheck and send it to the FTB. A bank levy is an order from the FTB that requires a financial institution to freeze a certain amount of money in a debtor's bank account and send it to the FTB. Download my free book: http://TaxDebtBook.com Visit Me: TaxDebtConsultant.com TEXT ME!! +1 (909) 909-345-9215 Office: (909)570-1103 Book an Appointment: CallTaxEA.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/carlossamaniego/message

Did you know there are actors on the screen and their are actors who are walking around this world. Think about it, these people perfect the poker face. They can actually look you in the eye and tell you they love you unconditionally and then with perfection their actions can be so completely different. Lies told as truths. I Believe Marcus Allen is a good Actor. He knows what to say and how to say it. He is charismatic and has a lovely demeanor even when challenged. I also believe his feeling do get hurt. When everything went down on tik tok about his pension for young beautiful woman the internet broke. Why do some love him and others are disgusted. Again it is my belief you have men who resonate with his attraction to women. You also have men and women triggered by his unapologetic way of getting around Morals and Norms. He dances by with his head held high and his clever charismatic way of imposing his perspective on you. Yep his way or the highway in a "In the back door" kind of way. He does it so quietly he can almost make you believe his way really is the better way. However the Onion cast did a round table and we deliberated without him present. We also took over a week off to just marinate and do our due diligence. A background check was done We didn't get much from it all of social media checked out and his affiliation with Harvard was removed from his facebook profile. I checked his linked in and he has some very prominate people recommending him, all in the government or contracted by the government. We all know politicians make the best actors. People who fallow a distinct set of rules perfectly are good CEOs. They have the right education the right credentials and know the right people. His other group of friends are corporate and if you have ever worked a corporate job and done their education. Its like retraining everything you know and we all know people don't just come to work and "Blammo" the childhood trauma doesn't exist. His Company website The MAF Group was founded in 1996 and has successfully helped businesses and individuals with overburdened Government regulations, most significantly in tax matters in front of the Board of Equalization and the Franchise Tax Board. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Find out how you could inadvertently invite the Franchise Tax Board into your finances by using a California mailing address as an expat. Here's what you need to know about the risks of using a California mailing address as an expat. Using a California mailing address when you're an expat and the Franchise Tax Board may be able to access your finances. If you're an expat living in California, you need to be aware of the dangers of using a mailing address in the state. The California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is known for aggressively pursuing out-of-state taxpayers, and they can come after you even if you don't live in the state anymore! In this podcast, I talk about why using a California mailing address as an expat is a bad idea and share some tips on how to stay compliant with the FTB. Download my free book: http://TaxDebtBook.com Visit Me: TaxDebtConsultant.com TEXT ME!! +1 (909) 909-345-9215 Office: (909)570-1103 Book an Appointment: CallTaxEA.c --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/carlossamaniego/message

Welcome to EO Radio Show – Your Nonprofit Legal Resource. This episode covers legal aspects of amending the bylaws for a nonprofit corporation to change its governance, to update the bylaws for changes in the laws, or to conform the bylaw provisions to how the board is actually governing the organization. I'll address the approvals that may be required to amend the governance provisions, how the amendments need to be reported to the IRS and state regulators, and some thoughts on recent developments for emergency governance provisions that nonprofit corporations may want to adopt. Resources: Addresses for submitting copies of amended bylaws: The current address for submitting copies of the documents to the IRS can be found at https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/contact-irs-exempt-organizations. For entities tax exempt in California: The current address for submitting copies to the FTB is: Exempt Organizations Unit, MS F120, Franchise Tax Board, P.O. Box 1286, Rancho Cordova, CA 95741, and can also be found on the FTB website at https://www.ftb.ca.gov/file/business/types/charities-nonprofits/help-with-charities-nonprofits.html. The current address for submitting to the California Registry of Charitable Trusts is: Registry of Charitable Trusts, P.O. Box 903447, Sacramento, CA, 94203–4470. Alternative addresses are available on the Registry website at https://oag.ca.gov/charities/contacts. Use IRS Form 8940 (Request for Miscellaneous Determination) to request determinations (other than initial exemption applications) about its tax-exempt status that may be affected by bylaw amendments. The one-page form is accompanied by instructions that specify what information needs to be submitted to support each of the nine types of requests that may be submitted.  Delaware Corporations Code Emergency Bylaws and Powers  California Corporations Code Emergency Bylaws and Powers Public Benefit Corporations Mutual Benefit Corporations Religious Corporations EO Radio Show Episode 1: Nonprofit Basics: Overview of Nonprofit Charitable Organization Types: Corporation, LLC, Trust, Association and Fiscal Sponsorship EO Radio Show Episode 3: Nonprofit Basics: Director Duties and Best Practices for the Typical Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation If you have suggestions for topics you would like us to discuss, please email us at eoradioshow@fbm.com.  Additional episodes can be found at EORadioShowByFarella.com.  DISCLAIMER: This podcast is for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to be, nor should it be interpreted as, legal advice or opinion.

In the second episode of a two-part series, Meredith Smith and Stacey Roberts, from TaxOps' SALTovation Team, continue their conversation with Michael Cataldo, of Cataldo Tax Law in California. Michael continues to share his insight on the publications released by the Franchise Tax Board, that discuss sales of services and market-based sourcing in California. He also talks about some of his favorite cases outside the state.   Topics discussed in this episode: Recent ruling regarding California's sales of services and market-based sourcing California's most recent ruling on sales of service   What You Will Learn: [00:28] California's policy on alternative proportment [01:51] Sales of services in California [09:51] Michael's favorite cases outside of California [15:05] Retroactive tax laws [19:05] What creates nexus [21:06] Regulations on market-based sourcing   Quotables:   “It's very hard to articulate exactly what was going on, what they're doing. You have to do a lot of reading between the lines, see what they're trying to do.” - Michael Cataldo [02:21] “The things I get interested in is where's this going from here? And it takes a long time for things to develop in the state and local tax world to where this is going.” - Michael Cataldo [11:29] “Technology is moving so fast and what's not going online. There's going to be some challenges for them to figure out how to comply.” - Michael Cataldo [14:27] “But the constitution applies to all the states, so these constitutional arguments apply to all of them.” - Michael Cataldo [20:11]   Relevant Links: Cataldo Tax Law: cataldotaxlaw.com Michael Cataldo on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/michael-cataldo-aaa9205/

CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Wednesday July 6h, 2022 FLF Conference Plug: Folks, our upcoming Fight Laugh Feast Conference is just 4-months away from happening in Knoxville TN, October 6-8! Don't miss beer & psalms, our amazing lineup of speakers which includes George Gilder, Jared Longshore, Pastor Wilson, Dr. Ben Merkle, Pastor Toby, and we can’t say yet…also dont miss our awesome vendors, meeting new friends, and stuff for the kids too…like jumpy castles and accidental infant baptisms! Also, did you know, you can save money, by signing up for a Club Membership. So, go to FightLaughFeast.com and sign up for a club membership and then register for the conference with that club discount. We can’t wait to fellowship, sing Psalms, and celebrate God’s goodness in Knoxville October 6-8. . 476K Migrant Got-Aways Recorded in 2022 So Far https://www.breitbart.com/border/2022/07/05/exclusive-476k-migrant-got-aways-recorded-in-2022-so-far/ According to Breitbart: “More than 476,000 migrants eluded apprehension by the Border Patrol this fiscal year, according to a source within Customs and Border Protection. The total already eclipses the 389,000 got-aways from FY2021. The source says the number, recorded daily, is based on evidence collected by a range of technology systems and aerial drones that capture images. The metric is usually not released by CBP. Historically, the Border Patrol has relied upon traditional sign-cutting techniques to locate and count footprints and other physical evidence left behind at popular migrant crossings. The latter metric has been all but removed from the equation because manpower is redirected to daily migrant care. The average migrant got-away count, recorded since the fiscal year began in October, remains at roughly 1,700 per day. According to the source, more than 7,000 migrants are arrested by the agency on most days. In some areas, large migrant groups are taxing Border Patrol resources and contributing to the increase in got-aways. As reported by Breitbart Texas, in one Texas border town, 1,772 migrants were apprehended in one day. In April, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified to members of the House Judiciary Committee that there were more than 389,000 got-aways in FY 2021. At the current pace, the total projected number of got-aways will nearly double last year’s count, according to the source. The source says the situation along the southern border will likely worsen. After a recent Supreme Court ruling, DHS will soon end the Trump era Migrant Protection Protocol program also known as Remain in Mexico. DHS Secretary Mayorkas expressed his approval over the ruling that allows the agency to stop returning migrants to Mexico to await asylum processing.” 23 Million California Residents to Receive up to $1,050 in Inflation Relief Funds https://finance.yahoo.com/news/23-million-california-residents-receive-155218841.html According to Yahoo: “On June 30, California approved an inflation relief package — one which will see 23 million residents of the state receive a direct payment of up to $1,050. The $17 billion inflation relief package includes $9.5 billion for tax refunds to help address inflation and offset rising prices. Governor Gavin newsom and Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said in a joint statement” “California’s budget addresses the state’s most pressing needs, and prioritizes getting dollars back into the pockets of millions of Californians who are grappling with global inflation and rising prices of everything from gas to groceries,” “The centerpiece of the agreement, a $17 billion inflation relief package, will offer tax refunds to millions of working Californians. Twenty-three million Californians will benefit from direct payments of up to $1,050. The package will also include a suspension of the state sales tax on diesel, and additional funds to help people pay their rent and utility bills,” they added. The amount of the California inflation relief payments varies depending on the income and dependents in the household, and eligibility is divided into three categories. Payments are expected to be going out to individuals by the end of Oct. 2022 and conclude by the middle of Jan. 2023, according to California’s Franchise Tax Board. Couples filing jointly with an income of $150,000 or less can receive $1,050 with a dependent, and $700 without a dependent. Couples with an income of $150,001 to $250,000 will receive $750 with a dependent and $500 without a dependent. Couples filing jointly with an income of $250,001 to $500,000 are slated to receive $600 with a dependent and $400 without one. For heads of households making $150,000 or less, they qualify for $700 with a dependent and $350 without. Those with an income of $150,001 to $250,000 qualify for $500 with a dependent and $250 without. As for those with an income of $250,001 to $500,000, they qualify for $400 with a dependent, and $200 without.” CPI projections, which are low, project that the average household will experience an increase in about $5K of inflated expenses as a result of inflation…but I think it will be more like $15 to $20K. New York Effectively Nullifies The Supreme Court’s Latest Pro-Second Amendment Decision https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/05/new-york-effectively-nullifies-the-supreme-courts-latest-pro-second-amendment-decision/ According to the Federalist: “New York Gov. Kathy Hochul ushered in the long Independence Day weekend by signing legislation crafted in response to Supreme Court’s recent decision. he U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the Second Amendment guarantees law-abiding citizens the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, both in their homes and in public. On Friday, New York responded that it didn’t care. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul ushered in the long Independence Day weekend on Friday by signing into law legislation crafted in response to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. Just more than a week earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court in Bruen had declared that New York’s prior “may issue” gun licensing scheme, which prohibited individuals from carrying concealed handguns unless they “demonstrate[d] a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community,” violated the Second Amendment. In reaching that conclusion, the high court stressed that the right to “bear arms,” by necessity, applies outside the home. The New York legislature responded by calling an extraordinary session and then passing the bill Hochul signed into law on Friday. That hastily passed statute established detailed regulations governing a citizen’s right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon and added restrictive limits to where such concealed weapons could be carried. Both aspects of the New York legislation run headlong into the Supreme Court’s analysis in Bruen—and potentially First Amendment jurisprudence. … The larger constitutional problem with New York’s revised conceal-carry law concerns the state’s attempt to, in essence, declare most public spaces “sensitive locations” in which guns cannot be carried even by permitted individuals. Specifically, the statute makes it a felony to carry firearms “in or upon a sensitive location,” then provides an exhaustive list of sensitive locations which, because of its constitutional significance, is excerpted in full below: (a) any place owned or under the control of federal, state or local government, for the purpose of government administration, including courts; (b) any location providing health, behavioral health, or chemical dependance care or services; (c) any place of worship or religious observation; (d) libraries, public playgrounds, public parks, and zoos; (e) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, funded, or approved by the office of children and family services that provides services to children, youth, or young adults, any legally exempt childcare provider; a childcare program for which a permit to operate such program has been issued by the department of health and mental hygiene pursuant to the health code of the city of New York; (f) nursery schools, preschools, and summer camps; (g) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by the office for people with developmental disabilities; (h) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by office of addiction services and supports; (i) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by the office of mental health; (j) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by the office of temporary and disability assistance; (k) homeless shelters, runaway homeless youth shelters, family shelters, shelters for adults, domestic violence shelters, and emergency shelters, and residential programs for victims of domestic violence; (l) residential settings licensed, certified, regulated, funded, or operated by the department of health; (m) in or upon any building or grounds, owned or leased, of any educational institutions, colleges and universities, licensed private career schools, school districts, public schools, private schools licensed under article one hundred one of the education law, charter schools, non-public schools, board of cooperative educational services, special act schools, preschool special education programs, private residential or non-residential schools for the education of students with disabilities, and any state-operated or state-supported schools; (n) any place, conveyance, or vehicle used for public transportation or public transit, subway cars, train cars, buses, ferries, railroad, omnibus, marine or aviation transportation; or any facility used for or in connection with service in the transportation of passengers, airports, train stations, subway and rail stations, and bus terminals; (o) any establishment issued a license for on-premise consumption pursuant to article four, four-A, five, or six of the alcoholic beverage control law where alcohol is consumed and any establishment licensed under article four of the cannabis law for on-premise consumption; (p) any place used for the performance, art entertainment, gaming, or sporting events such as theaters, stadiums, racetracks, museums, amusement parks, performance venues, concerts, exhibits, conference centers, banquet halls, and gaming facilities and video lottery terminal facilities as licensed by the gaming commission; (q) any location being used as a polling place; (r) any public sidewalk or other public area restricted from general public access for a limited time or special event that has been issued a permit for such time or event by a governmental entity, or subject to specific, heightened law enforcement protection, or has otherwise had such access restricted by a governmental entity, provided such location is identified as such by clear and conspicuous signage; (s) any gathering of individuals to collectively express their constitutional rights to protest or assemble; (t) the area commonly known as Times Square, as such area is determined and identified by the city of New York; provided such area shall be clearly and conspicuously identified with signage. Merely skimming these provisions confirms the breadth of the new law, which leaves New York residents with few public places where they may legally carry a gun for self-defense. That bottom line strikes to the core of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bruen that the Second Amendment guarantees a right for law-abiding, responsible citizens to carry a firearm in public for purposes of self-defense. New York’s expansive list of supposedly “sensitive locations” likewise ignores the Supreme Court’s analysis in Bruen.” Armored Republic The Mission of Armored Republic is to Honor Christ by equipping Free Men with Tools of Liberty necessary to preserve God-given rights. In the Armored Republic there is no King but Christ. We are Free Craftsmen. Body Armor is a Tool of Liberty. We create Tools of Liberty. Free men must remain ever vigilant against tyranny wherever it appears. God has given us the tools of liberty needed to defend the rights He bestowed to us. Armored Republic is honored to offer you those Tools. Visit them, at ar500armor.com After SCOTUS win on EPA case, Patrick Morrisey takes aim at SEC https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/satafter-scotus-win-epa-case-wv-ag-patrick-morrisey-takes-aim-sec According to Just the News “After the Supreme Court handed him a win on Thursday limiting the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency, West Virginia Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey next takes aim at the Biden administration's effort to use its powers to regulate capital markets through the Securities and Exchange Commission to push its environmental agenda. The Supreme Court on Thursday curtailed the EPA's ability to restrict power plant emissions under the Clean Air Act. Morrisey, who brought the suit on behalf of his coal-dependent state, celebrated the ruling on the John Solomon Reports podcast. The legal implications of the decision far transcend environmental policy alone, according to the attorney general. "We wanted to say this is really about maintaining the separation of powers, not climate change, because it was about who gets to make the major decisions of the day, not necessarily what those decisions are, but who gets to make it," said Morrisey. "And the reason that's so important, is because when you have something so fundamental, a vast economic and political significance, you want the people's representatives to make a decision, and to have clear statements, clear lines of delegation to the federal agencies," he added. "And that did not happen here. That's why the court said that it was not going to allow the Clean Power Plan or similar type of regulation to go forward." Morrisey expressed optimism that the ruling would effectively limit overreach by federal regulators and arm states with a legal basis to challenge similar initiatives in the future. "I think it helps really solidify this major questions doctrine, so that you're gonna be able to limit when the bureaucrats can reach down, seize power, and try to take some one strand of ambiguity and turn it into a major rulemaking with incredible burdens on the American people," he said. "And so I am really gratified that the court resolves it on those grounds, as opposed to just merely some technical grounds." Rush toward green energy has left US 'incredibly' vulnerable to summer blackouts, expert warns https://www.foxnews.com/us/rush-green-energy-has-left-us-incredibly-vulnerable-summer-blackouts-expert-warns Did you know renewable energy is putting the country at risk of power outages this summer? The government’s push to renewable energy and away from traditional energy sources is silly. Daniel Turner, founder and executive director at Power the Future told Fox News that he “think(s) the entire country is incredibly vulnerable, because the entire country is facing a huge energy shortage and I don’t think there is any place that is truly safe,", told Fox News. Turner went on to argue that outages will most likely affect the poor and minority neighborhoods. "They will choose what neighborhoods go into darkness," Turner said. "Historically, when we have done this, we have chosen poor and usually minority neighborhoods to do that." Previously planned power outages in states such as California have a history of disproportionately impacting poor neighborhoods, including one instance in 2019 where a poor, mostly Hispanic neighborhood in Sonoma County had its power cut for eight days in October. The deliberate outages not only plunged residents of the area into darkness for days, but the resulting food spoilage strained already tight budgets. "Even if the electricity doesn’t arrive… the bills do," one resident said at the time. "Look who they shut off. Have you ever seen a Kardashian complain about lack of power, or Silicon Valley… Facebook’s headquarters? They’re all fine… they’re never the ones plunged into darkness," Turner said. Washington Post says you need to “calm down and back off” regarding inflation: https://video.foxnews.com/v/6308394937112 Play clip: start to .54 mark This is the Waterboy with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief. We appreciate your sharing this news brief with your friends, joining our club, and we hope to see you at our Fight Laugh Feast conference Oct. 6th-8th in Knoxville. You can take all these steps at www.FightLaughFeast.com.

CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Wednesday July 6h, 2022 FLF Conference Plug: Folks, our upcoming Fight Laugh Feast Conference is just 4-months away from happening in Knoxville TN, October 6-8! Don't miss beer & psalms, our amazing lineup of speakers which includes George Gilder, Jared Longshore, Pastor Wilson, Dr. Ben Merkle, Pastor Toby, and we can’t say yet…also dont miss our awesome vendors, meeting new friends, and stuff for the kids too…like jumpy castles and accidental infant baptisms! Also, did you know, you can save money, by signing up for a Club Membership. So, go to FightLaughFeast.com and sign up for a club membership and then register for the conference with that club discount. We can’t wait to fellowship, sing Psalms, and celebrate God’s goodness in Knoxville October 6-8. . 476K Migrant Got-Aways Recorded in 2022 So Far https://www.breitbart.com/border/2022/07/05/exclusive-476k-migrant-got-aways-recorded-in-2022-so-far/ According to Breitbart: “More than 476,000 migrants eluded apprehension by the Border Patrol this fiscal year, according to a source within Customs and Border Protection. The total already eclipses the 389,000 got-aways from FY2021. The source says the number, recorded daily, is based on evidence collected by a range of technology systems and aerial drones that capture images. The metric is usually not released by CBP. Historically, the Border Patrol has relied upon traditional sign-cutting techniques to locate and count footprints and other physical evidence left behind at popular migrant crossings. The latter metric has been all but removed from the equation because manpower is redirected to daily migrant care. The average migrant got-away count, recorded since the fiscal year began in October, remains at roughly 1,700 per day. According to the source, more than 7,000 migrants are arrested by the agency on most days. In some areas, large migrant groups are taxing Border Patrol resources and contributing to the increase in got-aways. As reported by Breitbart Texas, in one Texas border town, 1,772 migrants were apprehended in one day. In April, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified to members of the House Judiciary Committee that there were more than 389,000 got-aways in FY 2021. At the current pace, the total projected number of got-aways will nearly double last year’s count, according to the source. The source says the situation along the southern border will likely worsen. After a recent Supreme Court ruling, DHS will soon end the Trump era Migrant Protection Protocol program also known as Remain in Mexico. DHS Secretary Mayorkas expressed his approval over the ruling that allows the agency to stop returning migrants to Mexico to await asylum processing.” 23 Million California Residents to Receive up to $1,050 in Inflation Relief Funds https://finance.yahoo.com/news/23-million-california-residents-receive-155218841.html According to Yahoo: “On June 30, California approved an inflation relief package — one which will see 23 million residents of the state receive a direct payment of up to $1,050. The $17 billion inflation relief package includes $9.5 billion for tax refunds to help address inflation and offset rising prices. Governor Gavin newsom and Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said in a joint statement” “California’s budget addresses the state’s most pressing needs, and prioritizes getting dollars back into the pockets of millions of Californians who are grappling with global inflation and rising prices of everything from gas to groceries,” “The centerpiece of the agreement, a $17 billion inflation relief package, will offer tax refunds to millions of working Californians. Twenty-three million Californians will benefit from direct payments of up to $1,050. The package will also include a suspension of the state sales tax on diesel, and additional funds to help people pay their rent and utility bills,” they added. The amount of the California inflation relief payments varies depending on the income and dependents in the household, and eligibility is divided into three categories. Payments are expected to be going out to individuals by the end of Oct. 2022 and conclude by the middle of Jan. 2023, according to California’s Franchise Tax Board. Couples filing jointly with an income of $150,000 or less can receive $1,050 with a dependent, and $700 without a dependent. Couples with an income of $150,001 to $250,000 will receive $750 with a dependent and $500 without a dependent. Couples filing jointly with an income of $250,001 to $500,000 are slated to receive $600 with a dependent and $400 without one. For heads of households making $150,000 or less, they qualify for $700 with a dependent and $350 without. Those with an income of $150,001 to $250,000 qualify for $500 with a dependent and $250 without. As for those with an income of $250,001 to $500,000, they qualify for $400 with a dependent, and $200 without.” CPI projections, which are low, project that the average household will experience an increase in about $5K of inflated expenses as a result of inflation…but I think it will be more like $15 to $20K. New York Effectively Nullifies The Supreme Court’s Latest Pro-Second Amendment Decision https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/05/new-york-effectively-nullifies-the-supreme-courts-latest-pro-second-amendment-decision/ According to the Federalist: “New York Gov. Kathy Hochul ushered in the long Independence Day weekend by signing legislation crafted in response to Supreme Court’s recent decision. he U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the Second Amendment guarantees law-abiding citizens the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, both in their homes and in public. On Friday, New York responded that it didn’t care. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul ushered in the long Independence Day weekend on Friday by signing into law legislation crafted in response to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. Just more than a week earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court in Bruen had declared that New York’s prior “may issue” gun licensing scheme, which prohibited individuals from carrying concealed handguns unless they “demonstrate[d] a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community,” violated the Second Amendment. In reaching that conclusion, the high court stressed that the right to “bear arms,” by necessity, applies outside the home. The New York legislature responded by calling an extraordinary session and then passing the bill Hochul signed into law on Friday. That hastily passed statute established detailed regulations governing a citizen’s right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon and added restrictive limits to where such concealed weapons could be carried. Both aspects of the New York legislation run headlong into the Supreme Court’s analysis in Bruen—and potentially First Amendment jurisprudence. … The larger constitutional problem with New York’s revised conceal-carry law concerns the state’s attempt to, in essence, declare most public spaces “sensitive locations” in which guns cannot be carried even by permitted individuals. Specifically, the statute makes it a felony to carry firearms “in or upon a sensitive location,” then provides an exhaustive list of sensitive locations which, because of its constitutional significance, is excerpted in full below: (a) any place owned or under the control of federal, state or local government, for the purpose of government administration, including courts; (b) any location providing health, behavioral health, or chemical dependance care or services; (c) any place of worship or religious observation; (d) libraries, public playgrounds, public parks, and zoos; (e) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, funded, or approved by the office of children and family services that provides services to children, youth, or young adults, any legally exempt childcare provider; a childcare program for which a permit to operate such program has been issued by the department of health and mental hygiene pursuant to the health code of the city of New York; (f) nursery schools, preschools, and summer camps; (g) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by the office for people with developmental disabilities; (h) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by office of addiction services and supports; (i) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by the office of mental health; (j) the location of any program licensed, regulated, certified, operated, or funded by the office of temporary and disability assistance; (k) homeless shelters, runaway homeless youth shelters, family shelters, shelters for adults, domestic violence shelters, and emergency shelters, and residential programs for victims of domestic violence; (l) residential settings licensed, certified, regulated, funded, or operated by the department of health; (m) in or upon any building or grounds, owned or leased, of any educational institutions, colleges and universities, licensed private career schools, school districts, public schools, private schools licensed under article one hundred one of the education law, charter schools, non-public schools, board of cooperative educational services, special act schools, preschool special education programs, private residential or non-residential schools for the education of students with disabilities, and any state-operated or state-supported schools; (n) any place, conveyance, or vehicle used for public transportation or public transit, subway cars, train cars, buses, ferries, railroad, omnibus, marine or aviation transportation; or any facility used for or in connection with service in the transportation of passengers, airports, train stations, subway and rail stations, and bus terminals; (o) any establishment issued a license for on-premise consumption pursuant to article four, four-A, five, or six of the alcoholic beverage control law where alcohol is consumed and any establishment licensed under article four of the cannabis law for on-premise consumption; (p) any place used for the performance, art entertainment, gaming, or sporting events such as theaters, stadiums, racetracks, museums, amusement parks, performance venues, concerts, exhibits, conference centers, banquet halls, and gaming facilities and video lottery terminal facilities as licensed by the gaming commission; (q) any location being used as a polling place; (r) any public sidewalk or other public area restricted from general public access for a limited time or special event that has been issued a permit for such time or event by a governmental entity, or subject to specific, heightened law enforcement protection, or has otherwise had such access restricted by a governmental entity, provided such location is identified as such by clear and conspicuous signage; (s) any gathering of individuals to collectively express their constitutional rights to protest or assemble; (t) the area commonly known as Times Square, as such area is determined and identified by the city of New York; provided such area shall be clearly and conspicuously identified with signage. Merely skimming these provisions confirms the breadth of the new law, which leaves New York residents with few public places where they may legally carry a gun for self-defense. That bottom line strikes to the core of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bruen that the Second Amendment guarantees a right for law-abiding, responsible citizens to carry a firearm in public for purposes of self-defense. New York’s expansive list of supposedly “sensitive locations” likewise ignores the Supreme Court’s analysis in Bruen.” Armored Republic The Mission of Armored Republic is to Honor Christ by equipping Free Men with Tools of Liberty necessary to preserve God-given rights. In the Armored Republic there is no King but Christ. We are Free Craftsmen. Body Armor is a Tool of Liberty. We create Tools of Liberty. Free men must remain ever vigilant against tyranny wherever it appears. God has given us the tools of liberty needed to defend the rights He bestowed to us. Armored Republic is honored to offer you those Tools. Visit them, at ar500armor.com After SCOTUS win on EPA case, Patrick Morrisey takes aim at SEC https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/satafter-scotus-win-epa-case-wv-ag-patrick-morrisey-takes-aim-sec According to Just the News “After the Supreme Court handed him a win on Thursday limiting the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency, West Virginia Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey next takes aim at the Biden administration's effort to use its powers to regulate capital markets through the Securities and Exchange Commission to push its environmental agenda. The Supreme Court on Thursday curtailed the EPA's ability to restrict power plant emissions under the Clean Air Act. Morrisey, who brought the suit on behalf of his coal-dependent state, celebrated the ruling on the John Solomon Reports podcast. The legal implications of the decision far transcend environmental policy alone, according to the attorney general. "We wanted to say this is really about maintaining the separation of powers, not climate change, because it was about who gets to make the major decisions of the day, not necessarily what those decisions are, but who gets to make it," said Morrisey. "And the reason that's so important, is because when you have something so fundamental, a vast economic and political significance, you want the people's representatives to make a decision, and to have clear statements, clear lines of delegation to the federal agencies," he added. "And that did not happen here. That's why the court said that it was not going to allow the Clean Power Plan or similar type of regulation to go forward." Morrisey expressed optimism that the ruling would effectively limit overreach by federal regulators and arm states with a legal basis to challenge similar initiatives in the future. "I think it helps really solidify this major questions doctrine, so that you're gonna be able to limit when the bureaucrats can reach down, seize power, and try to take some one strand of ambiguity and turn it into a major rulemaking with incredible burdens on the American people," he said. "And so I am really gratified that the court resolves it on those grounds, as opposed to just merely some technical grounds." Rush toward green energy has left US 'incredibly' vulnerable to summer blackouts, expert warns https://www.foxnews.com/us/rush-green-energy-has-left-us-incredibly-vulnerable-summer-blackouts-expert-warns Did you know renewable energy is putting the country at risk of power outages this summer? The government’s push to renewable energy and away from traditional energy sources is silly. Daniel Turner, founder and executive director at Power the Future told Fox News that he “think(s) the entire country is incredibly vulnerable, because the entire country is facing a huge energy shortage and I don’t think there is any place that is truly safe,", told Fox News. Turner went on to argue that outages will most likely affect the poor and minority neighborhoods. "They will choose what neighborhoods go into darkness," Turner said. "Historically, when we have done this, we have chosen poor and usually minority neighborhoods to do that." Previously planned power outages in states such as California have a history of disproportionately impacting poor neighborhoods, including one instance in 2019 where a poor, mostly Hispanic neighborhood in Sonoma County had its power cut for eight days in October. The deliberate outages not only plunged residents of the area into darkness for days, but the resulting food spoilage strained already tight budgets. "Even if the electricity doesn’t arrive… the bills do," one resident said at the time. "Look who they shut off. Have you ever seen a Kardashian complain about lack of power, or Silicon Valley… Facebook’s headquarters? They’re all fine… they’re never the ones plunged into darkness," Turner said. Washington Post says you need to “calm down and back off” regarding inflation: https://video.foxnews.com/v/6308394937112 Play clip: start to .54 mark This is the Waterboy with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief. We appreciate your sharing this news brief with your friends, joining our club, and we hope to see you at our Fight Laugh Feast conference Oct. 6th-8th in Knoxville. You can take all these steps at www.FightLaughFeast.com.

In the first episode in a two-part series of the SALTovation podcast, Meredith Smith and Stacey Roberts, from TaxOps' SALTovation Team, speak with Michael Cataldo, of Cataldo Tax Law in California. Michael shares his insight with his experience on Franchise Tax Board, public accounting and private law on the publications released by the Franchise Tax Board. He also talks about tax issues and cases related to Public Law 86-272 and business versus non-business income.   Topics discussed in this episode: Current issues discussed by Franchise Tax Board including market-based sourcing and multi-state practice Business vs. non-business income and what qualifies as doing business in the state Public Law 86-272 and alternative proportment   What You Will Learn: [00:57] An introduction to Michael Cataldo [03:21] Current tax issues [10:20] Business vs. non-business income [17:55] What qualifies as doing business in the state [22:05] Interpreting Public Law 86-272 [29:28] The procedure for alternative proportment   Quotables:   “Over the years, there's been this sort of gradual shift where my clients used to be mainly located in California, and now more and more of them are located outside the state.” - Michael Cataldo [04:09] “It used to be a little more debatable and it's still not completely decided, but is it business or non-business income? You have to look at that question.” - Michael Cataldo [11:38] “Trying to explain that concept of business income vs. non-business income to the unknowing, it's like ‘But I'm not in the business of selling land.' But ‘Ok, fine, but did you use that land in order to create your other business income?' It's almost a given that if you call something non-business income, you will be audited. Like 100%” - Meredith Smith [14:03] “These issues come all the time and there is room to argue about it. Now California has their rule and regulation on substantial and unusual sales are thrown out of the sales factor but the income is still in there. The question is ‘Hey, is this a fair reflection of income?' Sometimes it's not.” - Michael Cataldo [17:00]   Relevant Links: Cataldo Tax Law: cataldotaxlaw.com Michael Cataldo on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/michael-cataldo-aaa9205/

The Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is a scary government agency that has been known to take people's money without warning I'm here to talk to you about a recent issue that a lot of people are having with the Franchise Tax Board. Recently, they've been taking money out of people's bank accounts without any warning or notification, and a lot of people don't know what to do about it. In this video, I'm going to show you what you can do if the Franchise Tax Board takes money from your bank account without any notice. Call us or text us now you have less than 10 days to get your money back! Get my free book at TaxDebtBook.com Visit Me: TaxDebtConsultant.com TEXT ME!! +1 (909) 345-9215 Office: (909)570-1103 https://my.community.com/carlossamaniego (click to add me to your contacts) Book an Appointment: CallTaxEA.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/carlossamaniego/message

In this episode of the SALT Shaker Podcast, Eversheds Sutherland Associates Jeremy Gove and Annie Rothschild delve into a recent decision out of the California Court of Appeal – Metropoulos Family Trust v. Franchise Tax Board. The court ruled for the Franchise Tax Board, affirming the trial court's decision that non-resident S corporation shareholders are subject to California income tax on their pro rata shares of the income from the S corporation's sale of shares in a subsidiary.  Jeremy and Annie discuss the case's background and substance, as well as what this case's holdings may mean for other California taxpayers. Jeremy's overrated/underrated question this week appeals to our fellow coffee drinkers. Is iced coffee overrated or underrated? Questions or comments? Email SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com. You can also subscribe to receive our regular updates hosted on the SALT Shaker blog.

About Selwyn Whitehead and Law Offices of Selwyn D. Whitehead: Selwyn D. Whitehead Esq. [JD, LLM Tax Law, LLM IP Law, California Bar Bankruptcy Law Certified Specialist] is a San Francisco Bay Area bankruptcy and tax attorney whose practice focuses on helping her clients manage their wealth through effective estate and tax planning and/or manage their debt through debt restructuring or bankruptcy. Selwyn also helps her clients facing foreclosure and represents clients with emotionally and financially “taxing” issues before the Franchise Tax Board, the IRS and the U.S. Tax Court. Selwyn also produces and hosts her weekly talk show, SELWYN'S LAW, which discusses the law as related to consumer and small business finance airing Saturday mornings at 10:00 AM on the Christian Radio Station KFAX, located at AM 1100, whose broadcast footprint includes the San Francisco Bay Area and nationwide on the Internet. And beginning in April 2020, Selwyn expanded the reach of SELWYN'S LAW when her show was picked up by World-Wide Christian Radio, WWCR, which rebroadcasts her shows world-wide over short-wave on Friday afternoons. Prior to going into private practice, Selwyn managed a group of attorneys and paraprofessionals in Fireman's Fund Insurance Company's Claims Department, where she was responsible for auditing the claims and case handling practices, performance, fees, and expenses of outside defence counsel. Before joining Fireman's Fund, Selwyn spent the preceding 17 years as a financial services industry consumer advocate. She held leadership positions at the Law Offices of Public Advocates and The Greenlining Coalition, focusing on banking and insurance public policy issues; was a consumer representative to the California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan, the California automobile insurer of last result; and, founded the non-profit Economic Empowerment Foundation, whose mission was to educate urban center dwellers, small business owners, and women about their rights and responsibilities as financial services industry consumers, while advocating on their behalf before regulatory and governmental bodies, including the Untied States Congress the California Legislature and the National Association of Insurance Commissions. Protect your assets with the help of the legal attorney services of Selwyn Whitehead in Oakland, California. I'm a Bay Area attorney whose practice focuses on helping my clients manage their wealth through effective estate and tax planning and/or manage their debt through debt restructuring or bankruptcy. I produce and host a radio talk show about bankruptcy, taxation, trust and estates and real estate law called "Selwyn's Law" that airs on KDIA and KDYA on Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. I can help clients facing foreclosure, vehicle repossession or the burden of taces or unsecured debts. Get the help you need when dealing with the IRS, or when you need a thoughtful estate plan. Before going into private practice, I managed a group of attorneys and paraprofessionals in Fireman's Fund Insurance Company's Claims Department, where I was responsible for auditing the claims and case handling practices, performance, fees, and expenses of outside defense counsel.

It can happen to the most honest of us. It could be fraud. It could be a financial issue. But it happened. You're facing a tax issue. Is there anywhere you can go to for help?CTEC Chair, Brandon Chanley, chats with Steve Sims - former Taxpayer Advocate for the Franchise Tax Board and nationally-recognized state tax expert. Hear stories of how he's helped taxpayers with taxing situations and who you can trust for help.

Investing in real estate is a powerful way to build long-term wealth and achieve financial freedom. But if your assets aren't sufficiently protected, you may be putting yourself at risk of losing your hard-earned income.   Clint Coons is a real estate investor, an attorney, and an asset protection expert with Anderson Business Advisors. In this episode, Clint gives a clinic on how you can set up asset protection for your real estate portfolio.   Get a free strategy session with Clint's team here: aba.link/roofstock --- Transcript   Before we jump into the episode, here's a quick disclaimer about our content. The Remote Real Estate Investor podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. The views, opinions and strategies of both the hosts and the guests are their own and should not be considered as guidance from Roofstock. Make sure to always run your own numbers, make your own independent decisions and seek investment advice from licensed professionals.   Michael: Hey everybody, Michael Albaum here. Welcome to another episode of The Remote Real Estate Investor. Today I've got with me a very special guest, Clint Coons with Andersen Business Advisors. And Clint is gonna be talking to us today about all things asset protection, and what we need to know about them as investors. So let's get into it.   Clint Coons, thank you so much for taking the time to hang out with me today. I really appreciate you coming on the show.   Clint: Mike, thanks for having me on. Looking forward to it. Yeah,   Michael: Absolutely. So for all of our listeners, if you could tell us a little bit about yourself and how you got into the world of asset protection.   Clint: Well, okay, so I'm an attorney that that that goes right. How do I how do I fall in asset protection? Well, I think a lot of it stemmed from the fact when I was growing up, my father was an avid real estate investor. And he, he wanted two kids, he got two sons, because he needed indentured servants for 27 years. And so I grew up working on my own my dad's real estate for free, he always said, hey, it's gonna be yours one day, so you better do a damn good job, or you know, I'm sending you to college, and I'm paying for it. So this is your payment. But what was interesting to me is that my my grandfather, my dad's dad, he's an attorney, and he never wants to told my dad, you should do this, this, protect your assets, reduce your taxes.   And so the few times that my father was involved in a lawsuit is more about let's just write a check to make this thing go away. And when I was in law school, start thinking about this, hey, there's got to be a better way to do it, rather than put yourself out there and, and have all your assets exposed, because there'll be some times when he would be legitimately concerned about a situation that came up maybe at an apartment building, that he thought, you know, there might be a big lawsuit coming down the road and hit him.   So that got me really started with my partner, when we started our firm, Anderson business advisors, you know, it was, I never thought I'd be where I'm at today with, you know, close to 400 employees and in multiple states. But when we started out, we saw that there was a real need for this and that people just weren't getting the right type of advice, I guess, when it came to protecting their assets. And so that's what I started doing.   Michael: No, that's awesome. And you so graciously are going to be offering everyone, all of our listeners a consult with a link in the show notes. So definitely check that out, if you are interested in scheduling a time with Clint or his staff in the show notes section of the podcast.   So curious to know, Clint, I mean, give us a high level of what asset protection is, what does that entail? Because I think it's a term that gets thrown around a lot in real estate investors love to sound fancy schmancy. So we love throwing terms around but give us a breakdown of what does it actually mean?   Cilnt: So So here's the thing I'll do, I'm gonna answer your question, but it's gonna be a little different here. You know, right now I have a portfolio that's over 250 properties spread out, cross unite, well, not all I don't have as many states as I used to. But it's in multiple asset classes, predominantly single family homes, that have multifamily commercial, also have warehouse and mobile homes. And when I started investing, I went about the approach of, you know, set up an entity, an LLC, or a corporation, that's what you're going to do to buy property and, and you're going to protect it. And I thought that was the way that it should be done.   And over the years, I started to recognize the fact that when it comes to asset protection planning, you just can't look at that by itself. And that's the mistake that I made when I first started practicing my partner and I, Toby, we came out of the gate and our firm we were doing really well and the first couple years and we could make $500,000 and, and because our firm works both on the tax and asset protection side, you know, we have CPAs tax preparers, bookkeepers and stuff, we would work to reduce our taxes down to zero, so I can make a half a million bucks and pay zero federal income tax. I thought I'm the smartest guy out there and   Michael: I have made it   Clint: Yeah, yeah. You want to be like me? Alright, let me just show you some of the things that we could do for you. And all of a sudden, at about 2004 or five I realized that all that stuff I was doing on the tax side really wasn't helped me out on the investing side. Because I wanted to be in a real estate mess or just like my father I want to go out there and buy and buy properties and I started struggling because you know when you go to an underwriter What do they ask for copies of your tax return. So I turn over my tax returns and they look at and they say hell you make no money. Yeah, it just doesn't show up there. Yeah. Thank you. You're a drug dealer, right? You're running coke to Miami.   Not the best scenario to be in. And so when it came to the asset protection side, I started realizing Alright, so you got the tech side, get this asset protection side, so, so you can put stuff in entities and you can overstretch yourself, I started realizing too, on some of the investments when I was trying to apply for an SVA loan, they would look at some of my structuring and they go, What the hell are you doing, you know, I don't see your name associated with this, and I'm trying to get a loan closed, and I can't get it closed because of some of the planning that I had done, which sounded really great at the time. And so for me, it was a matter of finally coming to this realization that for any investor, you have to look at three things, you look at asset protection, you look at tax planning, you look at business planning, and you understand that the entities and the tax planning that you do, should further you're investing and investing to me as a business.   And many of the things that I tell our we tell our clients run contrary to what a CPA is going to say, or possibly what an attorney is going to tell them because they themselves only look at that one leg. And they don't understand the wider picture of what it takes to get a deal done. Unless you have tons and gobs of cash floating around where you're going to you're not going to use leverage, you have to be sensitive to that. And, you know, even when I started, I was flipping properties in the Vegas market for a couple of years, my partner and I and we'd set up an S corp to flip them, we had separate LLC set up to minimize the risk and everything's running great, then we decided to wind this thing down. As you know, more California investors started coming in and screwing up our returns on these deals were picking up.   Michael: Yeah, we have a tendency to do that kind of across the board!   Clint: I know we would look at something and think, oh, man, that's it. That's a 60% return like not touching anything less, it's 28 to 30. Because you get a taste for that. And you don't want to deal with anything else after that point. Right. And so I started winding that business down. And because of the way I'd set it up through an S corp, you know, I thought it already solved my problems. I went away from, you know, deferring on my taxes and changing, I started showing more income and then I set up this flipping business and then that flipping business starts to become an anchor around me because every time I turn over my tax returns my 1040s. It's a what's going on with this business over here, it looks like it's about out of business. So I'm just winding it down. Well, how do we know you're just not very successful, and you have outstanding obligations and all this stuff that the bankers or underwriters like to throw out the brokers throw back on you? And it was it's been a learning experience, to say the least.   And so when I went to your question, when you talk about asset protection high level, you need to think of it at that what I described think of as a three legged stool that the entities can help you do more. And that's what they should do, you should set up structures that are going to protect you, but at the same time allow you to achieve your goals. You don't want to create a structure that's going to handcuff you. And it's going to make it hard for you to get to where you want to be because you have to deal with title companies, you're going to have to deal with underwriters at the end of the day and local attorneys or CPAs. And so you have to be able to explain it. And if you can't explain that you don't understand it, it's really not going to be beneficial for you.   And so I always approach it in that manner. Look at what you're doing, and then design the plan around the investing rather than stick the investor into one common plan, which so many people end up doing when they're working with people who don't who aren't real estate investors themselves.   Michael: Yep. I think that makes so much sense. And I love that you have kind of all three components at your company because I think so often too many of us have a great CPA that we've worked with and become investors and say, Okay, well, this is what I'm doing. Talk to a CPA, TPAs, tell them something, they go do it and then they go talk to their attorney and attorneys like yeah, I shouldn't have done that, like, Oh, crap. Well, the CPA told me and the attorney tells you one thing you go do and his CPA goes, I wish you hadn't done that. It's like, come on, can't we all talk under the same roof? So I think makes…   Clint: that I would probably step in and tell them a completely different strategy.   Michael: Yeah, there you go. So talk to us a little bit about some of the different vehicles that are involved with, we'll call it a quote unquote, asset protection, a typical asset protection scheme, somebody a lot of our listeners have a couple of single family homes, and they're looking to protect themselves, what are some of the different options or vehicles that they have likely heard about that they might want to consider utilizing?   Clint: Typically what we're going to look at, of course, as a limited liability company, LLC for for single family investors, if that's what you're doing, you know, the buy and hold type. I like to use limited liability companies and about 90% of the time, because that structure allows you to control how the income is going to hit your tax return, which is which I think is oftentimes overlooked by people, professionals who are not real estate investors. And I'll, I'll come back and circle back to explain that in a minute.   So the LLC is a hybrid entity, it gives you asset protection, something happens inside of the box, you know, I always say it's going to stay inside of the box verse and it also protects your assets from what you may do, you know, say you sign a personal guarantee on something and then you default and they sue you. Typically LLC should protect the assets from your creditors. And so when we're working with investors, we want to make sure that they're utilizing that structure in the right context. And you know where you're investing as well, because it could change if you're investing in Florida, I'm probably going to use a land trust in Florida because most people have a mortgage on their property, if they want to protect it, and they transferred into an LLC, well, then you have the doc stamps, which is going to hit you for one to $3,000, possibly on that transfer.   But if you use a Land Trust, you've got to pay any tax, and you get the same asset protection as the LLC if something were to go wrong. Whereas if you're in California, I'm probably gonna use a statutory trust out there, because in that context, you're gonna save $800 a year in a franchise tax, whereas the LLC in California, they're gonna want $800 for each LLC set up. And there's other nuances…   Michael: Per year for all you California listeners.   Clint: Per year. Yeah, maybe in Texas, it's a series LLC, or a Tennessee might be the same thing. And so what I tend to do is we want to look at where you're investing, number one, and then we'll decide whether or not it's going to be a limited liability company, or a trust for single family investments. But the mistake that I see that people make, and I used to make this mistake when I would teach, when I first started teaching asset protection workshops for real estate investors, is that I would tell people, hey, you know, if you got four properties, look at the equity value, and if it's under 250, to $300,000, put all four properties into one limited liability company.   And the reason I would tell people that is a, I looked at asset protection from an equity standpoint, you know, I got four properties, what's the most I stand to lose that if something goes wrong with one of those properties, there's toxic mole, the smoke detectors not working in the place burns down, because the meth dealer that you're renting to disable them, and then their family turns around and sue's You these are all stories that have from our clients, by the way?   Michael: Oh, yeah, I though you were grabbing these from thin air.   Clint: No, Hell no, he got a multi million dollar lawsuit for wrongful death. And I'm like, he must have been the most successful meth dealer in that county. You know, they say his life was worth that much. But you say you approach it with this, you that mindset that it's all about the equity. And when people think about setting up LLC is, you know, they're they're trying to save, they think, well, I don't want to spend the money, they don't see it as an investment. They see it as a cost. And that's really a preservation mindset, not a growth mindset when you go that way.   But then it dawned on me, when my investing took off, and I started buying more. And I started to realize, as a single family investor, it's not about the equity, I'm not buying these properties, I do a lot of investing in Winston Salem. And you know, that's not an equity play, that is just purely income. And that's why I buy residential real estate is to generate that that monthly cash flow that mailbox money that comes in.   So I started realizing Wait a minute, I'm buying for cash flow, let's say had four properties in one LLC, and one lawsuit takes out all four properties. Yeah, I lose $200,000 equity. But that doesn't hurt as bad as losing the $24,000 in income I was bringing in every year because that's what I had my wife quit her job, and now she's working full time in real estate. Or maybe we're sending her kids to college now and that $16,000 or $24,000, and we no longer have it. That's life altering for a lot of people to lose that money that you'd come to count on.   And I started thinking, Wait a minute, I'm doing this wrong, I'm doing people a disservice. And so they start telling, hey, when it comes to asset protection, put one property per LLC, that's and and that's not uniform, okay. Now at my level, I probably I typically group 10 properties for LLC. And people say, well, you're hypocrite you just told me to put one you're just trying to charge me more for make more money off me. Yeah, that's exactly that's all you know, I'm an attorney. Right? What's the difference between lawyer and liar, pronounciation.   So why? Why is that? It's because when you hit my level of investing, you have 200 properties, and you have 20 limited liability companies with 10 properties in each. And each of those LLC, let's say is thrown off 50 grand a year, I can lose a 10 pack of properties in a lawsuit and that $50,000 Yeah, it sucks to lose 50k but I've got 19 others giving me $50,000 a year. Whereas if that was all you had, and you just lost that $50,000 in income, that's life altering for me. It's not changing the wine I'm ordering at night, that's not changing where I'm vacationing, it's not changing anything about my lifestyle. And so I often tell people you know, when you get up to about 20 properties, then look at starting to group them, because I would never put myself in a situation where I have 250 limited liability companies set up to protect my assets, right? But when you're starting out, that's when you really need the protection, because that's where you're more apt to make mistakes as well.   Michael: Yeah. So I come from the insurance world, for better or for worse, I was raised in that world and used to work in commercial property insurance. So I'm curious to get your thoughts around people, because there's kind of the two camps, there's the pro LLC camp, and then there's the no LLC camp. The no LLC camp says, especially for the California investors, for 800 bucks, you can go buy a lot of umbrella insurance, a lot of excellent coverage. What are your thoughts around that for especially for folks that are just starting out?   Clint: Well, I mean, you need the insurance no matter what you do. And so you always have to get a policy. The way I look at it, when it comes to insurance planning is Do you trust your carrier is going to actually step in when you really need them? And going to pick up that claim? Or is that claim even covered, most people never read their policy, so they don't have a clue as to what's excluded.   Michael: Right. And that's a very long list, by the way   Clint: It is, and it keeps getting longer my business. But my partner here at Anderson, he used to be on the insurance side, he represented insurance companies, and he has a great little story where he talks about they always, you know, have these conventions about how they're excluding more and even charging more for less coverage,   Michael: For less coverage.   Clint: Yeah. So what I tell people is, it's the way I go about my planning for our clients is that I want to create a situation where number one, people don't even know what you because the way we structure the LLC is on the single family side, if somebody run an asset search, you're not going to be associated back to these properties, it's really difficult for them to find that you're the owner, because you can set up LLC, in a way in which your name is not tied to it on the public database. So you know, Secretary of State's website.   And so the whole reasoning behind this strategy is to get the plaintiff's counsel to take your policy limits. The Listen, that's my whole goal. I said, you know, if you're likely to be in sued those is pretty small. I've never been sued on my real estate have come close, but I've never been involved in a lawsuit. But if it did happen, I'd want it to be where, you know, they say we can't get after anything or better. They don't even know what you have. And and they'll take your policy limits and go away.   In fact, one of my clients in California, you brought up California and they have a nightclub. And two guys were injured. When they walked out of the nightclub, they got hit by a car by somebody who was in the parking lot. And so these three attorneys representing these two individuals, were suing for 15 20 million bucks. And my client that had the nightclub, which is probably the most responsible party for over serving, someone was able to walk away with policy limits. That was it. And in Why was that? Because all of his assets that are close to 15 to $20 million, were completely hidden from plaintiff's counsel, they couldn't figure this out, couldn't tie it back to them.   But then they went to the building owner, the least culpable person in this neurology was on a building's leasing it to this nightclub. And when he tried to settle, they're like, man, we did an asset search and live this, what they said is that we know what you're worth, and we know you can afford to pay. So you're gonna take we're gonna take policy plus on you. And he's looking at the other guy, which happened to be his son, he's like, this is BS, you have more than me, and you're walking away without paying anything and said, well dad, that's why you don't hold things in your own name the way you do. And so that's the way I approach planning. You know, you can't see what you can't see. And if you set it up that way, it's a great defense.   Michael: Interesting. And as someone who has set things up in a certain way, how easy is it to change once it's already in place?   Clint: Yeah. So I mean, you can do some things. But unfortunately, there's always going to be a trail there. If somebody were to dig hard enough, they're going to be able to find it out. But I often tell people I said, most attorneys in my experience that bring these types of cases are lazy. And they're just going to do a cursory analysis. And they're not going to dig deeper to see who's actually involved. So it's worth pursuing. But what's even more important to when you're setting up these structures is understanding the tax side of it that, you know, when you set up an LLC, we all know their pass through entities and a lot of people like to set up disregarded LLC, so they don't have to pay a CPA to file a tax return. And I get it. I mean, most of my LLC is are disregarded, they don't file federal tax returns.   But I like to filter that down on my 1040. By having that I call it a holding company will set up an LLC in a state like Wyoming or Delaware, and it will own all my single family residential LLCs as well point down to it. And on that one, I'm going to have it set up to be treated as a partnership. So it's going to file a 1065 and I know that's that some people say it's a cost I'm going to tell you it's an investment and when you pay a CPA to do that Because most of the loans that, you know I've dealt with, or my clients are dealing with on the single family residential side, they're underwritten by Freddie Fannie guidelines because those brokers are selling them off. And so they're going to take your 1040, they're gonna look at your, your schedule E, and they say, all right, look at all these properties, you're a new investor, you have three properties, right? And they're on your schedule E page one because either you hold them in your own name, or you hold them through a disregarded LLC, where you got the asset protection.   But when you're applying for the next loan, and they run a debt to income ratio on you, to see whether or not you qualify, you're pulling in $50,000 a year in rental income, but they're not going to give you credit for 50k, they're only going to give you credit for about $38,000. And you say, well, that's not fair. They say yeah, but we have to take 25%, throw it out the window, because Freddie Fannie will buy this stuff. If we give you full credit, we only can give you credit for 75% for vacancies.   But if you hold it the way I'm describing, you take that same amount of income, you put it on a different page of your tax return, the way it filters down, then you get 100% of that income credited towards your debt to income ratio. And it's just I mean, I find it astonishing how many people continue to make these mistakes where they start getting up against his debt limit on investment property loan limits, and he's wondering, Well, why is that, you know, I can pull out their 1040? Or are teams doing like, right here, right here, I need to change this. And it's as simple as just changing what you're doing   Michael: Very, very interesting. So at what point would you say it's appropriate for someone to sit down with someone such as yourself or at your firm? or do some real business and tax and and legal planning? Is it their first property before they got their first property? Is it after they have five? Is there are a good number?   Clint: Well, it depends on what you're doing. So if you're just strictly single family, then the next question is going to be if you have money properties at your single family investors, my next question is gonna be how you're going to fund the deal if you're going to use traditional financing. And then what I would tell you is listen, get the property First, if you're going to buy a property, maybe you think that you're going to be able to do a cash out refinance in a short period of time on it, within six months, you're going to try to angle for that, well, then I can't even touch that property, you can't do any planning with it for the first six months, but if it's not that type of play, where you're buying the property and rehabbing it and then go on to do a cash out refi on it, then then my recommendation would be after you get your first property that would be the time to explore what we're doing as far as asset protection is concerned.   Now if you're buying for cash or private money is coming into the deal to finance it for you and so you're not dealing with a broker or maybe it's a portfolio lender. I often tell individuals I always tell people that I work with or in our events, Hey, go out and find a community lender develop a relationship with a community bank that's going to be one of your best friends going forwards I mean it hasn't been for me and those deals I can't put together through other means and they have different lending standards so in that situation maybe you explore possibly taking title in the LLC itself so it never hits your name Yeah, you're gonna be on the debt but those types of lenders are they will allow you to close in an LLC. Whereas your Freddie Fannie stuff, it can't happen you're gonna have to close in your own name and then you can transfer later on into the limited liability company.   So I'd like to close in the name and the way I typically tell people to write up their agreements if you're making an offer you know, put your name and or designated entity on the offer and the reason I use that language is so that if it turns out that I'm working with a portfolio or private I can then set up an LLC and close in that LLC and the lender couldn't object to or the seller couldn't object because I had that language in there and if you ever asked by the realtor or the seller Why did you put that extra line in there? best response is my and then fill CPA or attorney you choose told me that they're not sure yet on how I'm going to take title of this property for either, choose again tax or estate planning throw it in there purposes and so they may want me to close in and one of the entities I've set up for me and then whenever you throw those names out there CPA or attorney tends to make the sellers and their agents go Okay, no problem.   Michael: Okay. Yeah, sounds good. Yeah, all right. That's great. That's good. Something I actually do on every offer I make or every purchase I make is Michael album or assignee because I need to be able to move that around.   Clint: Perfect. Yeah, that's I mean, you know, you're you're an avid investor. So you've been doing it.   Michael: Yeah. Now that's, that's a great tip. That's a great tip. Clint, I'm curious to know and hopefully you can shed some light on is something I've heard in the past is, if if I go get a really big umbrella policy, even inside of an LLC, or a big a big high liability limit on an insurance policy, I'm putting a big target on my back, because like you mentioned, a lot of these folks are not going to go much deeper in So they're gonna say look here's the policy limit we could can see this guy is worth 5 million or this gals is worth 5 million so how do you think about how much to insure something I've heard is insure up to the the property value or the equity rather in an LLC or in the property I'm curious to get your thoughts around how much insurance should you get?   Clint: Yeah, I agree with that um, I think that's a is typically a good way to approach it whatever your foreseeable risk of loss could be on that property. So typically, you're going to be looking at somewhere around 200,000 250 total for any type of bodily harm injury things like that that can come up from that but it's not to say wouldn't still have an umbrella policy if you can get it I mean, I'm sure you've had some other events where you've interviewed people who work with real estate investors and they offer those types of policies there's a number of them there's a few of them out there that I direct people to as well because it's good just to have the umbrella now if you go excess liability what a lot of people don't realize with insurance is that these things get stacked on top of one another so if any layer there gets cut out many times it throws off the rest so you could say well I have this umbrella policy or excess liability policy but if you're if it's predicated on your umbrella paying first now then if they doesn't pay then they don't pay and so that's why I'm not into the stalking the insurance get game because many times they find ways to get out of it.   Michael: That makes sense. And I'm curious if you could share with us some common mistakes that you hear people come you know that experience in their life whether they're a new client they're like Clint, I tried to do it the cheap route and do it on my own and now I need you to fix it or are you someone that was working with somebody else and you know, regale us with some with some of America's Funniest Home Videos   Clint: Well typically comes down to this is not understanding the investment that they're getting into and and what's going to happen down the road for example I was working with this was last year a guy called me yes I met him on YouTube, he calls me up and says hey, I've been trying to sell this multifamily deal that I got into I bought and I'm buyers keep falling out of under the financing contingency I've gone through two I've got my third one on right now and what's going on? I said well how's it held? You said an LLC so like let me get your LLC is a disregarded LLC said yeah, that's why I set it up on whose advice well my CPAs that I wouldn't file a tax return if I did it this way.   Well he's, right but the problem is is that when you go to sell you know the underwriter is going to look up they're gonna pull title it's gonna say LLC and the what they're asked for is tax returns. I mean, that's they assume every LLC has to file a tax return. So that's your problem. You can't verify income and expenses, you should have been set up filing a return. And so it's things like that, that that that creep up on people or let's say you you don't understand the state law with regards to holding property, I brought up Florida let's say you buy some property in Florida, you set up an LLC deed your property into the Florida LLC, got $150,000 in debt on it, the assessor sends you a bill a month and a half later saying you owe 100, or you know, 1500 bucks in doc stamps, like, well, where did this come from? Well, it's because you put in the LLC, you should have never done that.   So those are the things that come up, or Pennsylvania, for instance, you know, if you set up an LLC in Pennsylvania to transfer your property in the county is going to nick ya for at least between two to 810 $12,000 on that property transfer. So knowing what you should do to get that protection is so important. And that's where investors oftentimes make these mistakes, where they just don't do anything. And that's the worst. And I often tell people when I teach you before COVID we always teach these you know, live events, 3d asset protection events for real estate investors. And on break, you always got attendees that want to rush in and ask questions. And I can always pick that one guy that had the story and I knew the story before he even got up to the front of the room because of the look on their face. And I always start out like this, you know, I used to have and now I don't and I wish…   Michael: Back in the good old days.   Clint: Yeah, I wish and my wife told me and I didn't listen but I do now. So those are the things that you know, you cannot predict when a lawsuit is going to occur. And if you're going to start getting that start investing in real estate, you know, just understand what you're getting into and look at setting up a structure as investing back into your business and that's what you need to look at real estate investing as a as a business. And then not only do you need the right structure, you need the right tax and accounting firm to work with or CPA who's gonna keep keep good books and records for you know, profit loss balance sheet, because there's going to come a time where someone's going to ask for that information.   And if your stuff doesn't look professional Like you actually pay attention to the details, then they're going to whoever you're working with is going to make an assumption that you're too risky to do business with. And then it's going to create doubt in their mind. And those instances come about, at times when you least expect it. I mean, look what's gone on now with COVID. You go back to, to last year where they had the idol loan and the triple p loans. A lot of people we couldn't help get this money because they'd never paid attention that to their financial side, the loss and balance sheet. Yeah, I mean, they guys would write down their p&l on a napkin. I've got pictures on it. Yeah, they would. They would take a picture of it and send it in and say, Here, give this at the SPM like, a series a napkin? Yeah, buddy, you can't help you. And then they'd be mad.   Michael: At least use graph paper. Come on.   Clint: Yeah, something. And crayons. So it's interesting, but that's what I often tell people, there are certain things you need to do, and you're sticking your head in the sand, saying that it's never gonna happen to me, it is going to happen to you. But it seems like you appreciate the risk and you take reasonable steps to mitigate that risk, you're going to be in a much better situation, because no one wants to give it all away after you've spent, you know, 5 10 15 years, building this this stuff up? Yeah.   Michael: Yeah, that makes total sense. Then I've got two more questions before Yeah. And then I'm gonna let you get out of here. One is, I've actually heard of using debt as a form of asset protection in the sense that of, hey, if I, if I saddled this property with debt, I take out all of my equity possible, no one's gonna want to sue me over it, because they don't stand a whole lot the game Is that a fair way to think about it?   Clint: We'll see. Alright, so I tell people the exact same thing, we show them strategies where they can put, I'll call it Phantom debt on their own property to make it look unattractive to a creditor to want to go after and we've heard these is friendly liens. But at the end of the day, they're just smoke screens, number one. And that's to discourage that the shakedown lawsuits right where somebody is coming after you really don't have a claim, they think they're just going to put pressure on you, and you're going to capitulate and roll over and pay him, right, but on a legit judgment, now, that's not going to help you because what what attorney would do in my instance, I would just record the judgment in the county, wherever you're located. And that that's just going to sit there. And if you try to sell or refi, any property, I'm going to get paid. And so I'm going to sit back, I'm going to make 10% rate of annual interest on that debt. And what you're going to be doing is working for me, but you just don't realize it because you're not going to default on your debt, you're gonna keep paying that mortgage down. And eventually, one of these days, you're going to want to sell that property or refi, that property, and that's the day I'm going to get paid.   Or I'm going to move against the property at such time where I figured there's enough equity in there because the equity is going to continue to go up. So it's a payday. I mean, a lot of times that's what what plaintiffs will do, they're not going to move on the property directly. We're gonna sit back and wait, let that judgment, you know, grow at a 10 cap, who doesn't want a 10? cap? So so that's what it does for you.   Michael: Yeah. So not necessarily a cure all of Hey, I just laid the thing with debt, and I don't have to worry about it.   Clint: You do when you want to sell a refi? Because that's when they get paid.   Michael: That's when they get paid. Okay. That's really good to know. That's really good to know. And then my last question for you is because you mentioned California, and I'm a California guy, and I think we've got a lot of California listeners. they'd heard over a year, California Franchise Tax fee just sucks. Like there's no other way to put it. So how you mentioned that there's a way to get around it. And was that via a trust?   Clint: Yeah, actually, there's a couple of ways around it. One way is to use what's referred to as a disregarded limited partnership. And that is an entity a similar to a limited liability company. But the issue I have with with that strategy is that it's predicated upon a Franchise Tax Board ruling in 2019, that held the disregarded LP did not fall under the revenue tax code provision that assesses the $800 to disregarded LLC. They said hey, if the legislature intended to they would have put limited disregarded LPs in there, but they didn't, they just said disregarded LLC.   Well, the Franchise Tax Board moved to get the legislature to change the law, the revenue tax code, which they have not done yet to incorporate disregarded limited partnerships in that definition has been subject to the $800 franchise tax. You can use them and I have some clients that prefer to go that route because they're more familiar with the limited partnership and working with third parties, but there's always a risk California changes it and incorporates it into the revenue and tax code because of this Tax Court ruling.   Now on the other side of that is to use business trusts. And you've probably heard the term Delaware statutory trust which is a trust that it That has become synonymous with 1031 exchanges. So if you sold a piece of property and then you wanted to roll into a syndication, it wouldn't qualify into a typical syndication structure as an LLC. But if you structured as a trust, you can, the IRS has ruled that it's an acceptable interest to roll into. And so a lot of syndicators that want to bring in 1031 money started using that Delaware statutory trust framework to allow this to occur.   Well, the trust itself offers asset protection. So if you put an asset into it, and something goes wrong with that asset, the beneficiaries of the trust are completely protected from the claims of the trust creditors. Wyoming has a statute that's very similar to Delaware. And I choose to use Wyoming just because it's a little less expensive. And it's a little more flexibility built into their trust statute. So what we'll do for California investors, oftentimes this create a Wyoming statutory trust, then registered in California as a business trust, we have to make one filing in California, and then they can start holding their California real estate in these business trusts, instead of limited liability companies and the business trust is not subject to that $800 franchise fee.   And in fact, if you invest outside of California, I mean, the Franchise Tax Board has taken the position that since you live in California, any LLC you create on this planet, or some other planet is doing business in California, and out of it, yeah. So so many times, we'll just set up the trust in in every state that we can, that actually recognizes a business trust to hold real estate.   Michael: Very interesting   Clint: That's a way around it.   Michael: Very, very interesting.   Clint: I'll still have an LLC, though for you will still have your interest in that trust owned by typically a Wyoming Limited Liability Company, and you'll still have to pay $800 on that. So you can't get away from the $800 fee completely with the way we put the structures together, we'll just minimize it down to no more than $1600 a year total. So you could have 50 trust and you're not paying more than 16 $100. And banks. I mean, I just did a deal with one of my clients, we set up for Ws T's for some buildings in California, and they were able to go through the refi process with Chase Bank, I had to do some work with Chase to get them to understand it. Namely they said these don't exist. And I say well, hell you guys underwrite this loan right here. And it's in a Delaware statutory trust. So what am I missing here? Are you guys are obviously using these things? And yeah, went through. There is a little bit of a learning curve there for some some institutions, but they di work.   Michael: All right. Well, I might have to schedule a call with you here offline, because there's definitely something there. Well, Clint, this has been so great, man, thank you so much for taking the time, where can folks get a hold of you, or some of your colleagues, if they have additional questions want to reach out to you for your services?   Clint: Yeah, I'd be happy to give anybody that will would like a free strategy session, if you just go in the show notes. It's ABA.link/roofstock, you can go there and click on that link, it'll bring you to a website and just put in the information. Or if you just want to, you know, Google, my name, YouTube, I got a ton of information. I mean, we lead by educating people and we give it all away for free the education because we want you to make informed decisions when it comes to your investing.   And it's really based upon as I stated, you know, real world experience because we're doing what you're doing when it comes to investing and I'm sharing with you those strategies that I'm finding that make better helpful for me and those for our clients to help them find success and build their business.   Michael: Love it. Love it, Well Clint. Thanks again. Definitely look forward to chatting with you and do yourself a favor. Take care. All right.   Clint: Thank you, likewise.   Michael: Alrighty, everybody a big big, big thank you to Clint, that was an awesome episode. I know that I got a lot out of it. And as he was talking, I was like, Oh, I need to be doing some, some changing around here. So definitely give that one another listen to definitely check out the show notes with a link to a free console with Clint and his team. I think it's definitely something that everybody can learn and use from. If you liked the episode. As always, feel free to leave us a rating or review. We'd love to hear about new episode ideas. So leave us a comment in the comment section. Looking forward to seeing you on the next one

I didn't file my own taxes for 8 years. What motivated me to get my act together and finally file all those past year returns? Well, a wage garnishment from the Franchise Tax Board was a motivating factor, for sure. But I had got married and didn't want to be "living a lie" with his wife, Liz. When you have tax problems, there can be or will be a lot of marital problems that come along with one spouse not filing taxes. Lot of concealing. Lot of lying. Fear. Panic. Judgement. Et cetera! Listen to my wife explain what she was thinking during this time in our life! If you have not gotten my book, "How To Make the IRS an Offer They Can't Refuse." It's Free for a limited time: TaxDebtBook.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/carlossamaniego/message

For the listeners who know Bob and his involvement in the National Association of Real Estate Property Managers, NARPM, you will remember that he is currently the President of the California Chapter.  Last week was the CALNARPM annual conference and it was quite an event!  For those who were not able to attend, Bob is dedicating this week's FMF to a quick overview of the conference and provides his top takeaways.  Maybe this will convince you, even if you are not in the state of California, that it is a must attend next Spring, when the conference will next be held, hopefully in person as a live event in either Palm Springs or Napa Valley.1) Great education opportunities – The conference had nineteen speakers on various topics related to being a landlord or property manager in the state of California. 2) Accessibility and low cost of attendance - This year the conference was conducted virtually, first time ever, due to the pandemic.  Because of the virtual platform, the costs were a lot lower which allowed  the cost of registration and attendance to be  way less than in previous years. 3) Legal updates -One thing that is always challenging in California is keeping up with new landlord and tenant laws and legislative action … ESPECIALLY during the current time of Covid 19, tenant protections, and eviction moratoriums. 4) Expert panel sharing – In addition to the great speakers, an expert panel talked about the juicy information that they learned, key nuggets and their top takeaways. This was in a sort of pro sports half-time show format and was super fun to be a part of and watch as the property management analysts deciphered the content from the workshops.5) JP Pawlin-Fry - A big highlight of the conference was hearing our key note speaker, J. P. Pawliw-Fry. He is a psychologist and international performance coach to Olympic athletes and coaches, senior business leaders at Fortune 500 companies, and the CIA. Quite inspiring.6) State of California representation from CAR, the DRE Auditor and FTB - This year we heard from the Chief Economist of the California Association of Realtors with insights on what to expect in 2021 in our real estate market. We also heard from the California Department of Real Estate how you should prepare in the event of an audit.  Finally, we heard about all of the obligations property managers face as a tax withholding agent from the Franchise Tax Board.All in all a great event!  If you missed it, all the more reason to attend next year!Learn more about the California State Chapter of NARPMCALNARPMConnect with BobNorth County Property GroupThis episode is always available for listening, sharing, or download at Property Management Brainstorm. Subscribe to Property Management Brainstorm on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Spotify, TunedIn, iHeart Radio and

 CALIFORNIA DREAMING OR LEAVING? The pandemic has shaken California like an earthquake. - California's economy is the fifth largest in the world with a $3.2 GDP - Between 2008 and 2019, 18000 companies have left California. - There has been an increase in population but not in jobs. - California has lost more people to other States than the ones that have gained. - When you lose companies like Oracle, it changes a lot of things in the State, like the total amount of dollars that are collected by the State, budget allocated to education, infrastructure, and others. - Hewlett-Packard was born in California and in December 2020 announced that they were moving their headquarters to Houston, Texas. Oracle announced the same month that they were relocating their headquarters to Austin. Tesla is building its next gigafactory in Austin. Others like Toyota, Jamba Juice, Nestle, and others have done the same. Taking thousands of jobs with them. Small and medium-sized companies are leaving too to states like Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington. California is known for its high taxes State business tax climate index - California ranks 50 California Individual income tax rate is 13.3% Washington, Nevada, Alaska, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, Tennessee, Florida, and New Hampshire are States with no income tax on wages. Texas has high property taxes but when you run everything that you have to pay in texas vs what you have to pay in California, Texas is a better option. Lots of regulations High housing costs High cost of living Public services are not where they should be 47% of unsheltered homeless Americans live in California The pandemic is motivating more people to leave California now that they have the option to work remotely for their companies. Companies like Facebook and Twitter have announced that their workers can work remotely forever. The majority of people leaving California reported an annual income of less than 100,000. The situation in California can get very bad without essential workers leaving the state. Super-earners pay 40% of the State's tax revenues, according to California's Franchise Tax Board. Many California residents are hopeful that State Legislators will take a different direction after the pandemic is over. Many will realize that it is not worth it to risk California's economic future. It's not worth it to drive away creative, innovative, and hard-working people. History shows that California has always been able to come through challenging times. It's a resilient State. For those of us that are still here, let's keep moving forward and doing our best to keep contributing to the growth and development of the world's fifth largest economy. We don't ask for handouts Sacramento, just for more business friendly regulations that can help us thrive. If you want to leave california visit exitcalifornia.org Please let me know what you think about California? Leave a comment.

What is California doing about illegal tax preparers and tax scams? Quite a bit, actually. California is one of the few states to have set requirements for paid tax preparers. By law, anyone who prepares your tax return must be either an attorney, CPA, enrolled agent or a registered tax preparer with the California Tax Education Council (CTEC). CTEC partners with the Franchise Tax Board to go after tax preparers who are not one of those four professionals. CTEC Chair, Brandon Chanley, chats with Rebecca Landeros of the Franchise Tax Board's Tax Preparer Enforcement Team - she's the one who goes out and actually pays visits to questionable tax preparers throughout California.Hear what state is doing to stop fraud and Rebecca's advice to taxpayers.You can also find more tips on CTEC.org with links on how to find and verify a legal tax preparer.L0NuAo6nzC3qKzodP7JK

RE-RUN OF JULY 5, 2020 DEBUT EPISODE OF JEDI.TAX RADIO.

On March 14, 2020, the Federalist Society held its 39th National Student Symposium. The Symposium was originally scheduled to be held at the University of Michigan's Law School but was rescheduled as a digital conference. The fourth panel discussed "Originalism and Interstate Relations"The Constitution famously says very little about interstate relations. Writing for the Court in Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt, Justice Thomas suggested that the Constitution “reflects implicit alterations to the States’ relationships with each other, confirming that they are no longer fully independent nations.” How much of the law of interstate relations is truly settled by the Constitution? As for the rest, what kind of law governs instead? Is it federal or state, general or international, written or unwritten? And what does it provide?This panel examines what originalism has to say, if anything, about questions of “horizontal federalism”—such as personal jurisdiction, choice of law, full faith and credit, extraterritorial regulation, state borders, sovereign immunity, and other areas of interstate dispute. How did the Founders understand these questions, either before the Constitution or after? What duties do the fifty states owe one another? And what are the roles of Congress and the courts in determining the answers?Prof. William P. Baude, Professor of Law and Aaron Director Research Scholar, University of Chicago Law SchoolProf. Douglas Laycock, Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of LawProf. Stephen E. Sachs, Professor of Law, Duke University School of LawModerator: Hon. David R. Stras, United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

On March 14, 2020, the Federalist Society held its 39th National Student Symposium. The Symposium was originally scheduled to be held at the University of Michigan's Law School but was rescheduled as a digital conference. The fourth panel discussed "Originalism and Interstate Relations"The Constitution famously says very little about interstate relations. Writing for the Court in Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt, Justice Thomas suggested that the Constitution “reflects implicit alterations to the States’ relationships with each other, confirming that they are no longer fully independent nations.” How much of the law of interstate relations is truly settled by the Constitution? As for the rest, what kind of law governs instead? Is it federal or state, general or international, written or unwritten? And what does it provide?This panel examines what originalism has to say, if anything, about questions of “horizontal federalism”—such as personal jurisdiction, choice of law, full faith and credit, extraterritorial regulation, state borders, sovereign immunity, and other areas of interstate dispute. How did the Founders understand these questions, either before the Constitution or after? What duties do the fifty states owe one another? And what are the roles of Congress and the courts in determining the answers?Prof. William P. Baude, Professor of Law and Aaron Director Research Scholar, University of Chicago Law SchoolProf. Douglas Laycock, Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of LawProf. Stephen E. Sachs, Professor of Law, Duke University School of LawModerator: Hon. David R. Stras, United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

On January 25, 2020, the Federalist Society hosted its annual Western Chapters Conference at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA. The conference concluded with a panel on "The Anti-Federalists and the Court."Just this term, the Anti-Federalists played a major role in the outcome of Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt. Is that a one-off or a sign of more to come? Beyond simply citing the papers as a plea to authority, should courts confronting questions of originalism read the materials underlying Anti-Federalist thought as a way to understand the Constitution? *******As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.Panelists:Hon. Scott Keller, Partner, Baker Botts & Former Solicitor General of TexasErin Murphy, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLPIlya Shapiro, Director , Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, Cato InstituteModerator: Hon. Michael Brennan, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh CircuitIntroduction: Christopher Hage, Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency

On January 25, 2020, the Federalist Society hosted its annual Western Chapters Conference at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA. The conference concluded with a panel on "The Anti-Federalists and the Court."Just this term, the Anti-Federalists played a major role in the outcome of Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt. Is that a one-off or a sign of more to come? Beyond simply citing the papers as a plea to authority, should courts confronting questions of originalism read the materials underlying Anti-Federalist thought as a way to understand the Constitution? *******As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.Panelists:Hon. Scott Keller, Partner, Baker Botts & Former Solicitor General of TexasErin Murphy, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLPIlya Shapiro, Director , Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, Cato InstituteModerator: Hon. Michael Brennan, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh CircuitIntroduction: Christopher Hage, Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency

In this solo show, financial advisor Brian Wiley sits down to discuss his run in (of sorts) with the California Franchise Tax Board, who don't seem to value his time. Then, an enlightening discussion on asset classes and the importance of portfolio diversification, and a call from a curious listener. Brian Wiley, Financial Advisor www.treecityadvisors.com https://www.facebook.com/TheRealMoneyPros www.therealmoneypros.com www.kboi.com

The SALT Show Episode 79 (Update for Week of October 6, 2019) On this week's episode: • An overview of Texas Supreme Court oral arguments in several Texas franchise tax “cost of goods sold” cases, including Sunstate Rentals, American Multi-Cinema, and Gulf Copper • The California Office of Tax Appeals shuts down the Franchise Tax Board's 0.2% bright line test for taxing out-of-state members of LLCs doing business in California (Appeal of Jali). Links to share the podcast with colleagues: bakerbotts.com, iTunes, Stitcher, GooglePlay, Podbean, Spotify  

Ready for another fun-filled episode where Toby Mathis and Jeff Webb of Anderson Advisors talk about tax code rules to maximize your savings and keep more of what you earn. Do you have a tax question? Submit it to taxtuesday@andersonadvisors. Highlights/Topics:  Can a married couple file a joint federal return, if we live in different states? Yes; federal government requires married couples to file jointly in some way We are paying our son’s rent while he’s in dental school. Is there a deduction we can take for that expense? No, it’s considered a gift Can an individual sole proprietor sponsor a 401(k) plan? Yes, but all their income is considered wages and other potentially negative factors need to be considered I am a realtor sales associate. My company requires me to place my broker as additional insured. Can I Roth the portion on my premiums? Yes, as an additional insured I purchased an investment property in another state and formed an LLC. Can the LLC reimburse me for flights, hotels, and meals incurred prior to formation? Costs incurred when establishing your business can be captured and amortized Can a previously established LLC be reconfigured to be taxed as an S Corp? Yes, just follow same rules as making an S election I have an Inc. How many LLCs can I have under it? There's no limitation Do you give a 1099 to an individual who helped you find a deal for a referral fee? Give them a 1099, if it's more than $600 If you do a cost segregation, do you have to pay everything back, if you do a 1031 exchange in the future? No, you're just rolling forward the basis on your property right I'm licensed with Primerica. Should I create an LLC for my business? It depends on how much you're making because you're personally responsible for any liabilities incurred Can I submit mileage driven from my main work location to a branch office to my employer for reimbursement? Submitting it doesn't mean they're going to pay it Can I form an LLC to purchase a vehicle, lease it to myself, and then use an accountable plan from my C Corp to reimburse lease payments? Don't do that. For all questions/answers discussed, sign up to be a Platinum member to view the replay! Go to iTunes to leave a review of the Tax Tuesday podcast.  Resources: New Tax Laws That Give Real Estate Investors a Massive Deduction (free Webinar for Tax Tuesday listeners) Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt - SCOTUS Real Estate Professional Requirements 529 Plan Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (UGMA) Section 7702 Roth IRAs K-1 199A Deduction Bonus Depreciation MileIQ Depreciation Recapture Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) Section 179 Deduction Who Pays if You’re in an Accident in a Company Car? Schedule E 501(c)(3) Charities and Non-profit Organizations Section 121 Form 1120 Form 1065 Form 1099 Form 3115 1031 Exchange Types of Trusts Opportunity Zones FAQ Opportunity Zone Heat Map 280A Deductions Toby Mathis Anderson Advisors Anderson Advisors Tax and Asset Protection Event Tax-Wise Workshop Tax-Wise 2019 3-in-1 Offer/2-for-Tuesday Bulletproof Anderson Advisors on YouTube Anderson Advisors on Facebook Anderson Advisors Podcast

The quarterly Eversheds Sutherland SALT Scoreboard tallies significant state and local tax litigation wins and losses. In this Bottom Line videocast, Eversheds Sutherland attorneys Charles Capouet and Justin Brown discuss the results from the first two quarters of 2019, including: how taxpayers have fared in litigation in the first two quarters of 2019 compared to 2016, 2017 and 2018 three of the main cases from the second quarter of 2019: North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner, Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, and Department of Revenue v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. the recent Cook County Circuit Court decision, Mercury Sightseeing Boats, Inc. v. County of Cook, in which the court determined that the Department of Revenue violated the taxpayer’s procedural due process rights. Discover more of the latest legal news and topics discussed by our attorneys by subscribing to the Eversheds Sutherland Legal Insights Podcast Channel.

The quarterly Eversheds Sutherland SALT Scoreboard tallies significant state and local tax litigation wins and losses. In this Bottom Line videocast, Eversheds Sutherland attorneys Charles Capouet and Justin Brown discuss the results from the first two quarters of 2019, including: how taxpayers have fared in litigation in the first two quarters of 2019 compared to 2016, 2017 and 2018 three of the main cases from the second quarter of 2019: North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner, Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, and Department of Revenue v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. the recent Cook County Circuit Court decision, Mercury Sightseeing Boats, Inc. v. County of Cook, in which the court determined that the Department of Revenue violated the taxpayer’s procedural due process rights. Discover more of the latest legal news and topics discussed by our attorneys by subscribing to the Eversheds Sutherland Legal Insights Podcast Channel.

HodlCast Ep. 87 with former IRS Tax Attorney Dashiell Shapiro We discussed the letters from the IRS, the IRS’s likely strategy, similar to what was used for the Swiss Bank Accounts, to encourage people to self-report their crypto holdings and pay taxes. Check out his writing: https://stanford-jblp.pubpub.org/pub/crypto-irs-enforcement You can find Dashiell on Twitter: @DashiellShapiro You can email him at: dshapiro@sflaw.com Dashiell’s Bio: Mr. Shapiro advises individuals and business entities on a broad range of federal, state, and international tax planning and tax controversy matters. A native of the San Francisco area, he received his undergraduate degree and law degree from the University of Chicago. At the law school, he served as Comment Editor for the University of Chicago Legal Forum. Mr. Shapiro has successfully represented individuals and companies at all stages of tax controversy, from sensitive audit inquiries to administrative protests and appeals. He has significant experience litigating matters before California’s Board of Equalization and Office of Tax Appeals, the United States Tax Court, and in federal district courts in both civil and criminal tax matters. He has obtained favorable outcomes for taxpayers in a variety of settings, including no-change audit determinations, transitional relief acceptance within the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP), and 100% concessions of tax and penalties in IRS audit examinations and appeals. In 2014, he appeared before the California State Board of Equalization and obtained the Board’s full reversal of a $10 million constructive receipt determination made by the Franchise Tax Board. He appeared again before the Board of Equalization in 2017 and obtained a decision overturning California’s policy of imposing sales and use tax on destination management companies, and the full reversal of taxes, penalties, and interest. Prior to moving into private practice, Mr. Shapiro spent a total of seven years at the U.S. Department of Justice Tax Division litigating tax controversies in federal courts across the country. At the Department of Justice, he gained broad experience in all aspects of tax controversy practice in federal district and bankruptcy courts, including trial work and evidentiary hearings, depositions and written discovery, pleadings, motions practice, appeals, and settlements. He regularly handled a docket of 60 to 70 cases, and worked on a variety of matters including tax shelters, statutes of limitation, employment tax disputes, tax liens and collection cases, international tax disputes, summons enforcement in criminal matters, interpretation and defense of Treasury Regulations, and many others. For his achievements, the Department of Justice awarded Dashiell with a Special Commendation Award and an Outstanding Trial Attorney Award. Mr. Shapiro regularly publishes articles on tax litigation, the tax treatment of cryptocurrency transactions, and the taxation of financial products and investments.

On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, a case considering whether states maintain sovereign immunity from private suits in the courts of other states. In the 1990s, Gilbert Hyatt moved from California to Nevada. Following an investigation and audit, however, the Franchise Tax Board of California (FTB) claimed that he had misstated the date of his move and therefore owed California millions in unpaid taxes, penalties and interest. Hyatt then brought a tort suit against FTB, which is a California state agency, in Nevada state court--and won a jury verdict of nearly $500 million. Although the Nevada Supreme Court set aside much of the award on appeal, it nevertheless affirmed an award of $1 million for fraud--even though a Nevada statute would have capped such damages in a similar suit against Nevada officials at $50,000. Nevada’s interest in providing adequate redress to its own citizens, the court concluded, superseded the application of any statutory cap for California’s benefit.In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed that judgment, concluding that the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause required Nevada courts to grant the FTB the same level of immunity that Nevada agencies enjoy. The Court divided equally, however, on whether to overrule its 1979 precedent Nevada v. Hall, which holds that the Constitution does not bar private suits against a State in the courts of another State. By statute, the Court was therefore required to affirm the jurisdiction of the Nevada Supreme Court. On remand, that court instructed the trial court to enter damages against FTB in accord with the statutory cap for Nevada agencies. Thereafter the U.S. Supreme Court again granted certiorari to reconsider Nevada v. Hall. By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Nevada Supreme Court and remanded the case. In an opinion delivered by Justice Thomas, the Court overruled Nevada v. Hall, holding that states retain their sovereign immunity from private suits brought in courts of other states. Justice Thomas’s majority opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. To discuss the case, we have Stephen Sachs, Professor of Law at Duke University.

On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, a case considering whether states maintain sovereign immunity from private suits in the courts of other states. In the 1990s, Gilbert Hyatt moved from California to Nevada. Following an investigation and audit, however, the Franchise Tax Board of California (FTB) claimed that he had misstated the date of his move and therefore owed California millions in unpaid taxes, penalties and interest. Hyatt then brought a tort suit against FTB, which is a California state agency, in Nevada state court--and won a jury verdict of nearly $500 million. Although the Nevada Supreme Court set aside much of the award on appeal, it nevertheless affirmed an award of $1 million for fraud--even though a Nevada statute would have capped such damages in a similar suit against Nevada officials at $50,000. Nevada’s interest in providing adequate redress to its own citizens, the court concluded, superseded the application of any statutory cap for California’s benefit.In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed that judgment, concluding that the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause required Nevada courts to grant the FTB the same level of immunity that Nevada agencies enjoy. The Court divided equally, however, on whether to overrule its 1979 precedent Nevada v. Hall, which holds that the Constitution does not bar private suits against a State in the courts of another State. By statute, the Court was therefore required to affirm the jurisdiction of the Nevada Supreme Court. On remand, that court instructed the trial court to enter damages against FTB in accord with the statutory cap for Nevada agencies. Thereafter the U.S. Supreme Court again granted certiorari to reconsider Nevada v. Hall. By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Nevada Supreme Court and remanded the case. In an opinion delivered by Justice Thomas, the Court overruled Nevada v. Hall, holding that states retain their sovereign immunity from private suits brought in courts of other states. Justice Thomas’s majority opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. To discuss the case, we have Stephen Sachs, Professor of Law at Duke University.

Toby Mathis and Jeff Webb of Anderson Advisors don’t get paid to answer your questions on Tax Tuesdays. They just want to give back by making sure you don’t overpay on your taxes. Do you have a tax question? Submit it to taxtuesday@andersonadvisors. Highlights/Topics:  What’s the best way to transfer a title in real estate without increasing property taxes after joint tenant dies? This shouldn’t trigger an increase in property values; publish certified death certificate to warranty deed it into your own name My S Corp will only make about $20,000 this year. Do I still have to pay myself a salary? It depends; you didn’t make a profit, but did you make any distributions Where do I put real estate professional on my return? Real estate professional is an election you make every year; it’s not a form, it’s a statement included with your 1040 When can I legally take money from a 403(b) and transfer to a QRP? Most plans won’t let you withdraw/take money out, if you’re still employed, except in hardship cases; roll to QRP anytime plan documents allow it What is different about filing taxes for option traders as opposed to stock traders? Not much difference; short selling works differently for stocks and options Can a husband and wife filing jointly take two separate Roth IRAs and contribute to each IRA annually? You can’t share an IRA; you must have separate IRA accounts How does real estate profession benefit me? Real estate profession allows you to deduct all real estate losses against your personal taxes Can an individual place Bitcoin in a Roth IRA account? Yes, if plan documents allow it Can I pay my life insurance or family dental insurance from my LLC? Can LLC fund my HSA? LLC is not a tax treatment, so determine what it is and if it’s taxable to you I learned that a property I bought and rehabbed is in an opportunity zone. Can I retroactively qualify for tax advantages from an opportunity zone? No, the fund must be set up before the purchase Is there still a mileage deduction, if I drive my personal vehicle for my business? Yes, your personal vehicle for your business gets $0.58 a mile Is the mileage and unreimbursed employee expense no longer deductible? Correct, miscellaneous itemized deductions under the Tax Cut and Jobs Act were removed How do we navigate the standard deduction in the business sector? There’s no standard deduction on any business return For all questions/answers discussed, sign up to be a Platinum member to view the replay! Go to iTunes to leave a review of the Tax Tuesday podcast.  Resources: 403(b) Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt - SCOTUS Family Owned Non-Corporate Entity (FONCE) Roth IRAs 501(c)(3) Nonprofit/Charitable Organizations SS-4 199-A Dividends IRA Club Schedule A Schedule C Schedule D Schedule E 1031 Exchange Types of Trusts Tax Cutting Jobs Act (TCJA) Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Provision 11011 Section 199A - Qualified Business Income Deduction FAQs Opportunity Zones FAQ Opportunity Zone Heat Map Bonus Depreciation Form 1065 W-9 K-1 Garn-St. Germain Act A10 Capital CoreVest TD Ameritrade PENSCO Trust Company SALT Limit Uniform Gift to Minors Act (UGMA) Section 121 Exclusion Section 179 Deduction Toby Mathis Anderson Advisors Anderson Advisors Tax and Asset Protection Event Tax-Wise Workshop Tax-Wise 2019 3-in-1 Offer Infinity Investing Workshop (use code: FREETAX) Anderson Advisors on YouTube Anderson Advisors on Facebook Anderson Advisors Podcast

Guest host CHARLES STAR and RANDOLPH BRICKEY recap June's Supreme Court madness beginning with: A judge who loved the troops and playing games too much ... THEME ... GAMBLE v. UNITED STATES: Separate sovereign, double jeopardy and the criminal president ... Larry Krasner again ... RBG on dual-sovereignty and individuals ... Double jeopardy, Blockburger and stacking charges ... BREAK ... Plugs ... FLOWERS v. MISSISSIPPI ... A series of reversals for racism ... Alito's bafflement at the actual justice system ... Thomas: Exculpating prosecutors, "reverse racism" ... How to not NOT fake peremptories ... BREAK ... MONT v. UNITED STATES: On probation, three days from retirement ... Getting a probation violation while in jail ... Notorious RBG ... Probations, cases and multiple jurisdictions ... REHAIF v. UNITED STATES: Demonstrably bad student, obviously troubled guy and gun-possessor ... Is it "see something/say something" paranoia or actually scary? ... Knowing violations ... A shining moment for Sam Alito's issue-spotting clerk trollery ... The excesses of "possession of a firearm" ... BREAK ... GUNDY v. UNITED STATES: Pedophilia defense as administrative law crumbles ... A nine-month period of administrative phantom zone ... Alito's love-letter to a future Kavanaugh ... Gorsuch: No Gods, No Masters, Unbounded Discretion ... BREAK ... KNICK v. TOWNSHIP of SCOTT ... Force state exhaustion; state exhaustion precludes federal claims ... Takings law: You cost me billions in child poison! ... Billionaires walling off beaches ... Kagan: No one cares about stare decisis anymore ... FRANCHISE TAX BOARD of CALIFORNIA v. HYATT ... Decades of losing your own settlement, still not paying taxes ... Kagan signaling about the census and gerrymandering ... BREAK ... PDR NETWORK v. CARLTON & HARRIS CHIROPRACTIC: I'm the Fax Spam ... The GOP turning its back on Chevron ... No government left worth ruining ... VIRGINIA URANIUM v. WARREN: Downing millings, chasing tailings ... Gorsuch: World Class Alienating Pedant ... Roberts trolling RBG just to do it ... Gorsuch loses the women again ... Gerrymandering, Wisconsin and permanent anti-majoritarian legislatures ... The future is screaming ... • Intro theme courtesy of Ted Leo • All other music by Chris Collingwood of Look Park and Fountains of Wayne.

The show attempts to make assessments. To make critical analysis of what's happening in our society today from news, social issues, cultural issues politics societal issues, the goal is to open up one's mind. To give a critical analysis as to what's happening in our world today. To provide solutions and strategies. (PODCAST) 2019

The show attempts to make assessments. To make critical analysis of what's happening in our society today from news, social issues, cultural issues politics societal issues, the goal is to open up one's mind. To give a critical analysis as to what's happening in our world today. To provide solutions and strategies. (PODCAST) 2019

In Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, the Supreme Court has overturned a 40-year-old precedent in a case that changes the relationship between the states in our federalist structure of government. Indiana Solicitor General Fisher was counsel of record for an amicus brief of 44 states asking the Court to overturn Nevada v. Hall. In the Franchise Tax Board case, California believed that Gilbert Hyatt had evaded California taxes by falsely claiming to have moved to Nevada before he did. The California officials entered Nevada and Hyatt alleges that they committed fraud and other torts against him while in Nevada. He sued those California officials in Nevada’s courts and won almost a half billion dollar award (although that was later reduced to about a hundred thousand dollars). But is it proper for one state to sit in judgment on the official actions of officers of other states? Nevada v. Hall allowed this, but the Supreme Court has now decided that states are constitutionally required to give other states’ official acts sovereign immunity even when it occurs within the "host" state’s borders. Solicitor General Fisher will explain why and implications for this case to the future of the law.Featuring:Hon. Thomas Fisher, Solicitor general, IndianaMr. Devin Watkins, Competitive Enterprise Institute Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

In Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, the Supreme Court has overturned a 40-year-old precedent in a case that changes the relationship between the states in our federalist structure of government. Indiana Solicitor General Fisher was counsel of record for an amicus brief of 44 states asking the Court to overturn Nevada v. Hall. In the Franchise Tax Board case, California believed that Gilbert Hyatt had evaded California taxes by falsely claiming to have moved to Nevada before he did. The California officials entered Nevada and Hyatt alleges that they committed fraud and other torts against him while in Nevada. He sued those California officials in Nevada’s courts and won almost a half billion dollar award (although that was later reduced to about a hundred thousand dollars). But is it proper for one state to sit in judgment on the official actions of officers of other states? Nevada v. Hall allowed this, but the Supreme Court has now decided that states are constitutionally required to give other states’ official acts sovereign immunity even when it occurs within the "host" state’s borders. Solicitor General Fisher will explain why and implications for this case to the future of the law.Featuring:Hon. Thomas Fisher, Solicitor general, IndianaMr. Devin Watkins, Competitive Enterprise Institute Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

It's finally decision season, and Brett and Nazim are covering two cases with broader implications for the future.  First is Apple v. Pepper, which deals with conservative and evolutionary approaches to anti-trust common law, and the second is Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt, which deals with whether or not a controversial Constitutional interpretation should be overruled.  Law starts at (09:09).

A case in which the Court held that a state cannot be sued in the courts of another state without its consent, overruling Nevada v. Hall.

On January 9, 2019, the Supreme Court heard argument in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, a case considering whether one state may, without its consent, be sued by a private citizen in another state’s courts.In the 1990s, Gilbert Hyatt moved from California to Nevada. Following an investigation and audit, however, the Franchise Tax Board of California (FTB) claimed that he had misstated the date of his move and therefore owed California millions in unpaid taxes, penalties and interest. Hyatt then brought a tort suit against FTB, which is a California state agency, in Nevada state court--and won a jury verdict of nearly $500 million. Although the Nevada Supreme Court set aside much of the award on appeal, it nevertheless affirmed an award of $1 million for fraud--even though a Nevada statute would have capped such damages in a similar suit against Nevada officials at $50,000. Nevada’s interest in providing adequate redress to its own citizens, the court concluded, superseded the application of any statutory cap for California’s benefit.California sought review in the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to overrule the 1979 decision Nevada v. Hall, which held that one state’s courts could adjudicate a private citizen’s lawsuit against another state without the second state’s consent. The Supreme Court granted certiorari but split 4-4 on the issue, which resulted in a technical affirmance of the Nevada Supreme Court’s exercise of jurisdiction. Reaching the merits, the Court held by a vote of 6-2 that the U.S. Constitution did not permit Nevada to apply a rule of Nevada law that awarded damages against California greater than it could award against Nevada in similar circumstances.On remand, the Nevada Supreme Court reissued its vacated opinion except as to the damages portion and applied the statutory damages caps for FTB’s benefit. FTB again petitioned for certiorari, however, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to revisit the issue on which it had previously split 4-4: whether Nevada v. Hall, which permits a sovereign state to be haled into another state’s courts without its consent, should be overruled.To discuss the case, we have Stephen Sachs, Professor of Law at Duke University.

On January 9, 2019, the Supreme Court heard argument in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, a case considering whether one state may, without its consent, be sued by a private citizen in another state’s courts.In the 1990s, Gilbert Hyatt moved from California to Nevada. Following an investigation and audit, however, the Franchise Tax Board of California (FTB) claimed that he had misstated the date of his move and therefore owed California millions in unpaid taxes, penalties and interest. Hyatt then brought a tort suit against FTB, which is a California state agency, in Nevada state court--and won a jury verdict of nearly $500 million. Although the Nevada Supreme Court set aside much of the award on appeal, it nevertheless affirmed an award of $1 million for fraud--even though a Nevada statute would have capped such damages in a similar suit against Nevada officials at $50,000. Nevada’s interest in providing adequate redress to its own citizens, the court concluded, superseded the application of any statutory cap for California’s benefit.California sought review in the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to overrule the 1979 decision Nevada v. Hall, which held that one state’s courts could adjudicate a private citizen’s lawsuit against another state without the second state’s consent. The Supreme Court granted certiorari but split 4-4 on the issue, which resulted in a technical affirmance of the Nevada Supreme Court’s exercise of jurisdiction. Reaching the merits, the Court held by a vote of 6-2 that the U.S. Constitution did not permit Nevada to apply a rule of Nevada law that awarded damages against California greater than it could award against Nevada in similar circumstances.On remand, the Nevada Supreme Court reissued its vacated opinion except as to the damages portion and applied the statutory damages caps for FTB’s benefit. FTB again petitioned for certiorari, however, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to revisit the issue on which it had previously split 4-4: whether Nevada v. Hall, which permits a sovereign state to be haled into another state’s courts without its consent, should be overruled.To discuss the case, we have Stephen Sachs, Professor of Law at Duke University.

http://TaxDebtConsultant.com - Carlos Samaniego discuses what to do if you owe the Franchise Tax Board Money? Do not ignore letters. If you have state tax problems, Call me direct at 909.570.1103 . You host is Carlos Samaniego, Enrolled Agent licensed by the Department of Treasury and licensed health insurance agent. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/carlossamaniego/message

After Gilbert Hyatt, the petitioner, moved to Nevada he was investigated by the Franchise Tax Board of California for failing to pay California personal income taxes. Due to California’s actions in doing so, Hyatt sued California in Nevada’s courts for negligent misrepresentation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, invasion of privacy, abuse of process, and breach of a confidential relationship for which the jury found for Hyatt on all claims. California appealed the decision seeking to get the judgment vacated on sovereign immunity grounds. This teleform will discuss the Supreme Court oral arguments in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. This case considers if a citizen can sue a state in the court of a different state. This raises a variety of substantial questions concerning federalism and state sovereign immunity. In Nevada v. Hall (1979), the Supreme Court rejected that sister-state immunity was implicit in the Constitution. Today in Hyatt, 44 states, among others, are asking the Court to overturn that decision and protect states from suit in other state’s courts. Professor Stephen Sachs will discuss how the Court approached this case at oral arguments and its implications on the future of state sovereign immunity.Featuring:Prof. Stephen E. Sachs, Professor of Law, Duke Law Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

After Gilbert Hyatt, the petitioner, moved to Nevada he was investigated by the Franchise Tax Board of California for failing to pay California personal income taxes. Due to California’s actions in doing so, Hyatt sued California in Nevada’s courts for negligent misrepresentation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, invasion of privacy, abuse of process, and breach of a confidential relationship for which the jury found for Hyatt on all claims. California appealed the decision seeking to get the judgment vacated on sovereign immunity grounds. This teleform will discuss the Supreme Court oral arguments in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. This case considers if a citizen can sue a state in the court of a different state. This raises a variety of substantial questions concerning federalism and state sovereign immunity. In Nevada v. Hall (1979), the Supreme Court rejected that sister-state immunity was implicit in the Constitution. Today in Hyatt, 44 states, among others, are asking the Court to overturn that decision and protect states from suit in other state’s courts. Professor Stephen Sachs will discuss how the Court approached this case at oral arguments and its implications on the future of state sovereign immunity.Featuring:Prof. Stephen E. Sachs, Professor of Law, Duke Law Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

Sometimes I miss California. No, really, sometimes I do. And then�  California calls me and I remember why I not only don�t really miss it, I  yearn for the day when our divorce is 100% complete. Peter Strzok has  been fired by the FBI. Standby for Talking heads telling you why this is  both good and bad and bi-partisan and political. But there is really  bad news today. We�re about to lose a musical icon. So... a couple of housekeeping  things first. I will only be here for the show today and tomorrow (Tuesday). On  Wednesday, Ben and I are headed out for a "Guys" day in Oregon with my Brotherin  and his son. We'll be home very late that night, so probably not conducive to  doing a Thursday show. and on Friday we will be quite busy getting packed up for  vacation. I will be gone all of the next  week, on a vacation that is shaping up to be EPIC. Two full days in Yellowstone.  A full day in Little Piney Creek, another full day at Little Big Horn, and then,  the cherry on top, we will be travelling to a remote part of Eastern Montana to  visit  my favorite paleontologist at an actual dinosaur dig! Can you tell that I am jazzed  about the trip? The Peoples Demokratick Republick  of Kalifornia informed my last Friday that there were very upset that I had not  paid my vehicle registration for 2017. In fact, the DMV was so upset that they  requested that the Franchise Tax Board track me down and  threaten to take legal action against me to force me to pay the  registration fees. Now... I will say this: the FTB  folks are a lot more reasonable and friendly to talk to than the DMV. Once they  realized what was actually going on, they were actually sort of apologetic.  Except they were insistent on one thing: That I personally call the DMV and tell  them that I moved a while ago. I'll get right on that... Speaking of the DMV, they made  the news a lot on Friday, with three separate stories. First up, the DMV lines  are so long that people are resorting to  stealing license plates rather than wait. second, the State Legislature  seemingly doesn't think that the lines are bad enough to  warrant an audit. thirdly, it turns out the reason the Legislators don't  care about the lines is because they personally  don't have to stand in them. You know, like the little people they  serve. Good news! The press is now letting us know that  we should be upset about the whole thing...

Should be focused on your strengths, your weaknesses, or some specific combo in order to lead better? What if the problem is not so much your weaknesses as that you have not fully discovered how to tap into your strengths? Our guest on this episode is Darren Vira-ssammy Darren Virassammy is the Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer for an organization called 34 Strong, Inc.; a team that focuses on creating sustainable Strengths-based organizational culture for their clients. Darren’s biggest focus has been on developing teams around strengths, maximizing the talent on those teams, increasing employee engagement, by developing Strengths Based leadership. He and his team do this by initiating and designing sustainable strengths-based programs for organizations. Darren Virassammy speaks and trains extensively on Strengths, and is such a super star in the world of Strengths Based leadership that has recently spoke at Gallup’s International Strengths Summit. He’s also has spoken at the International Rotary World Peace Conference, DCA Partners and Drexel University’s Business School. A few clients that Darren has recently served include: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), The State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), The Franchise Tax Board, Bank of America and whole bunch more very impressive names. Outside of speaking, workshop facilitation and coaching, Darren Virassammy writes extensively on Strengths, Talent Development, Leadership Development and Strengths-based sustainability within organizations. His work has been featured through Gallup publications and others, including features in the California Employers Association, The California Society of Association Executives and the 15Five E-book “The Great eBook of Employee Questions,” where Darren is featured with prominent thought leaders including Simon Sinek, and Rand Fishkin. More about Darren Virassammy: http://34strong.com More on engaging the Host Dov Baron: http://FullMontyLeadership.com See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Should be focused on your strengths, your weaknesses, or some specific combo in order to lead better? What if the problem is not so much your weaknesses as that you have not fully discovered how to tap into your strengths? Our guest on this episode is Darren Vira-ssammy Darren Virassammy is the Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer for an organization called 34 Strong, Inc.; a team that focuses on creating sustainable Strengths-based organizational culture for their clients. Darren’s biggest focus has been on developing teams around strengths, maximizing the talent on those teams, increasing employee engagement, by developing Strengths Based leadership. He and his team do this by initiating and designing sustainable strengths-based programs for organizations. Darren Virassammy speaks and trains extensively on Strengths, and is such a super star in the world of Strengths Based leadership that has recently spoke at Gallup’s International Strengths Summit. He’s also has spoken at the International Rotary World Peace Conference, DCA Partners and Drexel University’s Business School. A few clients that Darren has recently served include: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), The State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), The Franchise Tax Board, Bank of America and whole bunch more very impressive names. Outside of speaking, workshop facilitation and coaching, Darren Virassammy writes extensively on Strengths, Talent Development, Leadership Development and Strengths-based sustainability within organizations. His work has been featured through Gallup publications and others, including features in the California Employers Association, The California Society of Association Executives and the 15Five E-book “The Great eBook of Employee Questions,” where Darren is featured with prominent thought leaders including Simon Sinek, and Rand Fishkin. More about Darren Virassammy: http://34strong.com More on engaging the Host Dov Baron: http://FullMontyLeadership.com See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Melina Boswell broke one of the first rules of real estate investing: There is no such thing as a real estate emergency. Actually, she stretched the rule to prove that real estate deals are not found, they are created. Melina came across a filthy and uninhabitable home saddled with a divorce, substance abuse, a non-judicial foreclosure, an imminent auction, multiple people on title, 1st and 2nd mortgages, a collection agency, liens from the Franchise Tax Board and an attorney, a homeowner with children who needed a roof and, of course, negative equity. She should have walked away. Instead, she put her head down and went to work executing a strategy called Forced Equity by crafting four legs to a sturdy stool: her network, her experience, her bravado to negotiate and her will to help a distressed homeowner.

My guest this week is my neighbor of sorts... He's San Francisco-based Jacob Fisher and he runs the Etsy shop where he sells his handmade all-vegan accessories that are durable, stylish and very reasonably-priced.  started out as a partnership business. Along the way has evolved into a one-man sole proprietorship. If you've ever considered getting a business partner OR going it alone you'll get some great firsthand insight form someone who's done it both ways. Jacob shares the pros and cons of both setups and sheds some light on how to determine what works or will work best for you. RetoolSF Topics Discussed Transitioning from full-time outside employment to full-time self-employment Pros and cons of different business structures i.e. partnership vs. sole proprietorship Keeping vegan accessories stylish yet affordable Strategies and resources for building handmade and crafting skills Resources Mentioned - I couldn't find the exact course Jacob took but it's a great resource for a wide variety of crafting courses nonetheless State Board of Equalization and Franchise Tax Board -varies from state to state but these offices are where you typically will need to go to get your seller's permit tool Jacob's Etsy Shop ShoutOut - original artwork, drawings and prints by Theo Ellsworth Best Ways to Reach Jacob Etsy shop: Email: RetoolSF [at] gmail [dot] com Social media: , , Website: Please take a minute to subscribe and leave an honest review of the podcast in and . That really helps to get the word out about the show. Connect With Me: Twitter: Follow Facebook Group: - This is where I'm connecting with you after the podcast. Lots of fun convos here too! Facebook: Like the Pinterest: Instagram: Google+: Email: Use the OR interview [at] convome [dot] com

An inventor runs into some issues between the jurisdictions of at least two States. Dave & John delve into Article IV Section 1 to see how this is all supposed to work out.

An inventor runs into some issues between the jurisictions of at least two States. Dave & John delve into Article IV Section 1 to see how this is all supposed to work out.

Title: Agile Software Development and Quality at FTB Abstract: A look at the Agile software development methodology and how it can result in quality software for Franchise Tax Board. As agile softwaqre development practices move into the mainstream, it will be vital that you understand what agile is all about and how agile practices can help you deliver better software. Traditional development methodologies like the Waterfall approach can loss sight of quality and more importantly value. In comparison, Agile centers on value with the highest priority to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software. Thus, Agile can result in high quality, value driven software when implement for the right project and right environment. The practical application of Agile at Franchise Tax Board has proven that it results in quality software. To view the video click here