data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0d8c/a0d8c67b3763d9f228e7ad9c7c1cd045c4068459" alt=""
19 December 2009 | 11 replies
Either the taxpayer is paying for it or some ignornant landlord is losing their butt.Now, consider what happens when the tenant gets mad at you for ANYTHING.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5f5c6/5f5c6405f9344f07f5b1429ce90c9540f5af26ca" alt=""
21 April 2010 | 4 replies
The foreclosure case is actually considered void since the redemption voids the foreclosure and the property reverts back to the taxpayer (us).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f8527/f8527384ec40ff6e0acec65c2453b23be50fb99c" alt=""
7 February 2010 | 5 replies
While there is no proabition to a 501(C) (3) from entering into transactions for a profit, the deductability for the seller may be effected as the contribution is contingent on a beneficial gain by the taxpayer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa3d3/aa3d3b78ee8ac81e23079ae9bc8775c0884404b8" alt=""
29 December 2009 | 9 replies
If a property sold at a later date for more than the original amount, the deffered amount would be to offset losses and repay the taxpayer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6b757/6b757ab93968cafe177c480e8a978435b08f871d" alt=""
7 January 2010 | 7 replies
One thing I found interesting was that the taxpayer is in Texas, but the rental liscense holder for the property is only a couple miles away.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/28a54/28a545dce415a52ebd2ff935381c9e3ca8afdea8" alt=""
5 September 2012 | 40 replies
Let me hand you a tissue as you put the keys in the ignition of your TAX PAYER PAID MERCEDES or your silicone boobs, yep, that's right, most the people that are upside down used their home to buy crap that they did not deserve and need and now the American "workers" are set to pay for it for years to come.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92010/9201037ff6c680206299e169cd1ba0d357690708" alt=""
18 February 2010 | 11 replies
Then you don't need to enact difficult to police and enforce legislation (not to mention costly to the taxpayers) that affects the 90% of those that never did anything wrong in the first place.Another problem along these same lines is that there are not enough agents to pursue the fraudulent parties.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/68450/68450a1c6cba6c5d74fdd774b665a0d89d5c19b9" alt=""
24 February 2010 | 10 replies
HE DID IT ON TAXPAYERS MONEY WHILE MAKING THEM PAY FOR THE BULLSH__ SOCIALIST HEALTHCARE!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/367e2/367e2c4123adcb1885a79294592012ff3f47ac71" alt=""
11 July 2010 | 12 replies
The foreclosure case is actually considered void since the redemption voids the foreclosure and the property reverts back to the taxpayer (us).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/afe46/afe46b3fcdbacff7e26f31c55d071ed36ba4bfd2" alt=""
3 April 2019 | 36 replies
So, if you had 60% of 25X, or 15X your annual salary, you could still take the 4% and have the equivalent of your after tax pay.