[BloomRunsDubs]

Originally Posted by dumptruck

Maybe he should create a shell corp and never pay any taxes at all? This isn’t savy, its crime.

But you are free to lick the corporate boot and assume society operates on other people’s backs.

Lick the corporate boot? Not sure what you mean by that and I'm not sure you know either lol.

What do you think society operates on? fairydust? Of course it operates on other peoples backs, particularity people like myself and many people on here who pay their own fair share plus everyone else's fair share.

Like I stated before ill probably just pay the tax to avoid any potential future headaches, after all it really isn't that bad in my state. I still will never see anything wrong with it though and I hope other people in worse states continue to use it and save themselves some of their own hard earned money.

[Onizukachan]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

Ignorance is the biggest scam and you are unfortunately suffering from it. Educate yourself, but broadly, not narrowly from conspiracy theorists trying to control your mind by appealing to your baser instincts.

Governments are largely funded by taxes and fees. There are hundreds to choose from. The selection of one government may differ from another. Some primarily use sales taxes, some income taxes, some property taxes taxes. Within those categories there can be exceptions or limitations. The tax may be up to only a certain value or above only a certain value or not apply to certain goods.

My state has no broad based sales or income tax. It does have high property taxes and high registration fees on new and very young cars. Is my state scamming me? No.

No, but if you buy a used car in a different state, privately, on which sales tax was paid when it was sold new… what has your state done to justify charging 5+% sales tax again on a private transaction which occurred elsewhere? And setting some minimum taxable value of the vehicle no matter what you really paid to make sure they get enough tax out of you?

Or a used valve cover or other part bought privately from someone in Another state or Europe… what justifies your state charging 8 % sales tax on used parts sold privately outside their borders?

[cooolone2]

Ehhhh, to each their own! You want to play the Tax game, more power to you. I don't understand anyone who can afford a Lambo also looking to avoid taxes, it's a lot of work. Plus, some States you wouldn't be able to insure the vehicle unless you provide proof of the vehicle being present in that State. So there's a problem there... Not really worth it in my book.

Those who live at that level of affluence have Accountants with sharp pencils and know how to navigate the tax laws proficiently enough to justify their existence. So I'm sure, overall these individuals save enough by not paying a dime more than what the Govt is entitled to.

You want to be a Tax Objector, like all those Ministry's in the 80's, others with their offshore accounts, living off debit cards, etc. Go ahead, don't forget to write and let us know how it's going! Even Switzerland now cooperates with the US Tax man... Lmao!

[dumptruck]

If you do this, you cant then complain about shitty roads or schools or services in your state bc you will have directly and personally deprived your state of the revenue needed to address those issues. Dont confuse rugged individuality with criminality and blind anti-govt bias.

[Vindicator3]

I am the Republic of Vindistan and I am a Sovereign Citizen! I will issue myself my own Vindistan plates and The Man has no right to tax me!!

Happy Opening Day, all!

[spazzyfry123]

Originally Posted by Vindicator3

I am the Republic of Vindistan and I am a Sovereign Citizen! I will issue myself my own Vindistan plates and The Man has no right to tax me!!

Happy Opening Day, all!

GO BRAVES

[StradaRedlands]

Originally Posted by Vindicator3

I am the Republic of Vindistan and I am a Sovereign Citizen! I will issue myself my own Vindistan plates and The Man has no right to tax me!!

Happy Opening Day, all!

Hoping for a repeat!

[pbonsalb]

Originally Posted by Onizukachan

No, but if you buy a used car in a different state, privately, on which sales tax was paid when it was sold new… what has your state done to justify charging 5+% sales tax again on a private transaction which occurred elsewhere? And setting some minimum taxable value of the vehicle no matter what you really paid to make sure they get enough tax out of you?

Or a used valve cover or other part bought privately from someone in Another state or Europe… what justifies your state charging 8 % sales tax on used parts sold privately outside their borders?

I think I understand — you exist on a transactional basis. Everything you do depends on what you get out of it for your benefit. There is no interest in other people or society.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

I think I understand — you exist on a transactional basis. Everything you do depends on what you get out of it for your benefit. There is no interest in other people or society.

Are not taxes applied on a transactional basis? The State definitely acts on a transactional basis.

[Vindicator3]

Utah and California step up their enforcement efforts.

This article also has much detailed discussion about when it's legal and when it's not (e.g., CA allows it (at least with regard to sales tax) if the vehicle is delivered outside CA and remains outside of CA for more than a year, IA law explicitly provides that shell company LLCs are disregarded and IA taxes must be paid if the human owner of the LLC is an IA resident).

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-...on-tax-dodgers

[The J-Man]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

The legal costs of fighting your tax fraud case are WAY higher than just paying the tax.

What are you going to say when you get pulled over, and hand over a license from your state and a registration from a Montana LLC? You think that the cops are going to be stupid enough to believe that you normally keep it in Montana, live here, and just happened to be driving this car that resides out of state normally? They're not as foolish as you are for thinking you're gonna get away with it. Now you've got an improper registration charge, as well as potential tax fraud issues.

Police officers do not enforce tax law. Nor would the registration be improper. A Montana business is allowed to own a car and use that car in all 50 states.

The risk is that somebody from the state Department of Revenue gets on you, builds a case, proves that you've broken the law in your state, and then they will assess you the taxes and penalties. It takes at least $50-100K in taxes before they even begin to think about criminal charges. Tax enforcement is about collecting money, not putting people in jail. Your penalty is financial.

[The J-Man]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

That's what that Ed bolian guy from YouTube was doing and why he's so desperate to normalize this form of tax fraud. When he was selling lambos he was setting up fake Montana LLCs to avoid taxes.

Tax fraud is bad. But setting up a business that only exists to commit tax fraud for others, that's REALLY bad. So he's desperate to make it seem harmless and normal and everyone can and should do it so he doesn't have guys in prison setting up their own LLCs inside him every night.

You don't understand this issue well-enough to speak on it.

LLCs and other legal entities are established all the time as strategy for minimizing taxes. It is perfectly legal in all 50 states to establish an LLC for the purpose of a tax strategy.

This very issue went to the Louisiana Supreme Court many years ago, and they said the same thing.

https://law.justia.com/cases/louisia...13-c-1855.html

What might be illegal, however, is using the car in your home state in a personal capacity 100% of the time, despite it being registered to a Montana LLC. That's the gray area. And it is still a gray area in most states.

After the Louisiana case, I cannot find a single example of this issue being looked at by the courts in any states. My guess is the states try to keep it out of the courts because they know the ruling will end up like Louisiana. That's not to say that the Department of Revenue in each state won't try to find you and issue you an assessment.

If I were in Louisiana, I would consider this settled law, and I would register my cars in Montana without a care in the world. Other states, however, there is usually not a definitive answer, thus a risk would remain.

[The J-Man]

Originally Posted by Mech Spec

Clearly there has been enforcement and states are looking to make it illegal.

https://www.hagerty.com/media/market...s%20it%20work?

99% chance there have been other individual cases of enforcement that didn't make it to the public eye.

Here's and article where they looked to levy criminal charges against SD registrations in missouri

https://excelsiorcitizen.com/major-c...of%20the%20law.

Most of the enforcement actions mentioned in the Hagerty link took place before the Louisiana Supreme Court case.

Your second article has nothing to do with Montana LLCs - totally different issue - not parallel to the Montana issue at all. The LLC is key.

[The J-Man]

Originally Posted by Vindicator3

Utah and California step up their enforcement efforts.

This article also has much detailed discussion about when it's legal and when it's not (e.g., CA allows it (at least with regard to sales tax) if the vehicle is delivered outside CA and remains outside of CA for more than a year, IA law explicitly provides that shell company LLCs are disregarded and IA taxes must be paid if the human owner of the LLC is an IA resident).

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-...on-tax-dodgers

Best article written on the topic to date. Thanks for posting.

TLDR: It depends. Some states have now enacted laws specifically targeting this issue, which implies they felt they didn't have enough teeth to enforce the issue prior to that.

Utah's strategy is interesting. They are going to compare data between the Tax Commission and the state's Uninsured Motorist Identification Database. The former will tell them if a car has been registered in the state and the latter will tell them if a car is insured in the state. If the car is insured in the state, but there isn't a matching registration, then that's how they find you.

[Vindicator3]

Originally Posted by The J-Man

It is perfectly legal in all 50 states to establish an LLC for the purpose of a tax strategy.

This very issue went to the Louisiana Supreme Court many years ago, and they said the same thing.

https://law.justia.com/cases/louisia...13-c-1855.html

If I were in Louisiana, I would consider this settled law, and I would register my cars in Montana without a care in the world.

I don't read the LA case that way. My take - Of course it is legal to establish an LLC for any lawful purpose, including to take advantage of different taxation (most commonly to have the entity's income passed through rather than taxed at the entity level and then again as a distribution to the member, but that doesn't really have anything to do with this issue.

This issue, and I think the LA case supports this conclusion, turns on the law of the state where you live and drive/garage the car, not on Montana law nor on the law of LLCs (with one exception discussed below).

The LA case as I read it clearly states that the issue of who owes the tax is a LA law issue and the court said a) the LLC owes the tax, not the individual member; and b) the LA legislature can change this law if it wants.

The exception I mentioned above is that the court said that whether the individual member can be held liable for the obligations of the LLC is a question of Montana law.

So my takeaway from the LA case is that the state can still assess the LLC for the tax and (I assume, I don't know this point of LA law), ultimately get a tax lien on the LLC's only asset (the car). And that assumes the legislature hasn't changed the law as some states have done.

There is no magic to the LLC as I read it other than on the issue of whether the individual is liable for the obligations of LLC. If your state's law provides that the obligation is the individuals, as the Iowa law mentioned in the Bloomberg article seems to provide, then the LLC does you no good at all.

It really still boils down IMO to where you live and what your state's (county's, city's) law says about what taxes are due. Getting an out of state plate doesn't change what your state's law says and if your facts meet the test of your state's law, you still owe the tax whether or not getting that out of state plate allows you to avoid detection for breaking the law. Conversely, of course, if your facts don't meet the test under your state's law, you don't owe the tax (e.g., taking delivery in Montana and then not bringing the car to CA until more than a year later).

Originally Posted by The J-Man

Your second article has nothing to do with Montana LLCs - totally different issue - not parallel to the Montana issue at all. The LLC is key.

I disagree with this as well. It is true that article doesn't discuss Montana LLCs but it is certainly parallel to the Montana issue and the LLC is not the key (except for one specific point as I discussed above).

The issue to me remains that you have to comply with your own state's law and getting out of state plates, whether in SD or Montana, whether via LLC or not, is not a magic bullet, except that it helps you avoid detection because the main method of tax collection is at registration and renewal of your plates. Avoiding detection has nothing to do with whether it's legal and whether it's legal turns on your own state's law, not the law of the state where you got the plates and not on whether you got them in that state individually or via LLC.

At least that's how I read it.