IRS CODE & LEGAL COMPLIANCE

Recognizing Illegal Tax Avoidance Schemes

Economic Strategist Copyrighted Scott Compliant Trust provides a comprehensive safety net for your financial matters by putting all your fixed and variable assets in one place.

Economic Strategist Copyrighted Scott Compliant Trust. Internal Revenue Code and Legal Compliance for Non-Grantor, Irrevocable, Complex, Discretionary, Spendthrift Trust Many questions and concerns have been communicated related to the tax laws, legal aspects and structures that legally lessen tax, defer tax, reduce tax, and, at the same time, limit or eliminate liability.

This overview specifically addresses and answers these questions with legal cites, the Internal Revenue Code and the IRS Agent’s Handbook. Not everyone is familiar with the options available to accomplish the lessening, deferment, and reduction of taxes individuals and business can legally take to accomplish this. It requires a very special structure to be in legal compliance with the Internal Revenue Code and laws governing business. The structure used to legally achieve this is an Irrevocable, Discretionary, Complex, Non-Grantor, Spendthrift Trust Organization. This unique type of Trust was designed and copy-written to control assets and to defer, reduce, or lessen taxes. It also eliminates liability and provides for beneficiaries without legally affecting the corpus of the Trust.

The corpus of a Spendthrift Trust is not subject to turn over orders by any court or judge federal, state or local. The income or endowments, designated to the corpus of the Trust, are not income to the Trust. Other income designated as Extraordinary Dividends by the Trustee, through rules of the Internal Revenue Code, which is paid to the corpus of the Trust, by law, is not income to the Trust.

The Trustees of the Trust are the sole and absolute managers of the Trust and determine distributions of the Trust to Beneficiaries and the management of the assets and liquidity of the Trust. These types of Trusts are also not subject to capital gains when assets and properties, subject to capital gains taxes, are sold. These are the basic outlines of the characteristics of the Trust. They have been well established by the law and court related cases. The following refers to the legal structure of the Trust: A “Trust” is defined by Black’s Law Dictionary “as right of property, real or personal, held by one party for the benefit of another.” The trustee(s) hold the legal and equitable title to the property for the benefit of the beneficiaries.

Although the trustees hold the property title, they do not own the property. The trustee(s) is/are designated the management authority for the Spendthrift Trust Organization. The beneficiaries also do not own the property but they have right to all of the benefits, proceeds and profits of it. This is called the “beneficial interest” in the Spendthrift Trust Organization.

The “beneficial interest” is contractually non-assignable and for that reason a creditor may not legally attach it. The beneficiaries do not have any management control of the property. A Spendthrift Trust Organization is “created” and given life, through a “Contract in the form of a manifestation of intention in the Terms and Conditions of the trust of a Spendthrift Trust Organization” which is often referred to as the “instrument”. A contract in the form of a Spendthrift Trust Organization,does not owe its existence to any act of the legislature. The authority for its creation is the common law right of the parties to enter into a contract.

According to American law, the government cannot regulate or impose a tax upon a right. Our “right to contract” according to the Constitution of the United States, Article. §10 is unimpariable. That means that it is not within the power of the government or even a judge to change one word of a Contract of Trust. Once the property is transferred into a Spendthrift Trust Organization, it is subject to its own indenture, which governs and, protects the property held by it.

The government can ONLY regulate and tax entities it creates. Also assets conveyed to trusts are not gifts and may not be considered as such because there is no equitable title conveyed to any person or entity; all assets are held in the corpus of the trust for the benefit of the beneficiaries, who even though hold a beneficial interest, hold no title to said asset. Property held by a properly structured contract in the form of a Spendthrift Trust Organization is immune from tax liens, levies, and seizures, lawsuits, divorce claims and bankruptcy.

The Spendthrift Trust Organization is not liable for the debts of the trustees or the beneficiaries and the assets held by the trust cannot be seized to satisfy their debts. Further, the trustees and beneficiaries are not liable for the debts of the Trust Organization. Hussey v. Arnold 182 U.S. 461,21 S.Ct.645. In Weeks v. Sibley DC 269£, 155, Edwards V. Commissioner. 41512£!, 532 10th Cir. (1969) and Philips v. Blanchard 37 Mass 510, the courts ruled that a Spendthrift Trust Organization is not illegal even if formed for the express purpose of reducing or deferring taxes. Edison California Stores, Inc. v McColgan. 30 Cal 26472.183 P2d 16. ruled that persons may adopt any lawful means for the lessening of the burden of income taxes.

The Department of the Treasury, IRS Handbook for Special Agents § 412, Tax Avoidance Distinguished from Evasion states; “Avoidance of Taxes is not a criminal offence. Any attempt to reduce, avoid, minimize, or alleviate taxes by legitimate means is permissible”. Pursuant to Narragansett Mut. F. Ins. Co. v. Burnhamun 51 r1371, 154 a 909, It is not an evasion of legal responsibility to take what advantage may accrue from the choice of any particular form of organization permitted by law. A Spendthrift Trust is not considered a taxable “Association” pursuant to tax law. Black’s Law Dictionary defines Association as follows: “What is designated as a trust or a partnership may be classified as an association [only] if it clearly possesses [all] corporate attributes. Corporate attributes include: [1] centralized management, [2] continuity of existence, [3] free transferability of interest, [4] limited liability.

A Spendthrift Trust Organization is not an “association” or an “unincorporated association,” because it does not possess the same attributes of a corporation, such as continuity of existence and free transferability of [beneficial] interest. Furthermore, unlike a corporation, a Spendthrift Trust Organization is not an “artificial entity” nor does it owe its existence to the charter power of the State. A Spendthrift Trust Organization is also not an alter ego or a nominee for any trustee or beneficiary because no one individual holds both legal and equitable title and beneficial interest. With no equitable title and beneficial interest held by no one individual there is no gift therefore no gift tax consideration to any asset conveyed to the Trust.

Another major advantage to operating a Spendthrift Trust Organization as a business is that, because it is not a creature of the legislature, it is not subject to the myriad of strangling legislative controls, rules and regulations that are applicable to corporations and other legislative entities. The Supreme Court case Eliot v. Freeman 220 US 178 ruled that a Spendthrift Trust Organization is not subject to legislative control. The Supreme Court holds that the trust relationship comes under the realm of equity based on common law and is not subject to legislative restrictions, as are corporations and other organizations created by legislative authority. The fact that the trustees hold the property does not mean that the trustees own the personal property. Trust property cannot be held under an attachment nor sold upon the execution of trustee’s personal debts.

Trustees and beneficiaries cannot be held liable for debts incurred by the trust. If in fact, a trust has been created, the certificate holders are not liable on the obligation incurred by the trustees or managing agents appointed by the trustees. Hussey V. Arnold 70 NE 87: Mayo V. Morin, 24 NE 1083. Pursuant to 695.30(a) of the CPC for the State of California and similar Civil Procedure Codes of other states; “property of the judgment debtor that is not assignable or transferable is not subject to the enforcement of a money judgment”. This information on case law is irrefutable and not subject to debate. Economic Strategist Copyrighted Scott Compliant Trust.