ATM LEASEBACK SCHEMES-- any insight?

[grimreaper]

Please note: the receiver's website http://www.nasi-nationwideatm.com/ has just posted new communications you should read, as well as a questionnaire you should all fill out

Well, that's a matter of opinion. If I'm a NET WINNER, holding profits, I'm not likely to volunteer information am I? I would be more inclined to wait for the receiver/sec to contact me.

[Tednewsom]

There's no question in the questionnaire regarding how much you have or have not profited, or even how long you've been into it, either of which might be used to figure whether or not you're in the black. It's just contact info: name, address, etc. The only other questions:

Please list the names of any people involved in recruiting you to invest in Nationwide ATM:

How many ATM(s) have you invested in?

How much did you pay for your ATM(s)?

I'd say those are reasonable questions if you're trying to 1) create a family tree of the scam and figure out who were the primary branches, 2) get some idea of the scope of the scam and who were the prime movers within it 3) figure out why the hell there's a $7800 difference between the asking prices (or, even more interesting, if there were yet more prices for the same nothingness) and 6) establish whom among the cheerleaders would be a legitimate target for further investigation.

[Lost Income]

No one knows how this is actually going to end, so anyone not filling out the questionnaire is just costing the SEC more time for the enviable. If everyone helps maybe we can get this mess over with and move on without having to deal with it for years.

[grimreaper]

There's no question in the questionnaire regarding how much you have or have not profited, or even how long you've been into it, either of which might be used to figure whether or not you're in the black. It's just contact info: name, address, etc. The only other questions:

Please list the names of any people involved in recruiting you to invest in Nationwide ATM:

How many ATM(s) have you invested in?

How much did you pay for your ATM(s)?

I'd say those are reasonable questions if you're trying to 1) create a family tree of the scam and figure out who were the primary branches, 2) get some idea of the scope of the scam and who were the prime movers within it 3) figure out why the hell there's a $7800 difference between the asking prices (or, even more interesting, if there were yet more prices for the same nothingness) and 6) establish whom among the cheerleaders would be a legitimate target for further investigation.

My point is WHY make yourself KNOWN to the receiver if you're a potential CLAWBACK candidate? Let them FIND YOU if you're a net winner. Now, I'm not advising those with net profits to do so, but you can certainly understand why they would keep *MUM*. I'm sure their lawyer would agree, since there's no obligation for them to do so unless they're contacted.

[Tednewsom]

Yes, because luckily NASI kept no records of names or addresses, they just mailed out those monthly checks to "Mr. Anonymous, c/o General Delivery, Anytown, USA" and hoped the suckers would drop by their local post offices some day to pick them up.

[webhick]

Even if NASI destroyed every single document, check images and deposit copies can be gotten from the bank. I do it when piecing together people's finances so I have no doubt in my mind that the receiver can do the same. I've been able to go back more than five years (don't ask), but the bank had to research it on microfiche or some such nonsense.

[notorial dissent]

Guys, take a breath, get hold of yourselves, and take a chill pill.

At this point in time you DON'T KNOW ZIP, give it a rest. What you may or may not owe in taxes or have coming back as a refund or what happens with clawbacks is going to depend on what happens with the receivership, and as I, and several other have repeatedly pointed out, you are most likely, probably almost certainly going to need a good tax accountant, and probably possibly a tax lawyer at some point. A lot will depend on how far in you were as well, so there is no hard and fast answer. Actually there is an answer, if you are really nervous, and you know why, the answer is yes you need a tax professional, and chances are, that professional will tell you that right now there isn't much you can do until the receivership does something. This isn't something someone on the internet can or should advise you on.

What is going to happen, is that at some point, after the receivership is formalized, you will get a confirmation letter from the receiver, you will then probably get a questionnaire about how much you had involved(maybe), you WILL get a statement from the receiver showing what they believe you have invested, based on the records they have, and what you have received back from NASI, again based on records they have. This is where your paperwork comes in big time as you will need to compare what they sent you with what you show, there may be a big discrepancy, small discrepancy, or none depending how good NASI's records were. You will most likely be required to sign and return a copy of that statement to the receiver(unless they've changed things), most likely the document will have to be signed under penalty of perjury, so honesty really does count. Remember, this is essentially a gov't action, and lying either by omission or commission to the receiver could have really nasty repercussions down the road. Once they've verified their audit, then will come the determinations about what to do, and that will have to be approved by the court before they go any further.

[worried]

There's no question in the questionnaire regarding how much you have or have not profited, or even how long you've been into it, either of which might be used to figure whether or not you're in the black. It's just contact info: name, address, etc. The only other questions:

Please list the names of any people involved in recruiting you to invest in Nationwide ATM:

How many ATM(s) have you invested in?

How much did you pay for your ATM(s)?

I'd say those are reasonable questions if you're trying to 1) create a family tree of the scam and figure out who were the primary branches, 2) get some idea of the scope of the scam and who were the prime movers within it 3) figure out why the hell there's a $7800 difference between the asking prices (or, even more interesting, if there were yet more prices for the same nothingness) and 6) establish whom among the cheerleaders would be a legitimate target for further investigation.

My point is WHY make yourself KNOWN to the receiver if you're a potential CLAWBACK candidate? Let them FIND YOU if you're a net winner. Now, I'm not advising those with net profits to do so, but you can certainly understand why they would keep *MUM*. I'm sure their lawyer would agree, since there's no obligation for them to do so unless they're contacted.

Because... and PLEASE, all of you "net winners" out there reading this, consider this:... as long as you HAVEN'T resolved your "clawback" situation, it will ALWAYS be hanging over you and/or your heirs... you might as well get it over with.

[grimreaper]

Even if NASI destroyed every single document, check images and deposit copies can be gotten from the bank. I do it when piecing together people's finances so I have no doubt in my mind that the receiver can do the same. I've been able to go back more than five years (don't ask), but the bank had to research it on microfiche or some such nonsense.

YEP. The entity that issued the checks will be getting a *call* if they haven't already. That's just another *nail in the coffin* as far as identifying ALL investors past and present.This along with all the statements and 1099s issued by NASI (if they destroyed them the ARSE IS GRASS).

[grimreaper]

Because... and PLEASE, all of you "net winners" out there reading this, consider this:... as long as you HAVEN'T resolved your "clawback" situation, it will ALWAYS be hanging over you and/or your heirs... you might as well get it over with.

Something your LAWYER would never advise.

[Arthur Rubin]

The only tax relief you'll get is based on the ACTUAL MONEY CLAWED BACK FROM YOU. If and when you have actually PAID THIS, you'll be able to write off 95% (as I recall) of that against current income and carry forward any excess you may have to future income. As I recall, the max amount you can carry forward is 3K per year. THIS IS ALL MY HUMBLE OPINION...SO MAKE SURE YOU GET A PROFESSIONAL TO ADVISE!

We've gone through this before. See http://www.irs.gov/uac/FAQs-Related-to- ... -Treatment , among other pages.

In summary, Ponzi scheme losses are theft losses, deductible in the year that they were discovered (or should have been discovered), and can create an NOL (Net Operating Loss) which can be carried back 2 or 3 years, or forward. For most theft losses, one must estimate the recovery amount. Under the Madoff RR, the taxpayer can declare 95% or 75% of the actual loss as the estimated net loss. (I think 95% applies to this case.) Clawbacks are normally subject to "claim of right" analysis. If less than $3000, it's an itemized deduction (subject to the 2% limit). If more than $3000, the taxpayer has an option: Either take it as an itemized deduction in the year of payment, or recalculate the tax on the year(s) the money was taxed, and take a current (for the year of payment) credit in the amount the tax would have been decreased if the money had not been received.

[Lost Income]

I believe that everyone involved received a 1099 from NAS each year and included it in their tax prep, and if so it will be easy for the feds to track down investors and have numbers to work with.

[webhick]

The good news is that in the case of the Madoff scam, the receiver allowed for hardship waivers. And IIRC, that guy was pretty aggressive, perhaps too much so.

[snookered]

Wednesday was another sad day in regard to NASI, as it was the day that I paid my 2013 income taxes.

To know that I was paying taxes on phantom income just about killed me. And, it was a lot. To think that I will have to do it again for 2014 adds insult to injury.

[grimreaper]

I believe that everyone involved received a 1099 from NAS each year and included it in their tax prep, and if so it will be easy for the feds to track down investors and have numbers to work with.

That's assuming he actually filed 1099 with the IRS. He would also be required to file a 1096, which is summary of all 1099s filed. You don't actually *send in* your 1099 copy with your tax returns.

[Lost Income]

I agree. My point is that even if one tries to avoid contact with SEC, it's likely that there is enough tax info out there over the years to help the gov to find investors.

[grimreaper]

I agree. My point is that even if one tries to avoid contact with SEC, it's likely that there is enough tax info out there over the years to help the gov to find investors.

We know for a fact he did send out 1099s to investors like yourself and if he didn't file them with IRS that's FRAUD right there.

[Lost Income]

Good point, possibly another nail in the coffin.

[Tednewsom]

Oooh. I'd be careful, guys. You might be stepping a little too close to the line of libel or slander, suggesting that a couple of no-good lying crooked sacks of unredeemable dogshit might fudge on their taxes.

[grimreaper]

Oooh. I'd be careful, guys. You might be stepping a little too close to the line of libel or slander, suggesting that a couple of no-good lying crooked sacks of unredeemable dogshit might be fudge on their taxes.