Help with Liens

[Scoop]

Hello Quatloosians,

I'm a reporter covering the Browns. Rest assured I have been lurking here for months.

I'm chiming in on the off chance that one of you has some expertise on how to read tax liens. I'm trying to write about the total bill for the Browns (which appears to be close to $3 million), but can't quite make sense of the documents. Everything is free and available online.

Can anyone help??

Thanks,
msk

[Scoop]

I can understand the state lien and the forfeiture order, but there are multiple versions of each of the federal liens in the registry of deeds, each with slightly different dollar totals. I don't know which versions to rely on. I assume their federal tax liability isn't $6 million.

[webhick]

I believe (and I hope someone corrects me if I'm wrong), but the 5/3/07 notices are just updates of the 4/24/07 notices. I'm pulling them up now and running them through a spreadsheet to see that pans out.

[David Merrill]

You might want to check that the liens are filed properly by NH law.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uniform/vol7.html#fedln


http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/htm ... 54-B-2.htm

[quote][b]Section 454-B:2[/b]

454-B:2 Place of Filing. –

I. Notices of liens, certificates, and other notices affecting federal tax liens or other federal liens including without limitation releases, subordinations, refiled notices, and discharges shall be filed in accordance with this chapter.

II. Notices of liens upon real property for obligations payable to the United States and certificates and notices affecting the liens, including without limitation, releases, subordinations, refiled notices and discharges, shall be filed in the registry of deeds of the county in which the real property subject to the liens is situated. The register of deeds shall receive, record, and index the same in accordance with RSA 478.

III. Notices of federal liens upon personal property, [Like the Brown's alleged lien.] whether tangible or intangible, for obligations payable to the United States, certificates, and notices affecting the liens shall be filed in the office of the secretary of state. In addition, certificates and notices affecting federal liens previously filed in a city or town clerk's office [b]shall be filed in the office of the secretary of state[/b].

Source. 1988, 116:1. 2001, 102:54, eff. June 26, 2001. 2005, 219:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2006.[/quote]





Oops! The IRS misfiled the federal tax lien against the Browns!

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/ ... -000-.html

Do you suppose that is what it means when they say [b]Under state law[/b]? You see Scoop; there are people around here who believe that if the IRS agent chooses this to the US district court venue, they do not have to abide by the state stipulations for process...

[quote](f) [b]Place for filing notice; form[/b]

(1) [b]Place for filing[/b]

The notice referred to in subsection (a) shall be filed—

(A) Under State laws

(i) Real property In the case of real property, in [u]one[/u] office within the State (or the county, or other governmental subdivision), [u]as designated by the laws of such State[/u], in which the property subject to the lien is situated; and

(ii) Personal property In the case of personal property, whether tangible or intangible, in [u]one[/u] office within the State (or the county, or other governmental subdivision), [u]as designated by the laws of such State[/u], in which the property subject to the lien is situated, except that State law merely conforming to or reenacting Federal law establishing a national filing system does not constitute a second office for filing as designated by the laws of such State; or

(B) With clerk of district court

In the office of the clerk of the United States district court for the judicial district in which the property subject to the lien is situated, whenever the State has not by law designated one office which meets the requirements of subparagraph (A); or...[/quote]

You will probably agree that this pretty much lets the Browns off the hook.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[webhick]

I just finished typing everything off the notices into an excel spreadsheet and killing the duplicates.

If anyone's interested, you can download it from Here. I'm probably going to remove the link after a week or so.

I'm $1 off on the 941 notices, with the notices reporting $193,712.50 and I'm reporting $193,712.50. Can't find that dollar for the life of me. Everything else seems pretty cut and dry.

Edit: Removed the link.

[David Merrill]

[quote="webhick"]I just finished typing everything off the notices into an excel spreadsheet and killing the duplicates.

If anyone's interested, you can download it from [url=http://lindenashby.org/images/quatloos/Liens.xls"]Here[/url]. I'm probably going to remove the link after a week or so.

I'm $1 off on the 941 notices, with the notices reporting [b]$193,712.50[/b] and I'm reporting [b]$193,712.50[/b]. Can't find that dollar for the life of me. Everything else seems pretty cut and dry.[/quote]


Yep. We are all having a little difficulty finding that dollar.

[The Observer]

Hello Quatloosians,

I'm a reporter covering the Browns. Rest assured I have been lurking here for months.

I'm chiming in on the off chance that one of you has some expertise on how to read tax liens. I'm trying to write about the total bill for the Browns (which appears to be close to $3 million), but can't quite make sense of the documents. Everything is free and available online.

Can anyone help??

Thanks,
msk

I haven't viewed the copies of the recorded documents, but based on what I have read so far, the IRS may have recorded duplicate lien notices. Sometimes this happens because the revenue officer may have requested the lien recordation at an earlier date and then decided to go ahead and record it in person with the county recorder's office if they felt there was a need to get the notice recorded as soon as possible rather than wait for the electronic filing system to process it. Given all the recent activity involving the forfeiture of Dr. Brown's commerical property, this is probably what happened.

The reported dollar amounts on the lien notice are not critical to the authenticity of the lien - for a very simple and obvious reason. Penalty and interest accrue on the tax balance at a monthly and daily rate, respectively. Thus, the balance on a recorded lien notice will never be accurate. And it would not make sense for the IRS to record a new lien notice every day merely to provide a current balance. As such, the IRS only records the asssessed balance due on the lien notice.

The different amounts reflected on each of the recorded notices may be due to new assessments posting to the tax periods or if credits have been applied. It would be impossible to determine without a review of the transcripts, which the IRS will not provide due to the privacy requirements.

The IRS will provide an updated figure in situations where revealing the balance would resolve the liability in some manner. The updated balance would be provided at the day of the sale of the property or would be revealed if there was an escrow that would pay funds due to the refinancing or sale of the property.

[Scoop]

The reported dollar amounts on the lien notice are not critical to the authenticity of the lien - for a very simple and obvious reason. Penalty and interest accrue on the tax balance at a monthly and daily rate, respectively. Thus, the balance on a recorded lien notice will never be accurate. And it would not make sense for the IRS to record a new lien notice every day merely to provide a current balance. As such, the IRS only records the asssessed balance due on the lien notice.

The different amounts reflected on each of the recorded notices may be due to new assessments posting to the tax periods or if credits have been applied. It would be impossible to determine without a review of the transcripts, which the IRS will not provide due to the privacy requirements.
.

Thanks this is really helpful. So is the highest total likely to be the most accurate? What threw me is that all three sets of liens were signed by the revenue agent on the same day. (Given the circumstances, I think it's probably fair to assume there would be no new credits.)

[The Observer]

Oops! The IRS misfiled the federal tax lien against the Browns!

Really, David? Then why aren't you in court filing suit on behalf of the Browns? This could be the chance to prove that you aren't just uttering gibberish off the top of your head.

In the meantime, please explain exactly where were the notices of lien misfiled? And where should they have been filed?

You will probably agree that this pretty much lets the Browns off the hook.

Nope, I don't agree. The Browns are still on the hook and the government has the commercial property under seizure.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Oops! The IRS misfiled the federal tax lien against the Browns!

Really, David? Then why aren't you in court filing suit on behalf of the Browns? This could be the chance to prove that you aren't just uttering gibberish off the top of your head.

Well, his motor scooter can't be on his legal team so it's not worth it.

[The Observer]

Thanks this is really helpful. So is the highest total likely to be the most accurate? What threw me is that all three sets of liens were signed by the revenue agent on the same day. (Given the circumstances, I think it's probably fair to assume there would be no new credits.)

Not necessarily. As I stated there are a number of reasons the dollar amount varies, and it could be as simple as human error in putting the figures on the document. If you have a link to the copies of the notices, I would be glad to take a look at them to see if there is anything that would lend more information to the situation.

By the way, revenue agents do not record liens. That delegation resides mainly with revenue officers.

[The Observer]

Well, his motor scooter can't be on his legal team so it's not worth it.

Yes, David has never explained to us why he wasn't able to recover his motor scooter. I mean, you would think that a man who knows everything there is to know about the law would be able to win a simple lawsuit to recover the scooter.

[webhick]

Sullivan County Registry of Deeds, accept the agreement and search for Elaine Brown.

Edit: You might want to limit the search to just 2007. I just found it easier.

[Scoop]

Thanks this is really helpful. So is the highest total likely to be the most accurate? What threw me is that all three sets of liens were signed by the revenue agent on the same day. (Given the circumstances, I think it's probably fair to assume there would be no new credits.)

Not necessarily. As I stated there are a number of reasons the dollar amount varies, and it could be as simple as human error in putting the figures on the document. If you have a link to the copies of the notices, I would be glad to take a look at them to see if there is anything that would lend more information to the situation.

That would be wonderful, though it's hard to provide a direct link. Go to nhdeeds.com, select Sullivan County, and search under Elaine (or Edward) Brown for documents filed in 2007. You'll see them there.

You Quatloosians are the best!

[David Merrill]

[quote="The Observer"][quote="David Merrill"]Oops! The IRS misfiled the federal tax lien against the Browns![/quote]

Really, David? Then why aren't you in court filing suit on behalf of the Browns? This could be the chance to prove that you aren't just uttering gibberish off the top of your head.

In the meantime, please explain exactly where were the notices of lien misfiled? And where should they have been filed?

[quote]You will probably agree that this pretty much lets the Browns off the hook.[/quote]

Nope, I don't agree. The Browns are still on the hook and the government has the commercial property under seizure.[/quote]


You are so wierd!

I explained that through citing and quoting statutes. Right there in the post you quoted me from!



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. I get the feeling you do not get the benefits of font features like [i]italics[/i] and [b]bold[/b]. That must be why you are not bothering to read my posts The Observer.

Someone switched the feature off as an injunction making it more difficult to communicate with Lawprof!!

[The Observer]

That would be wonderful, though it's hard to provide a direct link. Go to nhdeeds.com, select Sullivan County, and search under Elaine (or Edward) Brown for documents filed in 2007. You'll see them there.

You Quatloosians are the best!

Thanks to webhick, I was able to view the copies.

The lien notices recorded on 4/24 were prepared by the revenue officer and recorded by him. The 5/03 notices were transmitted by the IRS' electronic lien filing system - you will note that the signature differs for the revenue officer with a automated signature stamp of another employee authorized to sign lien notices.

So my hunch is that the revenue officer probably requested the electronic lien transmission first and then decided to record the lien notices directly with the recorder's office in the interest of prioritizing the government's interest in the property before any other possible creditors of the Browns started establishing their claims on the properties.

As far as the different dollar amounts, it is still anyone's guess as to why that happened. Again, it isn't critical due to the changing daily balance.

However, what could be critical is an interesting difference in the name line on the first lien notice recorded against Elaine Brown instead of Elaine A. Brown. It mentions a couple of DBAs as well, which I would assume was the name of businesses that she operated as a sole proprietor. You will also note that a nominee lien notice was established against Elaine for the trusts that she set up. The IRS either discovered that she transferred properties to these other entities fraudulently or they wish to prevent her from doing so in the future. So these lien notices will attach to whatever property the entities have been granted by Elaine.

[Scoop]

As far as the different dollar amounts, it is still anyone's guess as to why that happened. Again, it isn't critical due to the changing daily balance.

Hmm . . . so if you were a reporter trying her darndest to be accurate, would you stick with a description like "close to $2 million?"

[The Observer]

You are so wierd!

I explained that through citing and quoting statutes. Right there in the post you quoted me from!

You are the one posting meaningless links that go nowhere and explain nothing. Not to mention your failure to file suit based on a "misfiled lien."

But I just viewed the lien notices and they were properly recorded. So the Browns are not off the hook in terms of the real property being encumbered by the lien. I am going to predict that (a) the real property will be sold and (b) you will be able to do absolutely nothing to stop it.

P.S. I get the feeling you do not get the benefits of font features like italics and bold. That must be why you are not bothering to read my posts The Observer.

Someone switched the feature off as an injunction making it more difficult to communicate with Lawprof!!

No, I don't bother agreeing with your nonsense. A subtle difference perhaps, but a difference all the same.

[The Observer]

As far as the different dollar amounts, it is still anyone's guess as to why that happened. Again, it isn't critical due to the changing daily balance.

Hmm . . . so if you were a reporter trying her darndest to be accurate, would you stick with a description like "close to $2 million?"

I would recommend going with the totals listed on the notices recorded on 5/3 that are not the "nominee" notices.

[webhick]

Due to the analysis, I'm recommending taking the Book & Page 1687-0813 and 1687-0815 (which pretty much agrees with Observer). They were both filed on 5/3/07 and are the very last to appear. 813 covers the 1040s and 815 covers the 941s. There are technically two 815s, but they contain the same exact figures so it doesn't really matter which one.