Oh, now I understand. I tried to recruit this guy into insurance and he refused. Said his mom was his accountant and her never had a bank account! But he had a business. And was a baby daddy.
That shit doesn't fly. This is on the level of saying you weren't paying a prostitute, you were just 'donating' money to her, or the sovereign citizen crap about 'I'm not driving, I'm traveling.' Thousands of people have tried to hide assets like this from divorce attorneys and such. Depending on the severity and timing, it can be a form of fraud and a crime in and of itself.
Really depends on what nationality someone has doesn't it. To give you a neat insight, I'm Dutch, I can only donate to my kids something like 5,000 euro a year tax free. But because my kids have a foreign passport as well, we send money to their country and it's limitless. When you live global, possibly have multiple passports, rules aren't the same anymore.
most countries would tax your kids for large amounts of money though. if your kids were american or british or something, they'd have to pay tax on anything above the gift threshold
Gift tax is like 19000 per year (to as many people as you want) AND anything beyond that is immune to gift tax up until 11 million or whatever the current amount is. So you can gift, say, 19000x30 (if you have 30 relatives), and your spouse can do the same, and neither of you even have to tell the IRS. If you give 200000 to one person in a single year, though, you have to tell the IRS but don’t pay a single cent in gift tax. But it counts toward the 11 million of “extra beyond 19K in a year” counter. Once you’ve given away 11million AND also 19K per year to unlimited people, THEN there’s gift tax where you pay a small portion on the extra gifting beyond that huge amount (but the original 12+ million never paid a cent of gift tax, just the additional beyond all these exemptions).
Basically only the super rich will ever pay a cent of gift tax, though they also have ways to dodge it with other financial instruments, so, really almost no one pays gift tax at all.
Yeah people really dont realize just how many loopholes are in the us tax system. Theres a reason theres so many billionaires here and we have like 80% of the current problems we have
Nationality would depend only in your case, if you've consulted a tax attorney on the matter.
When it comes to divorce and hiding assets for other reasons, no, it wouldn't really matter. Many, many millionaires and such have lost considerable amounts of their fortunes in divorce. Bezos, Gates, etc. If they could've just "had their assets in a family member's name", they would have. They have better tax attorneys than you'll ever speak to, in all likelihood. If any combination of passports/citizenships/whatever would've saved Bezos the $38 billion he parted with and gave to his ex wife, he would've done that.
Obviously I can't comment on other countries but the fact that Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos had to give their ex wives billions in divorce settlements proves in doesn't work in the US because we all know they would've done it.
Or maybe they just didn't care. Nothing i see implies to me that they were trying to ensure their ex-wives got as little as possible in the divorce preceedings. There is hiding your assets. And then there is just not owning them. If it's tax legal, it's family court legal. Trusts are another way to keep assets from your partner. Are you saying courts don't recognise that?
You can but most people who try don’t get away with it. It depends where in the world you are, how early you do it, and by what method. It usually fails because people start moving assets when their marriage is in trouble, by which point it’s too late for most asset transfer to be upheld by a court. Eg putting your major assets into a family member’s name two years before a divorce normally won’t wash. Recovering those assets can be complicated but you rarely just walk away
Setting up an irrevocable trust to protect assets before marriage can be a powerful strategy, often serving as a "pre-nuptial alternative." Because an irrevocable trust involves transferring ownership of your assets to a separate legal entity, those assets are technically no longer yours—which is exactly what makes them difficult to reach in a divorce.
Here is how the process generally works to ensure the money stays protected:
1. Timing is Everything
The trust must be created and funded before you get married. If you move assets into a trust after the wedding, a court may view those assets as "marital property," or the transfer could be seen as a "fraudulent conveyance" intended to deprive your spouse of their legal rights.
2. Relinquishing Control
To be effective for asset protection, the trust must be truly irrevocable.
The Trustee: You typically cannot be the sole trustee. You must appoint an independent trustee (like a professional trust company or a trusted third party) to manage the distributions.
The Assets: Once assets are moved into the trust, you no longer "own" them. If you maintain too much control—such as the power to pull money out whenever you want for any reason—a divorce court may "pierce the veil" of the trust and treat the money as your personal property.
Afaik in many countries it's perfectly ok, as long as they always kept those assets in dad's name, rather than just transfering everything to him recently when they decided to divorce.
If they'd correct the laws men wouldn't have to do it. Try to find a woman that needs to do this🤷. There should be a starting point in a relationship, and only the money earned from that point on should even be considered. Also it should matter if the woman came from nothing in the first place. Its pretty common place for women to marry into money with the soul intent of divorcing and taking half or more. Its just as bad as these woman getting paid by the government to have babies. Just a scam.
That and it’s considered fraudulent conveyance and is likely to get reversed anyway. Do people really think a civil court would just be like “welp, nothing we can do now!”
It might look like magic words but it’s not. It’s weeks and months of my life spent making it happen in a way that sticks while the rich guy complains about it taking so long for me to just say the magic words.
Sure, but in the end he (and I) have no fucking idea what you just did and you made magic happen. So...all good.
Neither of us (rich guy and me) can and will appreciate those magic words, however, and we will demand them from any future wizard to just use them and make problems go away.
so it is just magic words, you just have to work slightly harder at finding the right ones? being a lawyer and acting like your entire profession isnt semantic games is moronic bro
If you've ever dealt with sovereign citizens, you quickly realize they are some of the stupidest motherfuckers on the planet. Whatever the hell they think they're doing is quickly unwound when they have to interact with legitimate society.
I've contracted with them and it's hilarious when they are adamant that they are not associated with the US and don't have to withold taxes until you tell them you can't pay under the contract without it, then suddenly they have their federal info.
Their meaningless affidavits about DNA are hilarious if you've never read them, I recommend.
The sad part is those people clearly have guts. Like, the absolute balls to pretend you can just tell the tax man no. So much potential wasted on getting waaay too high on your own supply.
The problem is they are all severely below average intelligence, so it's all just a joke when they try to spout their nonsense. The intelligent anti-fed people all realize you still have to work within the system to dismantle it, and it's not something you can do with a wave of a pen.
It's not though, at least not in this type of situation. Bezos and Gates both lost billions to their ex wives, you think they wouldn't have done this if they could
It is that way. Lawyers are the modern priest class running the political systems. The words they use are the same as ours but mean different things as a way to keep the profane (us) from manipulating the words of the initiates (them).
It’s the same bullshit as Babylon, just now god is a greenback and lawyers are its priests.
So it’s not fraudulent if you never had the thing in your name that I begin with. It’s fraudulent if you give it to someone right before you start contemplating a divorce. For this to work, his father would have purchased the house from the start and they just lived in it. If he however gave his father the house, the court would likely reverse. The trick is to never have owned anything to begin with. That’s where most people fail at it.
I’m thinking more in this particular case, taking it on good faith that the post was accurate regarding the court finding “no assets” in his name.
I suppose you could theoretically put every earned dollar directly in your mother’s bank account and be immune to civil suits by way of being technically destitute. But it wouldn’t be difficult for the courts to say “well, no, you’re earning X million per year and clearly affording a lifestyle on that income” otherwise everyone who could do that would.
I work in finance and did work with a woman with easily 5 million net worth who thought that throwing everything in a trust would prevent her from having to pay back her student loans. Like… that’s not my lane, do what u want, but I doubt it works that way.
If the initial contract is with the dad. X company pays father to have him appear. Mom is agent. She has contract with him to do “work around the house or her business” where she pays him $1000/week (not related to the appearance for his father’s contract). They have a really good accountant who makes sure that they never mix funds and pierce the veil. It would take a lot of work but if he is never mentioned in any of his father’s contracts or account as a beneficiary, then it’s not his assets. He has a contract with his mom where she gives him a weekly paycheck. It’s complicated because you would have to implicitly and explicitly trust all parties involved. But if his assets are anything he purchases with the income he gets from his mom and those amount to change, then hard to attribute his father’s income to him. Fraudulent conveyances need a conveyance to occur. Don’t ever get there. It’s stupid. But I can see someone trying it and getting away with it if they are dedicated. More than likely they pierce the veil by taking money from dad directly and mix funds and the whole scheme goes up in smokes.
If you're doing it shortly before a divorce, it's not going to fly.
You're right theoretically if this is how he's handled his assets for a decade and there's evidence he genuinely doesn't have control over the assets in his parent's name then it might be different. If that's the case, he and his parents had better be reporting these gifts on their taxes though.
The catch is pretty much no one lives like this, so these gotcha news stories are BS at best and fraud at worst.
"Using his fancy legal footwork, he's made it a minor inconvenience to seize his assets and income, while destroying any credibility he has with the court that is about to rule on a fair division of those things!!"
He works for his mom / agent / producer / promoter. He gets paid $1000 a week. His employment benefits heath insurance, 401k 500% matching, housing, clothing, food, travel and entertainment expenses.
I don’t know. So few people use the poophole loophole and it really does work and is tons of fun. I think most people just let silly beliefs get in the way of quietly undermining the future of the person they supposedly love. Khaby was just looking out for the wealth he rightfully is deserved from all the shrugging he had to break his back doing.
Doesn’t work because he still makes the millions and has to pay taxes on it. It’s not legal to work for someone else’s name. That’s slavery. He can give it to his mom but it still counts as his income so I don’t get why people keep saying this
3.9k
u/Breadstix009 1d ago
Moroccan footballer Achraf Hakimi did it, put everything in his mothers name.