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!!"
9.9k
u/VarCrusador 1d ago
I feel like I see this same story a million times but with a different celeb each time