Land Tax

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

it’s all negotiable so it is possible to challenge them. I personally don’t know anyone who is/has doing/done this, sorry. You could be the first!

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

There is a Q and A tomorrow night, you could ask Mark your question there. register for it here…https://solutionsempowerment.org/event/general-qa-november-08/

[G]

Do you have your land title?

Is it a title “In Fee Simple” all 3 words required.

have you read the land tax assessment act. I think it is the 1976 WA Act. I may come back and correct that if I learn otherwise.

Read section 35 regarding appeals.

Issues relating to land can be dangerous ground as the Government will go after the land with great enthusiasm. Read Section 45. Read Section 50 & 51.

I find it interesting that land owners are obliged to furnish the State Tax Commissioner with an annual return on the 30th of June each year for the purposes of obtaining a tax assessment and failure to do so enables the STC to make their own assessment and possibly apply penalties for the failure to furnish a return.

I wonder how many land owners furnish the STC with a return? I wonder if penalties are applied?

[damianx303]

I am on the brink of full blown dispute with the Vic SRO.

My land value sky rockets, so the land tax assessment does the same, yet I have no benefit whatsoever of the value increase, until one day, if I sell – yet SRO claims EVERY Year, Yet also slogged with CGT.

Also, the land tax now makes up 32% of the GROSS earnings, before expenses (including rates), and before the NET amount added to personal income for another slog of tax.

This can not be constitutional.

I doubt this “legislation” is promoting prosperity for Auzzies with a 2nd ppty. (i inherited this – whoops, I’m sorry) and is in “good Governance” as stipulated in the constitution.

Happy to take this offline and discuss seriously how “WE” the power of the people can go forward.

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

Maybe ask Mark abotu this at the next Q and A? https://solutionsempowerment.org/event/general-qa-november-15/

solutionsempowerment.org

Access Restricted (Not an Active Member) – SolutionsEmpowerment.org

Access Restricted (Not an Active Member) – SolutionsEmpowerment.org

[G]

@damianx303 What are you being taxed on?

Vacant Residential Land?

Sounds like it’s a rental or business if it’s got an income? Rural?

[damianx303]

Its a residential rental.

Very old and worn house, but value of land is apparently very high.

[G]

I wonder if the STC is receiving any secret commissions?

[damianx303]

Your best and most powerful tool, is there own, which they can not defend against.

You / we must all learn the “Laws of Equity”.

This is our TRUE and only ticket for freedom.

There is plenty of case law on this too.

But, you have to do your own research into it.

Nothing comes to those who seek the easy way out.

And there is nothing easy about Law, but laws of equity is pretty straight forward. Once you understand how to communicate with “them”.

The 3 step process has some validity.

We will break current legislations only by way of using laws of equity, high court and chancery.

That’s more than likely where things will need to go to restore balance and fairness into the system.

Here’s a starting point for you. This will save you about 2 years of rabbit hole digging.

SUPREME COURT ACT 1986 – SECT 29

Law and equity to be concurrently administered

(1) Subject to the provisions of this or any other Act, every court exercising jurisdiction in Victoria in any civil proceeding must continue to administer law and equity on the basis that, if there is a conflict or variance between the rules of equity and the rules of the common law concerning the same matter, the rules of equity prevail.

Good luck.

www8.austlii.edu.au

SUPREME COURT ACT 1986 - SECT 3 Definitions

Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII), a joint facility of UTS and UNSW Faculties of Law.

[chessflower]

Would be interested to know if someone has had success with discharging Land Tax liability with the SRO pirates and which method ( BOE,PN or any other method ) they used? The pirates in Vic have gone bit over board here….

[damianx303]

see previous response chessflower.

Firstly, in any dealing with these authorities, you must provide evidence.

Under the Land Valuation Act 1960, it states in section 5 that “all things must be taken into consideration”

ALL THINGS.

There is also a section somewhere that states, “the capacity for the land/property to generate an income”

So you need to prove to them that something is not equitable, that the current claim is unfair, unreasonable, is likened to unjust enrichment, burdensome, breach’s the Charter of Human Rights Victoria (property rights) and so on, breaches legislation etc…. To these assertations they will need to provide a rebuttal or some form of adequate “reply”. Remember – silence is a “response”, careful with choice of words.

A non-rebuttal/inadequate reply is their acquiescence or agreement to your assertation/statements which you can use against them in court through affidavit if the matter cant be resolved before hand.

This is exactly where i am at now with SRO. multiple letters latter (all hand delivered with photographic receipt of delivery), a huge amount of evidence of a inequitable, unjust, self enriching, unfair, unreasonable, burdensome tax system, and their acknowledgement of my correspondence, which was now about 2 months ago.

Basically, SRO claims $10,500 in land tax from an evidenced incorrect land valuation of an investment property that generates $24,000.

1. The amount is incorrect because the valuation is incorrect and

2. Almost 50% of property revenue is unjust, unfair, unreasonable, burdensome etc….

IS THAT EQUITABLE ???????

The answer is no. Anyone can see that. Any court will see that.

They have got this so, so so wrong.

So you need to go back to them and express principles based on equity in combination with all the maxims of law at your disposal.

My favorite is:

“EQUITY WILL NOT SUFFER A WRONG WITHOUT REMEDY”

Maxims are extremely powerful. When combined with laws of Equity, where there is an unjust situation, these 2 principles will open the doors for justice.

[chessflower]

Thanks Damian,

In my case, its a property, my house in which my sister lives who has a psychiatric illness and a physical back issue. She does not pay anything for living there, other than her own elec, gas, water bills. I pay for the rates and SRO Land tax, based upon their version of its value. I do not get any revenue/rent from my sister, for obvious reasons.

I did tell them this years ago, but they are adamant that because I don’t physically reside there, I have to pay their claim.

This year that Land tax went from $540 to $1600 thanks to the bullshit Convid cost and this has upset me further, and I am considering perhaps a POE or a BOE, or Accepted for Value, but I am not confident enough of the process to execute it, nor do I know anyone that has done, probably other than Mark himself.

If you have some spare time, and wouldn’t mind a chat offline or any other advice, I’d appreciate it.

Regards,

Tom

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

Hi Tom it may be best to learn the BOE and PN processes (via webinars and buying modules) as unlike the A4v you can include a default and liability clause in those processes if you want to and if they default on the BOE or PN they will then owe you four times what they are asking and it will give you the commercial energy to do a statutory demand for payment if you so choose. Anyway study those processes in detail before taking them on and maybe learn how to discharge a parking ticket and other small matters before you take on something that is more challenging and harder to get past the line..

[damianx303]

I agree with <b style=”background-color: var(–bb-content-background-color); font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; color: var(–bb-body-text-color);”>morag-janet

I can guide you with those other things i raised previously regarding your case. They too are very powerful.

There are many elements that the SRO are in breach of through investigations – in studying specific legislation and their code of conduct too.

if you are still interested in those aspects, drop me a line on my email drm9@yahoo.com to discuss further your particulars. I’m not sure how S.E. will view that, it may be to their discretion to allow an off line communication, but its all help at the end of the day.

Cheers,

Damian