The first sale I was refering to was business to private, the title conveyed to the partner personally, ostensibly for use as a personal dwelling.
I see you don't figure on registering the title on that first transaction LOL.
By your specification, is that house has not been lived in but has sold by an business affiliate instead for an obvious profit. That first is a defacto business transaction and will be held so by the courts if you should try this little evasion tactic.
But it's your hide on the line not mine, so go for it. Who knows the state treasurer might not notice it when the title is proved for the real consumer of that home on it's actual retail sale. But I certainly wouldn't by my liberty on it.
Criminal prosecution would be subject to proving the initial buyer's intentions.
Yes for the jail term, however the civil side is by no means a matter of intentions, defacto result is sufficient there and preponderence of the evidence is all that is required for that side of the case.
However, looking at your specification of a house purchase for resale only, presented to a final consumer as not lived in. The intentions are more than apparent and will be to a jury, what you are forgetting is that final purchaser is on the hook for that additional $6k at least until he starts talking to the prosecution's investigators. Good luck.
Glad to see you back, geez. You are, as always, very thorough. This is not an attempt at a gotcha game, I'm quite serious. I had already considered your points before asking you.
Then you already had your answer. Obviously there is no more loophole there than there is for a traffic speed limit that is ignored when a cop isn't looking. If you're caught that's the breaks baby. The statute has it covered. If not, more power to yah. Government revenues and spending need to be trimmed, preferably by action of the electorate demanding such, but your informal way works well if you are willing to take a risk with at least three folks in on the shennanigans and that last one who is going to be looking after his own hide before you and your accomplice's in a fraudulent representation.
The final buyer of this home is not led to believe the home has never been lived in. They have no liability at all. It's no different than the end of the year vehicle purchases by businesses for personal use and used as a business tax write off. At the dealership I work at, a contractor just bought a few trucks for his "business". One was a bright yellow S-10 Extreme. Certainly not a work truck, it was bought for his son's personal use. I doubt the IRS will be breaking down his door over it. Nor the resturaunt owner who bought his wife a new minivan. Although he has a removable placard to hang on the door advertising their business, you can bet it will never scratch the paint. These are examples of tax evasion tactics that are accepted under the current tax code, as there will be under Fair Tax. Any complex tax system invites evasion by those with the insight to find them and the balls to use them. Such a system also requires constant vigilance to thwart such attacks. The beauty of APT is that there are no such loopholes, and therefore no policing to watch it. While Fair Tax reduces, not eliminates, filing and oversight, it does not reduce involvement to the extent that APT does. The argument that the daunting 23% sales tax will be offset by the reduction in embedded taxes is also true of APT, like it or not. While I've heard the argument that APT cascading is excessive, I have seen no examples of the cascade effect vs. loss of embedded taxes. Don't get me wrong, Fair Tax does have its points, but it is no better a replacement for the current code than APT is without further investigation and refinement.