Posted on 12/08/2012 3:50:23 AM PST by LiveFreeOrDie2001
So I saw this deal on a nice car on an Automotive enthusist's website. The car was in California, I am in Minnesota.
I agree to buy the car, fly down 1-way, check out the car and do the following:
- Write up a purchase agreement for the amount (I have a copy).
- Give him a Bank Cashier's Check for the full amount (I have a copy).
- We go to the DMV in Ca., do all the paperwork and I drive home to Mn. (I have a copy).
Now the problem....
Minnesota says the car is much more than what I payed for it... like $5,000 more. (Well, NO KIDDING, it was a deal, that's why I went to that extent to get it!)
Minnesota will not give me the clear title for the car until I pay several hundred more.
Can they really do this?
Isn't there some Commerce Clause?
I payed in full for the transaction and the transaction is complete!!
This was a YEAR ago and I do not want to give them more money if not necessary!
This sounds like a fairly standard transaction. Each State will have its own book of values for vehicles. This is to prevent buyers from avoiding sales tax by constructing sham transactions at very low purchase prices.
You screwed up... When buying out of state do not transfer the title until you get to your home state. Get the clear, signed, negotiable title in hand and process it when you get home.
Yep - they started that crap in Kansas a few years back. Got a ton of flack, mainly because of parents “selling” cars to their kids for $1 - and then being hit with full value sales tax.
I’ve heard if you move to Ca. with a car you pay their tax on your already owned vehicle. (not sure it was true, sounds close to it now with this)
This thread is useless without pictures.
LOVE the tag line.
What would make the seller comfortable with release of the car w/o the title transfer?? Can a seller let the car go with some other form proving he no longer owns it, you know to protect himself.. No one selling should just let the car go with just a signed title. ( I’ve been looking for a certain model, I may come across this)???
I believe CA charges the difference in sales tax rates from the other state, but only if the car is brought into the state for registration within a certain number of days from the out-of-state purchase date.
Most states also have add a penalty if you don't register the car in their state within a certain number of days from when you bring it into the state. The trick is to remember that the date you "bring" the car into the state must be after the sales-tax add-on, but before the penalty date for late registration.
It can be done. I did it more than once when I purchased a car outside of California, and then moved it into the state.
"have add" = "add"
Thanks, glad to have seen this post.. Not glad for R/Field.
Actually what was done in Ca. all had to be done there.
Mark Dayton is the governer here. He lives off trusts that are kept in South Dakota.
Meant Livefree not R/field, sorry!
You want to live in liberal Minnesota? If yes, then you pay. I left, because I’m right.
Sorry to say that it’s a common practice - keeps parents from selling their grown kids a nice car for $1 and avoiding the taxes...Not saying it’s right, but it’s nothing new.
Ran into the same thing buying a vehicle in Ga to be ;licensed in SC. Ga wanted their $750 and SC wanted their $700. The tax law is clear, Ga tax is not collected for a vehicle leaving the state. When I called the state tax office to get the proper procedure, the gov’t drone lectured me on my obligation to pay taxes.
I canceled the sale with the dealer I was working with and paid cash to an individual for the car I wanted, done deal.
Ran it for a year with the CA plates?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
