There’s just one problem with James’s case: the tax assessor’s office accepted and adopted Trump’s property values. If they were inflated, it only means he’s paying higher property taxes, but the fact the figures were validated and entered into the documents of record means the Government accepted them. If James wants to assert fraudulent behavior, she’s going to have to take on the city assessor’s office to explain the contrast.
I didn’t know that,thanks for sharing
WAY more than one problem.
There’s a major problem with Letitia James’s case (among many):
<><>the govt certified tax assessor’s office accepted and adopted Trump’s property values.
<><>”If” they were inflated, it means he’s paying higher property taxes to the govt,
<><>but whether the figures were validated or not, the govt tax assessor accepted them unconditionally
<><>Trump’s figures were entered into official documents of record
<><>that means the Government accepted Trump’s figures without question
<><>Trump’s figures were certified by the govt taxing Trump accordingly.
If James wants to assert fraudulent behavior, she’s going to
have to take on the NY city tax assessor to explain the
govt’s unconditional acceptance of Trump’s figures.