There is a special trickery in some scams and here is one we can see clearly.

Here is an excerpt from my book, "65th Octave" "Con men rely on the public's acceptance of authority figures. A fraud always relies on one of four fatal attractions, fear, greed, anger or lust." The note I received from the reader below shows how this works.

		"Dear Gary,

		I appreciate your earnestness in protecting people from scams. However regarding 		the subject of "Pure Trusts" there is considerable amounts of misinformation 		both pro and con. I am enclosing some court case excerpts to you to illustrate 		that pure trusts do exist and are valid. There have been numerous instances 		where so called pure trusts have been set up and sold that have been abusive 		stuctures and have basically operated as alter egos. These stuctures have been 		rightly condemned by the courts. This does not mean nor should we draw the 		conclusion that all pure trusts are illegal or abusive; as perhaps the IRS and 		others would like us to believe.

		Pure trust organizations have a very effective and useful place in estate 		planning and other considerations of protecting one's property, if they are 		constucted properly. They do not depend on statuatory law and thus have been 		overlooked by lawyers who have been schooled in statuatory law only. Pure trusts 		are entities of federal law and more specifically the Constitution, whereas most 		business and other trust organizations are creatures of state law.

		It is not necessary to go overseas to establish an effective trust program. If 		you would like more information on this subject you may contact me."

The reader then included this:

		TRUSTS AS LEGAL ENTITIES

		Weeks vs. Sibley, D.C. 269 F 135, " A Pure Trust is not illegal if formed for 		the express purpose of avoiding taxation."

		Phillips vs. Blatchford, 127 Mass 510, " A Pure Trust is not illegal if formed 		for the express purpose of avoiding taxation."

		Edwards vs. Commissioner, 415 F 2d 578,582, 10th Cir.(1969), "Dignity of 		contract cannot be set aside because a tax benefit results either by design or 		accident."

		Phillips vs. Blatchford, 137 Mass 510 (1884), as stated by Mr. Justice Holmes 		"An association does not become illegal simply because another very like it is 		taxed."

		TRUSTS AS BUSINESS ENTITIES

		Baker vs.. Stern, ALR 462 , the Court said "It is established by legal 		precedence that Pure Trusts are lawful, valid business organizations."

		Burnett vs. Smith, SW 1007 (1922), the Court ruled " Trust or trust estate is a 		legal entity for almost all purposes as are Common Law Trusts."

		Smith vs. Morse, 2 CA 524 , A Pure Trust is established by contract, and any law 		or procedure in its operation, denying or obstructing contract rights impairs 		contractual obligation and is, therefore violative of the United States 		Constitution.

		Crocker vs. MacCloy, 649 US SUP 39 at 270 , A Pure Trust organization, consists 		of a US constitutional right to contract which cannot be abridged. The agreement 		when executed becomes a federal organization and not under laws passed by any of 		the several legislatures.

		Elliot vs. Freeman, 220 US 178 , A Pure Trust is not subject to legislative 		control. The United states Supreme Court holds that the Trust relationship comes 		under the realm of equity, based upon the common law, and is not subject to 		legislative restrictions as are corporations and other organizations created by 		legislative authority.

		Schumann-Heink vs. Folsum, 159 NE 250 , The basis for "Common Law Trust" in this 		connection, is not that such organizations are creatures of common law, as 		distinguished from equity, but that they are created under the common law of 		contracts and do not depend on any statute.

		Schumann-Heink vs. Folsum, 159 NE 250, If it is free from control by Certificate 		holders, then it is a Pure Trust.

		Berry vs. McCourt, 204 NE 2d 235 (1965), A Pure Trust is a contractual		relationship in Trust form."

Plus there was more and looking at all this started me wondering….

The authority figure in this instance are these excerpts. This authority is enhanced by discrediting lawyers and suggesting that some lawyers are schooled in some other type of law. I asked eClub legal advisors attorney, Joe Cox and Leslie Share advisors their thoughts on this note.

Joe Cox jcox@coxnici.com replied first.

		"Gary, The Pure Trust is a scam. There are NO tax savings. That is how it is 		sold. A complete and careful reading of the cases will show that these are NOT 		tax cases and contail NO tax saving tricks. The trust is a contract a contract 		can be a trust and so on. But, income is income and is taxed in the trust or out 		of the trust. You can find exerpts of cases that when taken alone can say 		anything. This guy could not stand the heat if he had to debate the issue. Show 		me the income and estate tax saving with this trust. It is not there."

Tax attorney and legal advisor Leslie Share at Packman Neuwahl & Rosenberg las@pnrlaw.com was even more descriptive.

		"Pure garbage. A pure trust has as much viability as claiming the world is flat 		or the moon is made of green cheese.

So how can you know who to believe? Be sure that the person who is advising you can also defend you in court. Check their credentials in defending their clients. This will be the most important time you will need them if your structure is challenged.

By the way, I know that both Leslie and Joe have had great success in defending their clients. Until next message, good investing!

Gary

Similar Articles

The following articles contain content that is similar to this article, "More Scams":

• Another Scam Outrage
• A powerful asset protection and tax avoidance tip
• Another Rip Off and How to Save $5,700 Bucks!
• Tax Tip
• How to Gain Asset Protection and Reduce Tax