The Villages and the IRS. From Lauren Ritchie

[graciegirl]

Gee I hope so.. You and her anyway. HER does not mean Dillywho.

Just kidding.

[Russ_Boston]

the one thing that concerns me the most about this is TV's lack of divulging the information to the buyers.


They have the latest that they know about the IRS on the district gov website. What other info are they not divulging? Do you know of something?

Everyone who buys here is given the info about the normal bonds and the maintenance bonds and the amenity fee. They run a district government meeting (monthly? - someone help here). The district setup is given on the district website.

Obviously they thought they could issue the bonds as non taxable. If the IRS says no then they have to make amends.

As a new buyer I think I'm informed - NO?

[Pturner]

Not only is information about IRS issue posted on the district gov. website, http://www.districtgov.org/links/index.aspx, but there's a prominent link to the issue directly on the home page (4th link down).

[pauld315]

They have the latest that they know about the IRS on the district gov website. What other info are they not divulging? Do you know of something?

Everyone who buys here is given the info about the normal bonds and the maintenance bonds and the amenity fee. They run a district government meeting (monthly? - someone help here). The district setup is given on the district website.

Obviously they thought they could issue the bonds as non taxable. If the IRS says no then they have to make amends.

As a new buyer I think I'm informed - NO?

Russ, it is great that you are a savvy consumer and you were fully informed due to your own due dilligence prior to purchasing. I applaud you for that. However, I would wager (if iI was a bettor) that most did not read the information related to this on the district.gov website prior to purchasing because they weren't even aware there was a potential issue like this loomng.

So, unless they explicitly pointed out that this issue could affect your ownership in the future, I don't think TV was practicing full disclosure to their customers prior to the sale. Sometimes customers just don't know what to ask about and as an ethical seller you have the responsibility to inform them.

So, as I said before, I am surprised that TV wouldn't want to make sure everyone was informed before buyiing. They could easily make sure this was the case by letting people know what was happeining between the IRS and themselves, even if it was by just defining it at a very high level so that people could look into it on their own if they so desired. I have always run bisinesses with openess and have never seen any of them suffer because of it. If they are already doing that, it is fine. If not, one has to question why they aren't.

[Taj44]

Russ, it is great that you are a savvy consumer and you were fully informed due to your own due dilligence prior to purchasing. I applaud you for that. However, I would wager (if iI was a bettor) that most did not read the information related to this on the district.gov website prior to purchasing because they weren't even aware there was a potential issue like this loomng.

So, unless they explicitly pointed out that this issue could affect your ownership in the future, I don't think TV was practicing full disclosure to their customers prior to the sale. Sometimes customers just don't know what to ask about and as an ethical seller you have the responsibility to inform them.

So, as I said before, I am surprised that TV wouldn't want to make sure everyone was informed before buyiing. They could easily make sure this was the case by letting people know what was happeining between the IRS and themselves, even if it was by just defining it at a very high level so that people could look into it on their own if they so desired. I have always run bisinesses with openess and have never seen any of them suffer because of it. If they are already doing that, it is fine. If not, one has to question why they aren't.

Bingo. Well said.

[Russ_Boston]

The problem with notification, as I see, it is WHAT should be notified? The IRS has made no ruling - it is just an open question. It would be different if there was a huge lawsuit from someone that was hanging.

As far as being an educated consumer - duh! Shame on anyone who doesn't do enough homework to satisfy themselves. Through websites like this one all the issues are brought forth and then you do your research. To be fair many people don't really care and that is fine too. But don't blame the developer for not disclosing something that they do not have to disclose. For all we know the IRS might just say that everything is OK. And if not it is not the end of TV as we know it.

[spk7951]

Russ, it is great that you are a savvy consumer and you were fully informed due to your own due dilligence prior to purchasing. I applaud you for that. However, I would wager (if iI was a bettor) that most did not read the information related to this on the district.gov website prior to purchasing because they weren't even aware there was a potential issue like this loomng.

So, unless they explicitly pointed out that this issue could affect your ownership in the future, I don't think TV was practicing full disclosure to their customers prior to the sale. Sometimes customers just don't know what to ask about and as an ethical seller you have the responsibility to inform them.

So, as I said before, I am surprised that TV wouldn't want to make sure everyone was informed before buyiing. They could easily make sure this was the case by letting people know what was happeining between the IRS and themselves, even if it was by just defining it at a very high level so that people could look into it on their own if they so desired. I have always run bisinesses with openess and have never seen any of them suffer because of it. If they are already doing that, it is fine. If not, one has to question why they aren't.


Ok, but let me provide a bit of a stretch of the imagination to your position. In another post I provided a link to a POA article that stated if there is a negative outcome that the POA expected the developer to do right by the residents. So if I was the developer my Plan A would be to fight this and I would certainly have a Plan B ready which no doubt would be related to paying the charge. So if Plan B is to absorb the payment, yes this is hypothetical on my part, then why would I want to telegraph my position to anyone?

[Advogado]

The bottom line, which may have become obscured in the complexity of the situation, is that the risk to us Villagers is that the IRS sustains its position and, as a result, the two central CDDs (which are controlled by the Developer) can't or won't cover (by taxing the Developer's properties within the central Districts) the enormous costs involved and still have funds to provide our amenities. Bear in mind that the central CDDs have NO power to tax Villagers outside those two Districts in order to raise the funds.

IF that scenario does occur, then the recourse of the Villagers is to bring a new class action suit against the Developer, who contractually promised all of us that we would receive the amenities in exchange for the amenity fees. The Developer remains responsible with respect to that promise, regardless of the fact that the Developer assigned its rights under the amenity contracts to the central CDDs.

I continue to believe that the most reliable source for complete and unbiased coverage of the IRS investigation is POA meetings and the POA Bulletin, which can be found on the POA website.

[jackz]

Has anyone figured out the worst case scenario should the IRS prevail?
Will the developer be liable or will all owners receive an assesment?

Looking to buy within the next 18 months and this subject is a concern.

Thanks

Jack

[champion6]

Has anyone figured out the worst case scenario should the IRS prevail?
Will the developer be liable or will all owners receive an assesment?

Looking to buy within the next 18 months and this subject is a concern.

Thanks

JackNO ONE knows. Like everyone else, you simply need to wait for factual information to be reported by the parties involved in this matter.

[jannd228]

For all we know the IRS might just say that everything is OK. And if not it is not the end of TV as we know it.[/QUOTE]

um do you live in America, the IRS ALWAYS wins, although recently with the mess we are in there is a movement to repeal the 16th amendment,

I would open a separate account as a "just in case account" for this issue because the IRS is using their protocol by changing agents and rewarding others with promotions, they also give bonuses for resolved cases,

there is this NEW thing out there called the internet and Google, I suggest you find keywords, you will find MANY cases similar to the one the developers of TV are currently involved in, keyword here is developers, they are going to pass the resolution of this case onto the owners in TV, it is called the AMERICAN WAY

as I suggested before contact those in The Villages who have sued the developers previously and start working up a resolution; whether you have done your homework or not it doesn't hurt to be prepared, this case is NOT going to go away and the IRS is going to win

[golf2140]

For all we know the IRS might just say that everything is OK. And if not it is not the end of TV as we know it.

um do you live in America, the IRS ALWAYS wins, although recently with the mess we are in there is a movement to repeal the 16th amendment,

I would open a separate account as a "just in case account" for this issue because the IRS is using their protocol by changing agents and rewarding others with promotions, they also give bonuses for resolved cases,

there is this NEW thing out there called the internet and Google, I suggest you find keywords, you will find MANY cases similar to the one the developers of TV are currently involved in, keyword here is developers, they are going to pass the resolution of this case onto the owners in TV, it is called the AMERICAN WAY

as I suggested before contact those in The Villages who have sued the developers previously and start working up a resolution; whether you have done your homework or not it doesn't hurt to be prepared, this case is NOT going to go away and the IRS is going to win[/QUOTE]

What in the h--l are you saying? This post is really confusing!!!

[jannd228]

sorry my cut and paste was from Russ-Boston, read his then mine

The IRS doesn't back down, developers usually pass expenses onto others it is the way it all works IMHO

[Russ_Boston]

Jan,

Very pessimistic attitude. The IRS doesn't always win. And in this case there is nothing to win since they haven't presented an official case yet. My point is that they may not even bring action.

And if they do - and they win - then it will not be the end of TV as we know it. The judgement against the Morse's for the amenities will be higher than this judgment and that didn't bring anyone/anything down.

[jannd228]

Jan,

Very pessimistic attitude. The IRS doesn't always win. And in this case there is nothing to win since they haven't presented an official case yet. My point is that they may not even bring action.

And if they do - and they win - then it will not be the end of TV as we know it. The judgement against the Morse's for the amenities will be higher than this judgment and that didn't bring anyone/anything down.

maybe not pessimistic, just informed and aware, this is what Wikipedia states (I know would never let students use it, but it is interesting to read anyway)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Service

[EdV]

maybe not pessimistic, just informed and aware

I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree with you on both of those points. If the IRS always has the last word and always wins, we would not have a need for The United States Tax Court whose primary purpose is to resolve tax disputes between the IRS and taxpayers. If you would like to become informed and aware, then here’s a link to their website: http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/about.htm

I’d also like to say that Advogado’s summary a few posts back is spot on as to the worst case scenario of where this is going.

[jannd228]

I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree with you on both of those points. If the IRS always has the last word and always wins, we would not have a need for The United States Tax Court whose primary purpose is to resolve tax disputes between the IRS and taxpayers. If you would like to become informed and aware, then here’s a link to their website: http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/about.htm

I’d also like to say that Advogado’s summary a few posts back is spot on as to the worst case scenario of where this is going.

good point forgot about that post

[Bogie Shooter]

good point forgot about that post

Just more rehashed opinion.....no facts. Why waste the keystrokes?

[Talk Host]

Just more rehashed opinion.....no facts. Why waste the keystrokes?


Because they want to discuss it and that is the service this forum intends to provide.

Those who consider it a waste of key stokes should conserve their own key stokes.

[jannd228]

Because they want to discuss it and that is the service this forum intends to provide.

Those who consider it a waste of key stokes should conserve their own key stokes.

I have a family member who worked for the IRS, now retired, he reads the board too,

love all the comments and threads here, have a great day everyone