While Waiting: Poll: When do you guys think EPIC stage 2 hits the streets?

[Curran Giddens]

That hypothetical situation is impossible in my case. I don't owe a penny to anyone, I have zero overhead at the moment (I'm currently living at my moms), and the $ to cover both Epics is already in My_account at Red.

I don't know. Maybe others can think up solutions to hypothetical situations for their own sales agreements.

 

[Elsie N]

Sounds a little dodgy to me, what would happen if you went bankrupt & are still the legal owner of the camrea? or are you saying there is a diffrence with legal & registered owner? A bit like a car when it's registered to a 'keeper'

I'm no lawyer but I think a contract that has a future conclusion but where the money has already changed hands and where the actual goods are already in the hands of the "future" owner would be legal and binding... nothing "dodgy" at all about that commonly recognized transaction.

edit: full disclosure... I have enlisted Ketch to assist me in affecting a lease/purchase for my own R-1. I chose to do this because Ketch knows the legalities involved and is a trusted member of the RED community. He is for me the perfect go-between vis a vis buyers and sellers who otherwise do not know each other.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Sounds a little dodgy to me, what would happen if you went bankrupt & are still the legal owner of the camrea? or are you saying there is a diffrence with legal & registered owner? A bit like a car when it's registered to a 'keeper'

Once the camera or any gear of property has been legally sold with a signed agreement of a Lease to Buy contract were the only thing left to pay is the "$1.00" Buy out, the seller has lost all rights to such property and so any Debt collector and or Bank in the claim of such Property.

The Registration at RED is simply an in House registry, which gives the owner of record certain privileges.



EDIT: he he, you bit me to it Elsie, and thanks for the kind words ;~)

 

[Stephen Williams]

I'm no lawyer but I think a contract that has a future conclusion but where the money has already changed hands and where the actual goods are already in the hands of the "future" owner would be legal and binding... nothing "dodgy" at all about that commonly recognized transaction.

edit: full disclosure... I have enlisted Ketch to assist me in affecting a lease/purchase for my own R-1. I chose to do this because Ketch knows the legalities involved and is a trusted member of the RED community. He is for me the perfect go-between vis a vis buyers and sellers who otherwise do not know each other.

Hi,

It can get really complicated if the buyer or seller had any financing & somebody goes bankrupt.

The camera belongs to the seller & the seller has received money (an unsecured loan) from the 'buyer' If the seller goes bankrupt I can see the buyer loosing his camera & his money.

If the buyer goes bankrupt having taking out financing to buy something, & then it's discovered he does not own the camera...... failed to tell the finance company of the 'arrangement'.........

The seller still has a loan outstanding on the camera, the camera still legally belongs to the seller..... I don't even want to go there.

Good luck

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Hi,

It can get really complicated if the buyer or seller had any financing & somebody goes bankrupt.

The camera belongs to the seller & the seller has received money (an unsecured loan) from the 'buyer' If the seller goes bankrupt I can see the buyer loosing his camera & his money.

If the buyer goes bankrupt having taking out financing to buy something, & then it's discovered he does not own the camera...... failed to tell the finance company of the 'arrangement'.........

The seller still has a loan outstanding on the camera, the camera still legally belongs to the seller..... I don't even want to go there.

Good luck

This only takes place if and when the Loan is based on the actual property and or Serial number of such product, however, even then it is very hard for any Debt collector and or Bank entity to Repo an already sold piece of equipment, this is not a Car you are talking about, very different legal standards, which off course vary per each State.

My suggestion to you, if and when you would ever to buy something of value as used.. Do diligence!!

 

[Elsie N]

Hi,

It can get really complicated if the buyer or seller had any financing & somebody goes bankrupt.

The camera belongs to the seller & the seller has received money (an unsecured loan) from the 'buyer' If the seller goes bankrupt I can see the buyer loosing his camera & his money.

If the buyer goes bankrupt having taking out financing to buy something, & then it's discovered he does not own the camera...... failed to tell the finance company of the 'arrangement'.........

The seller still has a loan outstanding on the camera, the camera still legally belongs to the seller..... I don't even want to go there.

Good luck

Stephen, as Ketch pointed out, the lease provides for an ironclad option to complete the buy part of the agreement at the end of the agreement. Automobiles are leased/purchased daily in this country. (Maybe not in yours?... i.e. "loosing":beer so it is a common practice that is backed up by centuries, if not decades, of settled law.

edit: Heh, Heh, O.K. Ketch... this time you were the fastest on the draw.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Elsie,

Ketch wrote "this is not a Car you are talking about, very different legal standards, which off course vary per each State."

It would appear that those decades of settled law may not be applicable.

Best Stephen

Edit I am also unaware of car leases where you pay the full purchase price up front less $1

Stephen, as Ketch pointed out, the lease provides for an ironclad option to complete the buy part of the agreement at the end of the agreement. Automobiles are leased/purchased daily in this country. (Maybe not in yours?... i.e. "loosing":beer so it is a common practice that is backed up by centuries, if not decades, of settled law.

edit: Heh, Heh, O.K. Ketch... this time you were the fastest on the draw.

 

[Robert Frank]

Sounds a little dodgy to me, what would happen if you went bankrupt & are still the legal owner of the camrea? or are you saying there is a diffrence with legal & registered owner? A bit like a car when it's registered to a 'keeper'

The typical lease to own agreement has a $1 buyout at the end of the lease agreement.

As far as ownership, it is similar to buying a car, where you and the lender (or car dealer) own it together with a legally binding agreement that at the end of the term ownership is transferred completely to the buyer.


Disclosure: I am not a lawyer.

 

[Elsie N]

This only takes place if and when the Loan is based on the actual property and or Serial number of such product, however, even then it is very hard for any Debt collector and or Bank entity to Repo an already sold piece of equipment, this is not a Car you are talking about, very different legal standards, which off course vary per each State.

My suggestion to you, if and when you would ever to buy something of value as used.. Do diligence!!

Not to mention that if someone did have a bank loan on a specific camera and sold it without paying that money received from the lease/purchase toward the loan, that person would probably be in violation of laws that might lead to the seller being prosecuted criminally. I'm convinced this would not affect the purchaser in any way.

 

[Robert Frank]

Edit I am also unaware of car leases where you pay the full purchase price up front less $1

But there are many leasing companies that will do exactly that, for purchases of different kinds of equipment, other than cars.

I've also seen a variety of payment schedules, for example, with lower monthly payments and a balloon payment at the end.

 

[Stephen Williams]

The typical lease to own agreement has a $1 buyout at the end of the lease agreement.
Disclosure: I am not a lawyer.

Yes that is correct, but monthly payments along the way, not full price less $1.
In many countries lease payments are 100% tax deductible where purchase is treated differently, the asset on the accounts at the end of the day is only $1.
Hopefully the tax authorities will not think this was done to evade taxes.

 

[Elsie N]

Elsie,

Ketch wrote "this is not a Car you are talking about, very different legal standards, which off course vary per each State."

It would appear that those decades of settled law may not be applicable.

Best Stephen

Edit I am also unaware of car leases where you pay the full purchase price up front less $1

GM went bankrupt. GM had thousands upon thousands of cars leased. Did the bankruptcy court force those customers who leased from GM to return those cars? No. And I doubt they had any legal standing to do so and if a customer wanted to buy that car at the end of the lease (for the prior agreed upon price) they were able to do so.

Settled Law.

 

[Stephen Williams]

GM went bankrupt. GM had thousands upon thousands of cars leased. Did the bankruptcy court force those customers who leased from GM to return those cars? No. And I doubt they had any legal standing to do so and if a customer wanted to buy that car at the end of the lease (for the prior agreed upon price) they were able to do so.

Settled Law.

I think you will find the cars were not owned by GM directly, but by a holding company subsidiary.

 

[Elsie N]

Hopefully the tax authorities will not think this was done to evade taxes.

Almost everyone in the current (American) administration has evaded taxes without intent. Intent is no big deal.:smilielol5:

 

[Elsie N]

I think you will find the cars were not owned by GM directly, but by a holding company subsidiary.

Very good point. I think they may have just bailed out GMAC or maybe it was sold to someone else who was bailed out.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Almost everyone in the current (American) administration has evaded taxes without intent. Intent is no big deal.:smilielol5:

Interesting to know how the seller has accounted for the upfront payment, & the tax implications.

 

[Robert Frank]

Interesting to know how the seller has accounted for the upfront payment, & the tax implications.

Hehe.. Stephen, are you selling your Red One?

I think the point many are trying to make here is that there are different ways to buy things. And sell them.

 

[Elsie N]

Interesting to know how the seller has accounted for the upfront payment, & the tax implications.

Uh... you.. you're not working for... you know... (the irs) are you?

I of course will be calling you guys and asking you how you WANT me to handle it.

just joking of course. The fact of the matter is that a tax professional should help you decide how to treat it since it is possible the actual sale won't be completed until next year's tax season.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Almost everyone in the current (American) administration has evaded taxes without intent. Intent is no big deal.:smilielol5:

Not true. Nobody in the current administration has been charged with evading taxes. Tax evasion requires intent hence evasion.

What a number of administration officials were fined for was simply incorrect filings. As such you're obligated to pay the late fee, penalties and make up the difference. Some of them weren't even obligated to do that since it was beyond the statute of limitations.

If you think you're paying the correct amount of taxes, you won't be charged with tax evasion. You have to knowingly pay less than what you're obligated to pay to be charged with evasion. /my aunt is a corporate tax lawyer and that's a pet peeve of hers.

As to Leases not being taxed? Not here! I pay vehicle sales tax (which is higher than normal sales tax) and it's not a deduction on federal income tax to my knowledge. Might be different for corporations who could write off the depreciation.

 

[Elsie N]

Not true. Nobody in the current administration has been charged with evading taxes. Tax evasion requires intent hence evasion.

What a number of administration officials were fined for was simply incorrect filings. As such you're obligated to pay the late fee, penalties and make up the difference. Some of them weren't even obligated to do that since it was beyond the statute of limitations.

If you think you're paying the correct amount of taxes, you won't be charged with tax evasion. You have to knowingly pay less than what you're obligated to pay to be charged with evasion. /my aunt is a corporate tax lawyer and that's a pet peeve of hers.

As to Leases not being taxed? Not here! I pay vehicle sales tax (which is higher than normal sales tax) and it's not a deduction on federal income tax to my knowledge. Might be different for corporations who could write off the depreciation.

Wonder if those officials could stand up to scrutiny from The Lightman Group, in re: intent.:smilielol5:


Anyway, thanks for the clarification. I think it helps anyone who may be considering getting an executed R-1 with MX to rest easier.