Using Nontaxable Business Entities
Pure Natural Law Trusts, sole corporations, business corporations in tax havens around the world, and trusts in tax havens, have been used successfully for centuries for protection from all kinds of things. Regardless of where one lives and works, one can make use of these entities.
Pure Natural Law Trusts, tax haven corporations, sole corporations, unincorporated business organizations, asset protection trusts, secret trusts, COLATOS, business trust organizations, sovereign trusts . . . what are they? What do they all have in common? What are their benefits? How do they compare? All this education and more is available through thousands of books, websites, and seminars worldwide. Suffice it to say here, that millions and millions of businesses are already operating totally legally with absolutely no tax liability whatsoever.
Wealthy families and businesses have been using these trusts for tax benefits as well as protection from lawsuits, probate, and all kinds of other things for centuries. No new changes in the laws in recent years have changed this, and it is extremely unlikely to change in the future either, because the elite who ultimately influence the lawmaking use these very same entities themselves. They won’t “shoot themselves in the foot”.
Sovereign Natural Law Trusts are not “offshore” trusts in the usual sense of the word, although they can be operated anywhere in the world. The one thing defining them is that they are not “statutory” entities (like so-called “living” trusts) deriving their legitimacy and permission to exist from some government. They are sovereign, deriving their authority from the universal and unlimited private right to voluntarily enter into contract. Is this status being honored in the courts? Yes.
Uses of Trusts and Offshore Companies
by Randall H. (reprinted with permission)
“A King knows how to put and how to keep his financial estate in order,
And how to keep it productive, protected, and private.”
From 5000 B.C. until about 1250 A.D., the King or emperor was considered to be the only Sovereign individual, with divine rights bestowed upon him. The common man was considered to be a slave to satisfy the King’s needs. During this era of strong centralized authority, creative people conceived the trust instrument, formulated it, and secured legal status for it at an early date. Plato, for example, used a trust to create a Sovereign University in Greece around 400 B.C. Trusts were a part of Roman law as well.
In England, trusts were used as early as the eleventh century, and by the fifteenth century, were being enforced by the Courts of Chancery. Around 1200 A.D., the knights who had been fighting for the King resented him taking their land when they went off to war. In 1215 they wrote the Magna Carta, a trust, that for the first time would give man Sovereignty and ownership over his lands.
King John objected, wanting to know why he should sign such a document, since he felt he was the only Sovereign. His objections soon subsided when he was told that if he did not sign the Magna Carta, the knights would cut off his head later that day, as pre-arranged. Realizing his option was limited, the King agreed.
Today, the Magna Carta is regarded as the first contract recognizing Man as Sovereign. Of course, the Magna Carta was limited in scope, as only the knights and land barons were considered Sovereign, and not the common man or serf. However, it was a step in the right direction toward greater Sovereignty for larger groups of people.
The second step toward Sovereignty for all persons was the creation of what we now regard as “Natural Law Trusts.” Knights would have their estates held by the church, or often selecting a friend to be Trustee. The church or friend would hold the property in trust for the benefit of the knight and his family. If the knight did not come back from battle his family still had the benefit of the estate, because the trust as a separate entity could not die.
Trusts, as we know them today, came to us from England around the 16th century. During this time the kings still did not recognize individual property rights. People were not allowed to will their property to others, and they could not give their property to charity.
Individuals wanted greater freedom – to give their land to others during their lifetime, and leave that property as an inheritance to those whom they loved. To bypass the King’s imposed control over their personal property; the idea of entering into a simple contract with a friend emerged. The concept was simple; the King could not take away property which a person did not “own.” The friend would agree to use the property under certain terms set forth. These “uses,” as they were then known, came to be called “trusts,” because the friend was trusted to do those things upon which they had agreed.
These devices worked, because the property had been given away. In this manner, many people insulated their estates from their personal and civil liabilities.
In the early 1600’s, pilgrims who came to the New World further expanded the Sovereignty concept. They formulated the Mayflower Compact, which declared all men to be Sovereign, with unalienable, God-given Rights. These pilgrims also brought the knowledge of trusts
with them, and the wealthy ones among them immediately began to establish land trusts to protect their estates. In fact, in the 1700’s, Robert Morris, Governor of the Virginia Colony and a prominent financier of the American Revolution, had Patrick Henry establish a trust for his property. At the time, King George, III was taxing property owned by any English subject, but could not tax land owned by a Sovereign. The trust that Morris created, The North American Land Company, is still in existence today.
Since those early colonial days, the use of trusts has been kept intact by the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, which states: “No state shall…. pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts”. Natural law pure equity trusts have been used since that time by the knowledgeable and wealthy who knew how to be Sovereign in their estate.
What is a trust?
A trust is a unique legal relationship. According to Scott on Trusts, it is established the moment that legal and equitable titles are separated. A trust has some corporate characteristics, but it is not treated as a corporation. Black’s Law Dictionary defines a trust as a “right of property . . . held by one party for the benefit of another.”
A trust is a contract based on the confidence that one person (the Creator), places in another (the Trustee), for the benefit of a third person (the Beneficiary), with respect to property (Corpus), that has been placed in trust. The Trustees assume a fiduciary responsibility to the Beneficiary, and as such, have a special duty to perform their obligations on behalf of the trust, for the benefit of the Beneficiary.
A trust has many advantages. A trust can perform legal acts. It can save money by saving on taxes, probate, attorney fees, and other related expenses. A trust can avoid unnecessary delays, manage personal and business affairs more efficiently, protect loved ones against others, protect property against unnecessary liability, provide for better documentation and accounting, protect privacy, and accomplish many important objectives during one’s life and beyond, in a most efficient manner.
The use of a “Trust” has taken on a different meaning since ordinary men began to use them. Trusts were used for centuries by the super rich as they exercised the right to protection of wealth. Now, many trusts are called “shams”, as a result of the common people adopting its use. High profile attorneys enter the courtroom in representing a super rich client and the trust stands without question. The ordinary man may find his trust scrutinized. He enters the courtroom to find his assets dangerously exposed as any judge can set aside the trust, no matter how well formed or well structured. Such is the case whether the trust is a conventional statutory law trust, natural law trust (i.e. Pure Trust Organization, “PTO”) or natural law business trust (i.e. Unincorporated Business Organization, “UBO”).
Many people depend on protection under the natural law pure business trust, intended to operate on the principle of natural law and be outside the jurisdiction of the courts. Today however, judges have increased power inside the courtroom. They can order the trust be set aside and with it goes the protection. To be right, is of little value as the court demolishes the protection a pure business trust was structured to offer and instead seizes the assets. Years of legal battle are required to make right the scenario; in the meantime, the assets are long gone.
HOUSE OF FREEDOM...
combines the asset protection provisions of the Private Agreement / Contract with the asset protection provisions of a Business Trust (UBO). The result is a “pure natural law sovereign private contract trust”, a better overall asset protection device than the trust alone. It offers the protection of natural law business trusts under Natual Law with the protection of private agreement / contract under Contract Law, combined into one document providing total asset protection. NO JUDGE, NO ONE, HAS JURISDICTION OVER ONE’S RIGHT TO CONTRACT.
Article 1, Section 10 of the united States Constitution states, “… No state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts.” This is supported by the U. S. Supreme Court case Hale vs. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906) which was speaking the “Law of the Land”. It is the most quoted U.S. Supreme Court case in history, and has never been overturned.
In Hale vs. Henkel, it was the opinion of the court: “The individual may stand upon his constitution rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may intend to incriminate him. He owes no duty to the State, since he receives nothing there from, beyond the protection of his life and property.”
Another very famous U.S. Supreme Court case, also referred to the obligation clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, states “no state shall pass any law impairing the Obligation of contracts.” Dartmouth College vs. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819) Chief Justice John Marshall.
Once an asset is conveyed into the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST, its conveyance is irrevocable. Said asset of the company is held in “Fee Simple”, meaning an estate in which the owner and heirs have the unconditional power of disposition. Thus, the property is owned by the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST, its Managing Directors having unconditional power of disposition.
Managing Directors perform the day to day operation of the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST in a fiduciary capacity, which refers to a capacity where one transacts for another. As the Managing Directors perform a business transaction, handle monies or property of the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST, business is done not for his own benefit, it is performed for the benefit of another.
Once the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST is established and in working form, should anyone make an inquiry about the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST, the Managing Directors may raise the “Jurisdictional Challenge” by reading or presenting the “Constructive Notice”. The Managing Directors should fully realize the tremendous power it has against the statutory entity challenging the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST.
Listed below are some cases citing jurisdictional challenges:
- “Once JURISDICTION is challenged, it must be proven” Hagens vs. Lavine., 415 u.s. tee Note 3.
- “JURISDICTION can be challenged at any time, even on final determination.” Basso vs. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F. 2nd 906 at 910.
- “The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven” Main vs. Thiboutot., 100 S Ct. 2502 (1980).
- “Where there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are nullity, and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon strict collateral attack.” Thompson vs. Tolmie., 2 Pet. 157., 7 L. Ed. 381. Griffith vs. Frazier., 8 Cr. 9., 3 L. Ed. 471.
FOR EXAMPLE: CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE
To Whom It May Concern:
This notice is to advise all persons and agencies that THE NAME OF THE PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST is a private contract. This private entity is created under natural law and protected by the U.S. Constitution and Contract Law.
Furthermore, I am the managing director and NOT one of the owners.
If any persons or agencies allege that this Constitutional and Private entity has come under some statute, rule or regulation, please put it in writing then sign it. Furthermore, please specify what jurisdiction your statutory entity has over this Private entity.
In addition, this statement serves as Construction Notice that this Private entity, in the eyes of the Law, is protected under Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution and trespassers may be prosecuted to the fullest extent.
Note: You may attach some jurisdiction challenged cases to the Construction Notice; the Construction Notice may be recorded in the County where the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST is doing business.
It is further possible to combine the power of contract (PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST) and having the PRIVATE CONTRACT PURE TRUST be the owner of 99% of a statutory structure known as a limited liability company (LLC); leaving you only 1% ownership in a statutory company, the (LLC). Some find that this is the best combination to have in today’s society.
Keep in mind … ownership means liability. To be free, one should control and not own!f contracts… .”
Burnett v. Smith, 240 SW 1007 (1922) (US. Supreme Court)
Contracts and Trust Law
United States Constitution, Article I, Section 10.1
“No state shall…. pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts… .”
Burnett v. Smith, 240 SW 1007 (1922) (US. Supreme Court)
“A Pure Trust is established by contract and any law or procedure in its operation, denying or obstructing contract rights impairs contract obligation and is therefore, in violation of the United States Constitution.
The Origin and Uses of International Business Companies
(IBC) (A foreign corporation or trust)
Throughout history the financial Sovereign has often done business outside his home country. If his home country had an excessively high tax program he would find ways to legally avoid the taxing agency. One of those developments was the use of a foreign corporation or trust.
One thing the tax collectors in most countries do not have power to tax is a foreign corporation that is not engaged in a trade or business within the home country, and is not controlled by a citizen of the home country. In other words, if that foreign company has no source of income from within the home country, and is not actively engaged in a trade or business within the home country, and is not controlled by a home country taxpayer, then the tax collector cannot tax it.
Now you can see why the Sovereign must know how to create different entities for financial privacy and protection, and why offshore companies and trusts in tax haven countries have become essential for any Sovereign.
A FINANCIALLY SOVEREIGN ESTATE
1. Controls its Tax Obligations It pays tax only on what it wants to. By giving up ownership and maintaining the right to enjoy the property, you benefit without the legal responsibilities. If your estate is in trust, it is free from probate and avoids inheritance tax. When you die, there is nothing to probate, nothing to tax, nothing for the government or outsiders to control.
2. Has Privacy. Since a trust is a right and not a privilege, the government does not have the ability to have the same type of control over your estate as it does with a corporation, partnership, limited liability company (LLC), or sole proprietorship. The public is generally excluded from the affairs of a trust.
3. Has Liability Protection. When you don’t own anything, you can’t lose anything. By having your estate in a properly managed trust, you can increase your ability to become judgment proof. The Sovereign knows that by letting go and giving up ownership he is giving up liability, yet keeping the benefits.
Your Right to Sovereignty
Know that you are Sovereign. Your Unalienable Right of Sovereignty simply exists. You were born a Sovereign; however, there has been an attempt to keep that knowledge from you. This information will give you an understanding of that knowledge. It is yours, you just need to understand the concept and realize that the kings and the wealthy have held this concept to themselves so they could be on top.
Take your power, gain the knowledge, and regain your Sovereignty! You too can be on top!
What we want to create for you is a new paradigm – something that will have you see trusts in a larger sense. No one truly owns the earth. The earth cannot be bought and sold, or if thought to be, certainly only for a limited time.
A trust is an entity that holds property in such a way that it is no longer held by the individual. Yet, it is entrusted to serve or manage the property for your benefit. The higher vision is to see yourself as a steward serving this property, managing and controlling your estate rather than owning and possessing it. We want you to see this new vision as the forerunner to the changing of the whole financial structure of this country, to that of being Sovereign. It is the wise King who sees that he is indeed a servant to all he possesses, and in charge of managing it for the highest benefit of mankind.
This new structure, the Sovereign Trust System, is the merging of the vision of two people (Creator and Trustee), in service to the property being held. There is a level of confidence necessary among the people involved to hold the vision of non-ownership and non-possession so that the property being held is managed in its highest manner. It is a very high state to let go of possession and to understand that you are really being entrusted to take care of something. In this way, you will begin to see the transitory nature of possession, and realize the eternal value of service or stewardship.
The Sovereign creates Sovereignty in his estate by having the trust hold the property. He has given up ownership and has entrusted the ownership of the property to the trust. The trust has the Sovereign duty to see that it is managed properly and to see that it is dealt with for the highest good of all concerned. The Trustees are the “trusted” stewards of this vision of property held in trust, managed and passed on intact.
The trust takes on energy of its own, and these energies must be enhanced so that the properties in the trust might grow. It becomes the legacy, a state of energy that continuously moves on. The stewardship is also passed on as others are chosen to manage and are entrusted with keeping the estate intact, Sovereign!
The Sovereign knows how to operate in the highest state, and manages with responsibility and integrity. The Sovereign is a steward, not only of the trust but also of the planet. He knows that if others also are Sovereign and take responsibility as stewards, that everyone and everything will be enhanced and grows in abundance and prosperity. In shifting to non-possession, responsibility, integrity, stewardship and service, the Sovereign creates a higher form of living. When this higher form of living merges into society and government, we will see a shift back to the proper hierarchy.
The Sovereign knows that when, as a steward, he looks first to His Creator for how he can serve, the rest will fall into place. He has chosen to be a Sovereign. He has made a commitment to uphold this highest vision. The Sovereign knows it’s not about “getting out of” liability, taxes or responsibility – it’s about “getting into” Sovereignty, commitment to stewardship, and being accountable, not to an unjustly imposed government jurisdiction, but to spirit and mankind.
1. A Business Trust (A1) and/or a Holding Trust (A2) is created,
with ABC Trustees, entities that can be sovereign and
- A1 trust contains one or more businesses. If desired, it can become statutory to interface effectively with public and government agencies.
- A2 trust contains your house and/or your investments.
- A1 – A2 can hire you as a Manager and have you do any/all kinds of managing.
- A1 – A2 can give 100% of its profit away and have no tax liability.
- A1 – A2 are isolated from you and each other, and if attacked, each stands alone.
2 An International Business Company (IBC) (a foreign doing
- An IBC can invoice any entity (A1 or A2) for certain considerations,such as consulting, educational, or insurance services.
- An IBC used properly is non-taxable on its income.
- An IBC can make investments and hold assets worldwide.
3. A Sovereign entity (A3) is created to hold certain assets only.
- A3 can hold interest in A1, A2, and/or IBC.
- A3 can be used effectively for charitable purposes.
- Properly established, A3 has no tax-liability and is above the jurisdiction of any government agency.
Prices for a basic pure natural law sovereign private contract trust are USD $2500.
These can be set up in any country in the world.