[WSBARP] Today's King Co Recording Tale of Woe - help!

[Mark Anderson]

It seems to me that 2.A.2. would apply here.

Grantee (buyer) will make payments on zero (0) % of total debt of $ [whatever it is] for which grantor (seller) is liable and pay grantor (seller) $ 20,000.00 (include in this figure the value of any items received in exchange for property).  Any consideration received by grantor is taxable.

The percentage is zero (0) because this describes the debt for which grantor (seller) is liable.  There is no debt for which grantor (seller) is liable.


Mark B. Anderson
ANDERSON LAW FIRM PLLC
821 Dock St  Ste 209  PMB 4-12
Tacoma, Washington 98402
+1 253-327-1750
+1 253-327-1751 (fax)
marka at mbaesq.com<mailto:marka at mbaesq.com>
www.mbaesq.com<http://www.mbaesq.com/>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This transmission is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the individual named recipient. It may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or other confidentiality protection. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender via e-mail or by telephone at (253) 327-1750 that you have received the message in error, and then delete it. Thank you.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Craig Blackmon
Sent: 05/18/2023 10:20 AM
To: WSBA Real Property List Serve <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] Today's King Co Recording Tale of Woe - help!

Listmates, any insight you can provide as to a good path forward would be greatly appreciated. Here is my conundrum.

Client (grantee) has been and will be solely liable on existing debt. Grantee paying co-owner (grantor) additional $20k. A gift of remaining equity.

The excise tax should be due on the $20k. It appears to me (and now apparently the Recorder's Office as well) that the Supplemental Statement does not offer this option. I have now been told in the rejection notice that tax is due on one half the debt as well.

The rejection notice includes a "call for assistance" [sic] phone number; call, put on hold for five minutes, told to call back. Ahhh, just keep breathing...

At this point it may be more cost effective to file a lawsuit. What do you think?

Craig
Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law<https://www.mywsba.org/PersonifyEbusiness/LegalDirectory/LegalProfile.aspx?Usr_ID=000000029240>
92 Lenora St. #103, Seattle WA  98121
Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949
On the blog: Changes to Title and the QCD<https://seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog/quitclaim-deed-explained>
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4yAS3LbigaeQ7XjeX_jBFLC1xkGA4lhF3hRITg40apDzIx3WWSC-yKZowxra-M6dhcfA8lC3xQ]<https://seattlepropertylawyer.com/>   [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wb7RP8yX-nieDebz-qxj-lDuz4U1vb4JaUimepQmmYEjbAHyaH1ZbnST10vrkMatVaysevEMU] <https://www.fsbolawyers.org/>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged nature.  Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all copies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20230518/14602aca/attachment.html>