From Ken Ditkowsky — Explaining “constructive receipt” for IRS taxing purposes

To: “” <>, “” <>
Cc: Glenda Martinez <>, Bev Cooper <>, Probate Sharks <>, Tim NASGA <>, “JoAnne M. Denison” <>, Nasga Us <>, Matt Senator Kirk <>, BILL DITKOWSKY <>, Chicago Tribune <>, FOX News Network LLC <>, SUNTIMES <>, “” <>
Date: Dec 6, 2015 2:01 PM
If you read the guardianship statutes of most states, and in particular Illinois the statute is a fine piece of legislation that not only meets all Constitutional criteria but the Americans with Disabilities Act.   The problem is enforcement and understanding.
I trust you read the Chicago Tribune Article concerning Ms. E that I forwarded today.    Even though the article was written as a public interest piece, it disclosed the lack of understanding of the concept, the statute, and the purpose of the act by a Judge (who should have never granted a guardianship – thus corrupt under my definition), the Village of Highland Park (public officials) and the public.
It is grossly unfair to not give credit to the miscreants for their perversion of the law.   Had the Rule of Law been filed there would have been no guardianship – assuming the accuracy of the article.
A Society such as ours has to protect and take care of its infirm and disabled members.  (Parens Patrie)   That is a given.   The issue is how do we do it and eliminate the predators from the mix.   Here we also have laws.   As fiduciaries the guardians are held to the highest standards, and thus they are fair game when they breach their fiduciary relationships.   As you are aware, the breach of a fiduciary relationship is a taxable event and our law will not allow a fiduciary to profit at the expense of his/her ward.  (At least that was the law until overt corruption made the law words without meaning – but it is still on the books)
The law 18 USCA 371, 18 USCA 242 also is that persons who act in concert to do an act in furtherance of an illegal act are jointly and severally liable for not only damages but the taxes.    We also know that if a fiduciary breaches it fiduciary relationship and has a fund of x dollars to steal, the fact that only y dollars is stolen still subject the fiduciary to taxation on the entire fund.  That is called ‘constructive receipt’ .
Let me suggest that enforcement of the tax laws is not a “fun house” for the fiduciary who has breached his/her fiduciary relationship.    It is damn serious business and if law enforcement (including the tax man) does his/her job a serious deterrent exists to this type of conclusion.    This is the reason that Larkin got his panties in a bunch when JoAnne Denison in her blog demanded an HONEST INVESTIGATION OF THE ELDER CLEANSING SCANDAL.   Indeed for Larkin and his gang of criminals the call was devastating!    To the 18 USCA 371 Larkin associates engaged in the cover-up of Elder Cleansing it was much like a call of fire in a crowded theater.   Larkin could be personally held liable for millions of dollars of unpaid taxes, interest and penalties.    For all the miscreants  engaged in corruption  a lifetime of spoils thereof could be placed in jeopardy.   In the Mary Sykes case alone, over three million dollars (my calculation) of unpaid taxes, interest and penalties is collectible.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s