"dxAce" wrote in message
...


dxAce wrote:

dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:


A business should always be in some form of a corporation to protect
the
owner(s) from liability issues. The assets of the corporation would
be held
under a corporate name, but the assets of the individual owners or
investors
are protected from the debts or liabilities of the business activity.

Thing is, you've never actually owned much of anything.

Always been in 'someone else's name', etc.

Nothing that was ever traceable to you, which is very interesting.

I'm certain the IRS will be just as amused as I am.

I'll be calling them first thing tomorrow.

Nothing faux about that, eh boy?

And, if you don't believe that, get in touch with Mr. Bryant!

I have no idea who Mr Bryant is.

But I find it amusing that you answered your own post which was, in turn, an
answer to your own post.

That's some kind of good **** you're tokin' man.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


dxAce wrote:

dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:


A business should always be in some form of a corporation to protect
the
owner(s) from liability issues. The assets of the corporation would
be held
under a corporate name, but the assets of the individual owners or
investors
are protected from the debts or liabilities of the business activity.

Thing is, you've never actually owned much of anything.

Always been in 'someone else's name', etc.

Nothing that was ever traceable to you, which is very interesting.

I'm certain the IRS will be just as amused as I am.

I'll be calling them first thing tomorrow.

Nothing faux about that, eh boy?

And, if you don't believe that, get in touch with Mr. Bryant!

I have no idea who Mr Bryant is.

But I find it amusing that you answered your own post which was, in turn, an
answer to your own post.

That's some kind of good **** you're tokin' man.

Beats lying my ass off like you do!