politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Is that accurate? I asked this question yesterday and got several responses saying the exact opposite.
That the government would seize a property, quickly sell it, and then pay off any outstanding liens. Then whatever was left over got applied to the $464M and then the courts keep seizing, selling and paying until they achieved the full amount.
Otherwise if you seized someone's full collateral for a bunch of loans, they no longer have any incentive to pay those loans if they are already close to bankruptcy and there's nothing left for the creditors to seize.
Edit: had troubling finding an answer but this is from Tennessee and about cars. It says the government can either send the asset to lien holder or pay the lien holder
So I dug into it a little deeper and it looks like the answer is kind of. Government still gets first crack at the value of whatever the property is, but leftover funds may be distributed to other creditors. It also depends on the kind of loan in question as to whether the government will repay them or if they have to sue Trump.
Overall the process works much like bankruptcy does, creditors get ranked based on various criteria (generally the more money you're owed the higher you're ranked) and higher priority creditors get first dibs and whatever is left over goes to the next creditor in line. Government pretty much always goes first. Once they've gotten their money next would be anyone who has an actual lien on the property. It's also possible to have given a loan whose terms are tied to the property but doesn't result in an actual lien being issued for it. Those creditors are just fucked in this case. They'll have to chase Trump through court to get their money back as it's essentially a contract dispute at that point.
What's highly likely to happen is we'll see a panic recall on any outstanding loans Trump has as nobody wants to be on the bottom of the pile fighting for scraps after the financial corpse of Trumps assets has been picked over.
There's a reason no banks have been willing to loan to him for 30 years, and when he went looking for a bond the ones who were willing to give him one were demanding double the amount in property as collateral. They wanted to make sure that there would be enough left over for them to get their money back after the government took their cut.
As for what you cited, that's for civil asset forfeiture which is a little different. In that case the government isn't treated as a creditor since you don't owe them anything, they're just straight stealing your property. In the case of property with a lien on it they repay the lien holder essentially the full value of the lien as there's no valid claim to those funds by the government.
At the end of the day the government will just keep seizing property until both they and all Trumps creditors are paid off or until there's no more property to seize whichever comes first. What's definitely not going to happen is the government goes "This property isn't worth it because it has too many loans on it, we'll just let Trump keep it".