California Now Seeking $131k From Jackson Estate

[Moonwalker.Fan]

California wants a little bit more of the King of Pop — roughly $131,000 in tax penalties.

The figure is considerably more than the state's Franchise Tax Board sought from Michael Jackson's estate in March, when it filed a creditor's claim for $1,647.24.


The state amended its claims Friday to include $131,544 in interest and penalties that it says the estate owes for the 2009 tax year.

The original claim was because the state had to request that the late singer file a state income tax return for 2007, although the penalty doesn't appear in the updated document.

The late singer's estate evaluates claims before deciding whether to pay them.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=12388707

 

[MsCassieMollie]

Hmmmmm......

 

[Ashtanga]

What does this mean? :thinking:

 

[katrine]

hmmm indeed

 

[ConservativeMind]

Michael didn't pay his taxes in 2007 on something he owned? Perhaps Neverland or something that is of value and didn't file taxes on? It could be anything, Something over looked maybe.

 

[PCR]

 

[ivy]

in the estate report it was said that personal and business taxes for Michael and his companies weren't paid for the last 3 years. It could be a penalty related to that. I don't think this is significant.

 

[Prince Of Pop]

Was MJ even living in the USA in 2007?

 

[Guu@wallis]

oh,money~money~

 

[ivy]

Was MJ even living in the USA in 2007?

yes he was

 

[michaelsson]

Was MJ even living in the USA in 2007?

it wouldnt matter if he was living here or not, if he owned property in his name he had 2pay the taxes lol

 

[144000]

why doesn't this claim appear in the updated document? i'm glad the estate evaluates things. i don't need to hear about them blaming Michael for their mismanaging their own economy. or asking for an unsubsantiated handout because of their mismanaging their own economy. it's amazing how, when re evaluated, these people find a reason to always increase and not decrease. just feels suspicious.

 

[ivy]

why doesn't this claim appear in the updated document? it's amazing how, when re evaluated, these people find a reason to always increase and not decrease. just feels suspicious.

I don't think there's anything suspicious. Let me write a scenario.

As we know from the estate report taxes for Michael and his companies weren't paid for the last 3 years.

So if taxes weren't paid in 2007, the IRS most probably sent a notice requesting payment in 2008- 2009 (see Nicolas Cage example and how years later IRS sends requests , places liens etc). There was fee of $1,647 for this request/investigation.

Estate paid the back taxes and this fee.(therefore it's no longer included in the new claim).

IRS processed the payment and calculated the late fees/ penalty. Now asks the estate to pay them as well.