Talk:Tax lien sale

Under "Bid Down the Interest" it says 0% is rare, but under "Pitfalls of tax lien investing", it says most go for 0%. Consistant, no. Contradictory, yes.

Citation Spam?

The reference

(Sausa 2006, pp. 13)

promotes a book which already got removed several times from WP for link-spamming. Is this a real reference or should it be removed?

--ARebour 20:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam citations should be removed but the reference not. I reviewed the current link for tax liens (cornell) and it has no information on tax liens. The validity of the cornell link should be researched. --Jbanning22 14:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the article it states, "Payment is usually required at purchase or within a very short time afterward, thus requiring high levels of liquidity." The last part doesn't make sense. How does it require high levels of liquidity by making sure the county gets paid on time? Going to edit out last phrase. --Jbanning22

mortgages secondary to tax liens?[edit]

My County told me tax lien purchaser takes subject to all liens...why would this not include a mortgage on the property? Does anybody know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marcjacob (talk • contribs) 20:00, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Dear Marcjacob: Well, we don't generally render legal or tax advice in Wikipedia. The article does not say that the liens would not include a mortgage on the property, so I'm not sure of the purpose of your question. The general rule is that a purchaser of real estate takes the property subject to any perfected liens, whether those liens be mortages, tax liens, or whatever. Whether a lien is perfected is a somewhat complex legal question. Also, the order of priority among competing liens is a separate legal question. Yours, Famspear 20:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Marcjacob: OK, maybe I understand your question. The statement that a mortgage lien takes secondary to a tax lien means, for example, that if there isn't enough money to cover both liens, the tax lien has to be paid in full before any money goes to pay down the debt secured by the mortgage. It's just a question of which creditor gets paid off first. That is a separate concept from the statement that the buyer takes the property subject to all liens. In the example, the buyer does take the property "subject to all liens" - in other words, both the tax lien holder and the mortgage holder will generally demand that they be paid -- even if the buyer purchases the property. This means that the fact that the buyer was not the one who incurred the taxes, and the fact that the buyer was not the one who borrowed the money that gave rise to the debt secured by the mortagage, do not change the fact that the property will be subject to those liens - even after the buyer acquires the property -- unless of course the obligations to which those liens relate are paid off. Yours, Famspear 20:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the important point that Loftis was trying to make was that once you have a tax lien against a property, the mortgage obligation (and all others)(usually) takes second priority, hence the general rule that money is set aside in an escrow account by the mortgaging entity to cover current property taxes: they know they will have to pony up to protect their interest if the taxes aren't paid. Hence they make it a part of the initial deal that money WILL be set aside for this purpose. Dqgale (talk) 03:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Loftis Advertisement[edit]

This article reads like it was re-written as an advertisement purposefully for the end of promoting Mr. Loftis' book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.53.59 (talk) 15:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the inline references of Larry Loftis being an Orlando investor. It looks like an advertisement. Jbanning22 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Merge?[edit]

see Talk:tax deed sale Mhockey (talk) 19:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that tax deed sale be merged into tax lien sale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterWesco (talk • contribs) 18:53, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, merge into "tax lien sale". Raquel Baranow (talk) 03:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Guy-First Post - BobbyLev (Esquire) I don't agree that they should be merged -- at least not yet. I have not STUDIED the two sections carefully with an eye to this question. They reference each other, which is enough until someone (maybe me -- a couple of months from now) is willing to put in a lot of time to make the entry(ies) truly excellent, a challenge when 50 states have 50 different sets of rules. I know a Maryland attorney who is an expert in DC Tax Lien Sales. I once asked him a question about Maryland Tax Sales. He told me that he studiously avoids learning anything about the Maryland statute because he knows he would confuse himself. Where there is so much variation among Tax Deed sales and ditto among Tax Lien sales, discretion is the better part of valor and I think they should be kept separate. I think this position also best serves the purposes for which I often rely on and utilize Wikipedia -- as a starting point (and often an ending point) for simple research and understanding. BobbyLev - January 22, 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BobbyLev (talk • contribs) 03:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]