42 replies to this topic

[Rob Burgoon]

 

 

I'm interested in learning how an MX5 Cup car (that I presume  became part of the MH racing fleet) is part of the restitution, unless there was commingling of assets or sloppy accounting.

 

 

Isn't a married couple a single financial entity?  Or are you thinking the cup car might have been able to be safe in Mike's racing services business?

[davew]

I don't feel that this forum is the place to discuss legal or financial matters. Much less racial issues. This topic does nothing to improve Spec Miata racing, nor SCCA, NASA etc.  I would be in favor of this thread being locked, to eliminate any further speculation by people (including myself) who have no first hand knowledge the facts. Unless there are new facts, I would also delete any attempts at new threads on this topic. 

 

just an opinion from a non-moderator

Dave

[FTodaro]

I don't feel that this forum is the place to discuss legal or financial matters. Much less racial issues. This topic does nothing to improve Spec Miata racing, nor SCCA, NASA etc.  I would be in favor of this thread being locked, to eliminate any further speculation by people (including myself) who have no first hand knowledge the facts. Unless there are new facts, I would also delete any attempts at new threads on this topic. 

 

just an opinion from a non-moderator

Dave

I would second that.

 

lets move on.

[Rob Burgoon]

Ah the return of the black helos, a SM forum tradition.

[LarryKing]

Just a general financial question.

For you guys that have your spouse handle all the household finances: Do you get like an allowance or something?

[Rob Burgoon]

Just a general financial question.

For you guys that have your spouse handle all the household finances: Do you get like an allowance or something?

 

I believe the "experts" usually suggest something like an account for each spouse, and a joint account.  Money coming in is split between the three accounts at an agreed upon ratio.  Money in your account is your money to spend as you see fit.

 

Although no idea how many people practice that.

[davew]

I believe the "experts" usually suggest something like an account for each spouse, and a joint account.  Money coming in is split between the three accounts at an agreed upon ratio.  Money in your account is your money to spend as you see fit.

 

Although no idea how many people practice that.

 

I do that. Every month each of us deposit X amount from our personal accounts into our joint account. Ann pays all the household bills from there. I never see a bill or a checkbook. At least I hope she does

 

I can spend my money however I want, like racing. And she spends her money on all the crap that women spend money on !!!!!!!

[FTodaro]

I practice the "don't ask Don't tell" policy of marital finance.

[chris haldeman]

I'm with frank on this. I sure hope I am the big spender in my family tho the sheer volume of amazon boxes in my recycling bin might suggest otherwise

[MotoFusi]

I practiced the "Kick the biatch out" form of marital finance management. It was painful splitting it up but I'm having the time of my life now and she is working at an entry level job now. LOL

 

I will say I let her run the finances and I would have noticed a new Porsche in the driveway. LOL

[Sphinx]

Isn't a married couple a single financial entity?  Or are you thinking the cup car might have been able to be safe in Mike's racing services business?

 

Not necessarily.  MHR should have been setup as a separate business legal entity (LLC, Corp, etc.).  That org has its own books, etc.  Then the shareholder(s) can then take a dividend and/or salary out of the business to pay themselves.  Mike is a sophisticated businessman - I'd be surprised if he didn't do this.

 

So, the business itself might be a marital asset - that's what divorce court is for to sort through this stuff.   But the day to day cash/income/expenses should all be separate from personal assets.  If they aren't kept separate and are instead "commingled," the shareholders lose the protection of having a corporate form as the firewall between their personal and business assets.  Shareholders don't just get to stick their hand in the till without receipts, etc.

 

If the business goes bankrupt and if the shareholder commingled assets, then the creditors can "pierce the corporate veil" and go after the person's personal assets.

 

Unless Mike's wife raced, the question I'm asking is why is she using the MX5 Cup for restitution if it was an asset of the racing business?  Asked another way, how did the ill gotten personal gains make their way to buy an asset for the racing business?  Don't expect a definitive answer because Mike I imagine and speculate that Mike has been (and rightly so) been advised not to speak on this topic.

 

The same argument can be made for the truck and trailer but they can be argued to be "dual use," used for other purposes other than the racing business.  Once again, there's no way to know the exact legal position they are taking.

 

(I have more than a passing interest in this topic.  The vast majority of my LinkedIn posts are about the intersection between law & racing.  Indeed, I've even attended and spoke at The Racing Attorneys Conference (TRAC) - yes, there is such a thing.  Fun fact, the last time I went, I met Tony Stewart's criminal lawyer and Bill Simpson. (he told me a cool story about the Mazda firesuit commercial.))

[av8tor]

I do that. Every month each of us deposit X amount from our personal accounts into our joint account. Ann pays all the household bills from there. I never see a bill or a checkbook. At least I hope she does

 

I can spend my money however I want, like racing. And she spends her money on all the crap that women spend money on !!!!!!!

  

Make sure she knows about www.faceplantdreams.com and www.pillowtalkgift.com

[Rob Burgoon]

Not necessarily.  MHR should have been setup as a separate business legal entity (LLC, Corp, etc.).  That org has its own books, etc.  Then the shareholder(s) can then take a dividend and/or salary out of the business to pay themselves.  Mike is a sophisticated businessman - I'd be surprised if he didn't do this.

 

So, the business itself might be a marital asset - that's what divorce court is for to sort through this stuff.   But the day to day cash/income/expenses should all be separate from personal assets.  If they aren't kept separate and are instead "commingled," the shareholders lose the protection of having a corporate form as the firewall between their personal and business assets.  Shareholders don't just get to stick their hand in the till without receipts, etc.

 

If the business goes bankrupt and if the shareholder commingled assets, then the creditors can "pierce the corporate veil" and go after the person's personal assets.

 

Unless Mike's wife raced, the question I'm asking is why is she using the MX5 Cup for restitution if it was an asset of the racing business?  Asked another way, how did the ill gotten personal gains make their way to buy an asset for the racing business?  Don't expect a definitive answer because Mike I imagine and speculate that Mike has been (and rightly so) been advised not to speak on this topic.

 

The same argument can be made for the truck and trailer but they can be argued to be "dual use," used for other purposes other than the racing business.  Once again, there's no way to know the exact legal position they are taking.

 

(I have more than a passing interest in this topic.  The vast majority of my LinkedIn posts are about the intersection between law & racing.  Indeed, I've even attended and spoke at The Racing Attorneys Conference (TRAC) - yes, there is such a thing.  Fun fact, the last time I went, I met Tony Stewart's criminal lawyer and Bill Simpson. (he told me a cool story about the Mazda firesuit commercial.))

 

That's what I figured.  I'm thinking the mx-5 cup car would only be safe if his business bought the mx5-cup car on its own without running the business so deep in the red that the IRS and others stop seeing it as a business.

 

Like you say, Mike seems like a capable businessman, so wouldn't be entirely surprising if his engines and arrive and drive (if he does that) and whatever pull enough in to make payments on a cup car.  (or amortize it over a bunch of years or blah blah blah tax lawyers blah blah)

[Rob Burgoon]

Although the press release seems to imply the cars were bought on victim company credit cards, so that may be cut and dried as far as the cup car getting taken.

[Johnny D]

Sorry, can't resist.

 

[davew]

All, I am not a moderator so this has no official weight.

 

Please stop "guessing, thinking or implying" as to what may or may not have happened. Unless you have first hand knowledge of this case. No one outside of Mike, his wife and the lawyers know what the truth is.

[Johnny D]

https://www.justice....tealing-over-45

 

[Rob Burgoon]

All, I am not a moderator so this has no official weight.

 

Please stop "guessing, thinking or implying" ...

 

Sorry Dave, no.

[Waterboy]

I agree with Dave. Lock it down.

[David L]

As Per the dept of justice website 2 mx 5 race cars and a trailer were purchased fraudulently by wendy collins using her employers credit card.