Promise her anything...
A few days ago I said I'd look up the legal requirements on promissory notes. This was to see whether digital cash or similar instruments could implement digital promissory notes. I found a book of legal forms for a variety of situations, and one set of forms dealt with promissory notes. Here are some of the comments about the sample notes below. "Negotiability. "All of our notes are negotiable - that is, they can be sold. To understand what this means, think of what happens when you write a check. Your check means that you owe the face amount of the check to the person you have made it out to (the payee) and that your bank will pay this debt when the check is presented to it. The original payee of your check can either collect the amount directly or, as is common, endorse the check to someone else. This new owner can then collect the amount from your bank or endorse the check to someone else. In other words, the check can pass freely from person to person (that is, be negotiated) until it is presented to your bank for payment. "Promissory notes can similarly be negotiated, assuming they contain the following provisions and magic words: "names of the lender and borrower, and borrower's address "a statement that the debt is payable 'to the order of' the lender (promisee) "a specified principal sum to be paid and the specific rate of interest, if any "the address where the payments are to be made "the city where and date when the note is signed and "the signature of the debtor (promisee) "All the notes set out in this book contain this basic information. Although we told you in Chapter 1 that you could alter our contracts to your satisfaction, taking out any of these clauses will probably render the note non-negotiable (though still valid). "In fact, it is unlikely that negotiability will be important to very many readers, as most will never transfer their note. However, should one of the parties die, become mentally ill, or otherwise not be able to pay or collect the debt, the fact that the note is negotiable increases the chance that it will be paid. Why? Because institutions in the business of purchasing uncollected notes and collecting onthem may be willing to buy it. If you alter a note but want to have it remain negotiable, make sure it still contains the elements listed above." The promissory note in the book also has a clause regarding attorney fees. I will eliminate it here which implies that each party simply pays his own attorney fees. It simplifies the note. Here is the note. The form is not important, but the information present is: For value received, I individually promise to pay to the order of ____________ $___________ on _____________ at _______________________. Date: _________________________ Location (City or County): _________________________ Name of Borrower: _________________________ Address of Borrower: _________________________ _________________________ Signature of Borrower: _________________________ In considering how this could be presented in electronic form, the basic information could be provided in a digitally signed message. The thrust of the legal discussion about the note is to make sure it can be enforced in court if the borrower doesn't pay. Digital signatures have not, as far as I know, been tested yet in court, so lenders would not currently have the protections with a digital promissory note that they would have with a written one. These notes also do not seem to lend themselves to anonymous transactions very well. The original note must contain the name of both borrower and lender. And I believe that if the note is sold, it must be endorsed over to the buyer like a check. So not only does the note record the names of its owners, it also shows a trail of previous owners. In general, this does not seem to be an approach which would protect privacy. I imagine it is possible for a person to create a "bearer" promissory note, where he will pay back some loan to whomever presents the note. In normal circumstances, though, no lender would want to lend in exchange for such a note, since the regular promissory note gives him more protection. It's not clear, too, how enforceable such a note would be, especially if presented by someone not the original lender, say if the original lender contested the note (claiming it was stolen or such). The one loose end I did pick up from this reading was the general topic of negotiable instruments. These are financial papers which can be sold. Per- haps among the great variety of such instruments there would be some more suitable to digital implementation using the anonymous-transfer technology. Hal
One footnote to Hal's cool message:
I imagine it is possible for a person to create a "bearer" promissory note, where he will pay back some loan to whomever presents the note. In normal circumstances, though, no lender would want to lend in exchange for such a note, since the regular promissory note gives him more protection. It's not clear, too, how enforceable such a note would be, especially if presented by someone not the original lender, say if the original lender contested the note (claiming it was stolen or such).
The IRS made bearer bonds illegal about ten years ago. It seems people were using them to evade income tax. I believe they are forbidden within the United States and U.S. citizens are forbidden to own them at all anywhere. Bearer bonds are still widely used in Europe. They are liked because they simplify payment and bookkeeping - nobody has to go through a transfer agent to exchange them. Problems with theft and fraud appear to be manageable. There was an interesting case a few years ago when somebody tried to sell stock in the United States which was convertible to bearer bonds. Is it legal for a U.S. citizen to hold the stock if she or he does not convert it into a bearer bond? I don't know what the court decided, but the fact that the case was brought makes me think the authorities are pretty touchy on this issue. But, there might be some legal variant of the idea. Peter
On Tue, 22 Mar 1994, Peter Hendrickson wrote:
The IRS made bearer bonds illegal about ten years ago. It seems people were using them to evade income tax. I believe they are forbidden within the United States and U.S. citizens are forbidden to own them at all anywhere.
Bearer bonds are not illegal in the US. The interest paid on bearer bonds issued after a certain date is not deductible from taxes but the bonds are legal. Additionally, depending on specifics, financial institutions may have to report sales and purchases including tax ID # on some transactions involving bonds. A bond is just a debt obligation. If you want proof that bearer instruments are legal, endorse a check made payable to you - you have just converted it into a bearer instrument (as long as you add no restrictions to your endorsment). You will not be busted if the government finds out you signed the back of a check. DCF "She sleeps with the boss." Roz Russell on how Norma Shearer (wife of Irving Thalberg) got all the juicy movie roles. -- Not Rush discussing how HRC got WJBC to appoint her Health Care Czar.
Peter Hendrickson says:
The IRS made bearer bonds illegal about ten years ago. It seems people were using them to evade income tax. I believe they are forbidden within the United States and U.S. citizens are forbidden to own them at all anywhere.
Not really true -- much of US debt is still in the form of bearer bonds, although new bearer bonds are not being produced. I don't think they were made illegal per se -- I forget what was used to prevent them from being issued. In any case, bearer instruments in the generic sense are perfectly legal. Write a check to "CASH" and what you have is a bearer instrument. People wanting to learn about this should get a book on commercial paper, which is the subset of the law we are discussing. Perry
participants (4)
-
Duncan Frissell -
Hal -
Perry E. Metzger -
ph@netcom.com