Vetoed Property Registery Act

How do you vote?

  • Total voters
    11
  • Poll closed .
I

Incarnation__

Citizen
Senator
Supporter
Aventura Resident
Public Affairs Department
Interior Department
Education Department
Justice Department
Health Department
6th Anniversary Statesman
Incarnation__
Incarnation__
Senator
Joined
Feb 17, 2026
Messages
73

CONGRESS OF THE
COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
​




A BILL TO

Create a Property Registry to Document Plot Ownership




​


The people of the Commonwealth of Redmont, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law:


​
PART I — PRELIMINARIES

1. Short Title and Enactment

(1) This Act may be cited as the ‘Property Registery Act’

(2) This Act shall be enacted immediately upon its signage.

(3) This Act has been authored by NullaPoene.

(4) This Act has been sponsored by Rep Incarnation__.

(5) This Act has been co-sponsored by Rep Stanley582.

(6) This Act amends the following acts:

(a) Property Standards Act

2. Reasons and Intent

(1) There is currently no way to determine if a legal entity possesses ownership of a plot.

(2) Creating a property register will both increase transparency and reduce risk when transferring property.

PART II — AMENDMENTS

3. Amendments to the Property Standards Act

(1) The Property Standards Act shall be amended as follows

20. Transfer of Ownership
(1) The titleholder of a plot may differ from the owner who is registered in the Federal Land Register.
(2) For such a differing ownership to be enforceable, it must be registered in the Federal Land Register.
(3) The DCT shall change the titleholder of a plot upon request by the owner.

21. Federal Land Register
(1) The Federal Land Register (FLR) is hereby established.

(2) The FLR shall be managed by the DOC.

(3) The following property rights shall have a registration requirement:
(a) Ownership of a plot where the holder of the ownership right and the titleholder in the plot plugin are not the same (such registration shall mention the reason).

(4) Registration of property rights with a registration requirement shall at least include:
(a) The holder(s) of the property right;
(b) The plot number;
(c) The duration, if applicable.

(5) The registration must be public and kept updated without undue delay.

(6) Upon the end of the property right, a notice that the property right has ended must be posted on the registration without undue delay.

PART III - TRANSITION

4. Transition Period

(1) The provisions amended as Property Standards Act Section 20 (2) shall come into effect 90 days after this bill comes into law.
 
Last edited:
This is going to create so much tedious bureaucratic work - all for what?

You can tell who owns a plot by looking at the titleholder on the plugin. You can determine vested interests by looking at contract law.

If you own it, you are paying the tax on it.
 
TBH End, I had the same thought as you, but after research, it does seem like that in the current system, businesses can own plots, and there is also the rising existence of Rent to Owns. Let's take a simple example. If two people start a company, and they want to have a plot, they wouldn't want either player to own the plot itself. They would want the company to own it, or they will want to split ownership 50/50. In such a case, they would make a contract. But now, if they want to sell their share of the plots, or add other people into it, or god forbid run a rent to own, it becomes a very messy process.

The other solution is to simply invalidate anyone other than the titleholder from owning stakes in a plot. But thats currently not how it works, based on my research. Unless you are over the plot limit, you are kind of free to own a plot and let someone else be titleholders.
 

Veto


The President withholds assent from this Bill, and it is hereby vetoed.

Reason: This Bill aims to register security interests on plots, while I have always been an advocate for such a system, I believe this implementation does not cover enough of a framework to promote commercial certainty.

Typical to a property register, you would see rules around timing, registration, and priority, alongside the powers and duties of the Registrar. Aspects like this need to be covered with specifics, so citizens and businesses understand their obligations and the implications of registered security interests.

I have spoken to Senator Incarnation__ regarding my concerns, along with other affected stakeholders, in reaching this veto decision.

Technofied

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top