Wednesday, December 1

postheadericon Little Miss Slutty



Miss Seola has quietly been working das emails the last few weeks in preparation for this blog post. We heard, about a year ago, of Tila incorporating her brand into a business entity titled Little Miss Trendsetter, Inc. She espoused that it was her new deal, this that and the other would be under it, yadda yadda. At the time, in a short search, it was not attached to anything. I dug deeper just to see if there was something I missed in my query. As a business owner myself, I am aware not all state databases are really kept up to par. Imagine my surprise, I stumbled across several gems.

One, Little Miss Trendsetter exists. It exists in California. It has existed since 2006. It's registered to Tila as the incorporation, but mysteriously has an agent. (The mystery comes from the fact that Tila claims to do all these things herself yet nothing is ever actually done by her. Boss Lady my busted ass left pinky toe.)

Tila also incorporated a secondary business. Wanna hear what she called it? Billionaire Business, Inc.Yeah, I laughed too.

The agent listed is part of Level Four Business Management. Posing as an interested party for private reasons, I contacted the agent. No answer to any emails under which propositions and questions were asked in relation to the businesses. I waited on this info for quite a while. An agent representing a business with the sole purpose of being employed by a firm to DO business not dealing with agent requests is interesting. In fact, neither business is attached to any projects since 2006. And yeah - in 2006, she used her BIRTH/LEGAL NAME - the very one that just last year she called us and Perez racists for using. There's your evidence that she used it YEARS before making up that bull shit "racist" story as her legal name.

What is also interesting in all this, is the fact that not only does the agent not care about the work requested, but during a review of charitable contributions for both businesses revealed no disclosures (which for non-profits are required by law to disclose) to any businesses or corporations. Additionally, during my searches - Jayden's Angels was never attempted to be registered in conjuction or separately from these two endeavors. Alas though, it seems as though the truth is in Google. When searching the name, what are the first results?

Top 3 are exposing her lies, the 4th is her "me me me" post - lying about not actually "setting it up" when several blogs, including Rotty's post months ago on the situation showing Tila stating this charity was official.

11 comments:

Joann said...

Great work Seola. I do remember something about her having a business called Little Miss Trendsetter but thought little of it since I never heard anything else about it until now.

Anyone who has or had a business knows 1 person cannot run 3 or 4 businesses alone. You need help, so I never did believe she did it all alone.

It's also strange to me how she sets up all of these business names and yet does little or nothing with them and it's even stranger no one answered your email, if these businesses are active and current.

If these business names were active as of 2010 that means someone has been paying taxes with the CA State Board of Equalization, keeping the license for each business current plus paying federal and state taxes even if the businesses are not doing well.

Why would she keep them active if she's not making any money from them and no human body seems to be working them, especially after 4 years? It doesn't make sense.

I had an online business and that's what I had to do and I also live in Cali.

IMO, these business names MIGHT be used as a front for something else going on.

Yeah right said...

Whew, that made more sense this morning ;-)

Mystie said...

It's hilarious to me that she started a 'business' with the word billionaire in it.

Her 'registered agent' is a requirement in every state. The registered agent is the one who receives all of the annual reports from the state and files them, also is informed of any changes to corporate laws.
It's best that someone, like a third party, is your corporate registered agent.

I'm the registered agent for both of my husbands businesses, but recently turned over the request to change his second company's registered agent to his financial guy.

I don't want the responsibility of two companies information any longer.

The guy she has as her registered agent probably filed the corporate papers for her, that's why he's listed himself as that.
I'm sure Tina can't even pay her own water bill, much less keep up with filing annual reports and tax forms. LOL!!

Great posts girls.
<3

Prof. Chaos said...

Hello all. Since I set up California corporations for a living, maybe I can offer some clarification.

The registered agent only exists to accept service of process for the corporation. In other words, if she is getting sued, this is the person who accepts the summons, subpeona, etc. Typically, this is held by either an officer of the company, the incorporating attorney, or a third party registered with the state. This person would not necessarily have knowledge of the business activities. They just need to have a legit street address.

The company will remain "active" in the Secretary of State's database as long as 1) the $800 annual minimum tax is paid to the Franchise Tax Board and 2) the Statement of Information is filed annually. The business can file a "zero income/expense" return and still be active for years. It doesn't need to be profitable. It doesn't even have to make one cent to stay active.

The State Board of Equalization is only involved if there is sales tax collected, which there wouldn't be in this type of business since she isn't selling a product or taxable service. The business license is issued by the city of LA and would be renewed annually for a nominal fee.

Its actually really easy to keep multiple corporations up and running if you aren't doing anything with them. You just have to be willing to pay the FTB $800 every year.

The Secretary of State is very good about keeping their website updated. They update every week.

Joann said...

Prof. Chas....thanks for the info.

You said...."The business can file a "zero income/expense" return and still be active for years. It doesn't need to be profitable. It doesn't even have to make one cent to stay active".

Now let me ask you a question because I'm really curious.

What would be the purpose of keeping these businesses active if no money is being made and there has been no activity coming from these businesses in the last 4-5 years?

Why would someone even pay $800 every year for a business that's dead?

deluwiel said...

@Joann - I would venture to say that in Tina's weird, twisted little world if she has two "corporations" (in registered name only), that in and of itself makes her a Powerful Businesswoman, Mogul, blah-bladdity-blah. I don't think she even considers the fact that those corporations aren't DOING anything. They exist on record somewhere with her name listed as CEO and that's all that's important. Again, I say...

pathetic.

Prof. Chaos said...

Joanne, most people who do this are either 1) too stupid to close their corporation, 2) think that they will use the company for something in the future and 3) don't realize that they can dissolve the corp and then reactivate it with the same name later if they want to. As long as the corporate name is in use, no one else can use the name in California. Although I can't for the life of me figure out why someone would want to take that stupid ass corporate name from Tila.

I tend to think that if she isn't using the company it is just like deluwiel said. She like to play hogul.

Joann said...

Thanks to both of you for your answers.

Knowing what I know about her now, I'm going to go along with playing hogul.

DV40 said...

When Shawne sued Tila, he sued her and Little Miss TrendSetter.

His legal team found neither of them had any net worth to speak of and that she rented everything she had, including her furniture and vehicle.

Seola Uno said...

Prof. Chaos - while I'm sure you have some experience on this issue (I'm sort of foreshadowing my comment, because with my bluntness, it can come across as either accusatory or insincere) there is several positions you've stated that are untrue (possibly due to the fact, that while this post is somewhat thorough, it isn't all inclusive of everything I found).

For one, because this is listed with the state as the official business address, it cannot only have operated in the capacity of registration.

Secondly, because of the contact listed in the databases, along with the fact it remains the official operating address for the business, requests for business communication -at the very least- would have a response, directing towards the proper people. That's again, assuming that someone actually cared.

Thirdly, because the sole officer and owner status of the two companies is listed in Tila's name alone, anyone at those offices cannot act in a legal capacity (such as accepting a subpeona) in relation to the cases filed against Tila. Those include Merriman's where a deposition from Tila would be required.

As for the upkeep of records with the State, this is also untrue that it's weekly correctly updated. A friend of mine, who opened an LLC in the state, preferred to wait until it was available in the database to do business, so that any consumer would be able to search the legal and verifiable status of said business. It took 7 months after application and approval to appear.

As for tax issues, California also provides waivers for annual tax (as about 40 other states do as well) for any company that has not made sales tax within the state for the tax year. This is especially important in Tila's case because her current and only verifiable endeavor is the website, and with the ads on her site, most likely are coming from out of state, so any revenue would be considered interstate. Currently, only two states have interstate internet sales taxes requirements (thank goodness I moved away from Colorado for my business!). Unless things have changed recently, California still does not collect state taxes on internet businesses (i.e. any business with payments that cross state lines, as opposed to payments to each other within the state).

Another point to consider is that in registration of her website, the physical address is a P.O. Box, leaning heavily towards the argument that anything of value, such as ad revenue on her site is not affiliated with the official physical address.

The argument for a lack of physical address in Tila's businesses actually supports that argument more so than anything.

Seola Uno said...

I should also point out, that though I'm unsure on this point (it bears mentioning) the business registrant would not be able to serve as a third party agent towards legal action, since the agent is listed, however the address is for a business, in which case, the agent listed here cannot accept because of the discrepancy in using an individual's address if an individual is listed, and with a business address being listed, would require the operating business to file.

Though again, I'm unsure on this particular point and this would take a lot more research than I personally care to put in for just one comment. :)

There was an error in this gadget