Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language Detected language: English [00:00.000 --> 00:04.160] Welcome to the show. Hundreds of people have reached out to me asking about the [00:04.160 --> 00:08.480] Corporate Transparency Act and its Beneficial Ownership Information [00:08.480 --> 00:13.080] Reporting requirement. So you can decide if you want to continue watching this [00:13.080 --> 00:18.120] video, let me share the spoiler, that the Corporate Transparency Act does not [00:18.120 --> 00:24.080] address corporations created in any of the states of the Union. If you want to [00:24.080 --> 00:27.640] see that for yourself, keep watching. [00:30.040 --> 00:35.640] The Dr. Reality Vodcast with Dave Champion. [00:41.240 --> 00:45.680] Let's start with this. If the Corporate Transparency Act was operative in the [00:45.680 --> 00:48.800] states of the Union, it would mean everyone who has created a corporate [00:48.800 --> 00:52.560] entity would be required to file a Beneficial Ownership Information Report [00:52.560 --> 00:57.840] disclosing who owns or controls the entity to FinCEN, which is the Financial [00:57.840 --> 01:02.120] Crimes Enforcement Network within the U.S. Treasury Department. A lot of [01:02.120 --> 01:04.960] Americans don't believe filing that kind of information with the federal [01:04.960 --> 01:08.800] government is something they want to do or should be required to do, but they're [01:08.800 --> 01:12.360] concerned about the financial penalties and possible jail time for non- [01:12.360 --> 01:17.720] compliance. If your entity was created in a state of the Union, you can relax [01:17.720 --> 01:22.560] because the Corporate Transparency Act does not apply to you. Let's go through [01:22.560 --> 01:26.280] the facts together, but before we jump in, I want to let you know that I'm [01:26.280 --> 01:29.400] currently running the Big Christmas Special on my books. Between now and [01:29.400 --> 01:34.000] midnight on December 24th, everything on the website is 10% off, including the [01:34.000 --> 01:37.920] four-pack that contains Income Tax Shattering the Miss, Body Science, the [01:37.920 --> 01:42.720] Business Guide to Payroll Withholding, and the Business Handbook for W-9 and 1099. [01:42.720 --> 01:47.640] But it's not just 10% off. If your purchase contains Income Tax [01:47.640 --> 01:52.480] Shattering the Miss and or Body Science, I will personally inscribe and autograph [01:52.480 --> 01:56.240] your copy of each. For now, I'll just say that Income Tax Shattering the Miss is [01:56.240 --> 01:59.440] the best-selling book in the country that tells the American people the truth [01:59.440 --> 02:02.480] that Congress has never imposed the income tax on ordinary, hard-working [02:02.480 --> 02:07.000] Americans like you. It is the best-selling book on the subject because [02:07.000 --> 02:13.360] it contains mountains of incontrovertible evidence. In fact, even the [02:13.360 --> 02:16.160] federal government, which has admitted it possesses Income Tax Shattering the [02:16.160 --> 02:22.160] Miss, has never disputed a single item of evidence in the book. How could they? [02:22.160 --> 02:26.680] 100% of the evidence comes directly from the government. The gentleman whose [02:26.680 --> 02:30.440] comment you see on screen was one of the first people in the country to purchase [02:30.440 --> 02:34.960] Income Tax Shattering the Miss when it was released almost 15 years ago. And as [02:34.960 --> 02:40.200] you can see, his comment reads, my 15th year of ditching the scam and living in [02:40.200 --> 02:44.680] financial freedom is coming up this coming year. I share Cory's comment to [02:44.680 --> 02:48.440] make the point that if you become educated, you too can safely walk away [02:48.440 --> 02:53.280] from the income tax scam. For 10% off anything on the site and Income Tax [02:53.280 --> 02:56.560] Shattering the Miss and Body Science personally inscribed an autograph, go to [02:56.560 --> 03:01.400] DrReality.News, DrReality.News and get a great Christmas present for [03:01.400 --> 03:06.880] yourself or the truth-seekers in your life. Use the coupon code XMAS24. I'll give [03:06.880 --> 03:09.920] you more information on each of the items at the end of the video. Now back [03:09.920 --> 03:12.920] to the Corporate Transparency Act, which from this point forward I'll be referring [03:13.080 --> 03:19.240] to as the CTA. Virtually every law the average American sees as government [03:19.240 --> 03:24.320] overreach isn't really government overreach. It's actually the unwillingness [03:24.320 --> 03:29.240] of the American people to learn anything about the law. So the government relies [03:29.240 --> 03:33.480] on your ignorance. Should the government be taking advantage of your ignorance to [03:33.480 --> 03:37.480] accomplish things it couldn't accomplish if you were informed? No, of course not. [03:37.960 --> 03:43.400] On the other hand, the government has been using this same deceptive ploy for [03:43.400 --> 03:48.560] nearly a century and certainly hundreds of statues, perhaps thousands, yet in the [03:48.560 --> 03:52.280] nearly 100 years the government has been pulling this deception, the American [03:52.280 --> 03:57.440] people have shown no interest in getting informed about it. Thomas Jefferson said, [03:57.440 --> 04:01.920] If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects whatever was and never [04:01.920 --> 04:05.880] will be. I've been telling the American people about the kinds of things we'll [04:05.880 --> 04:11.760] be discussing today for 30 years and nothing changes. The government rolls out [04:11.760 --> 04:15.880] the same deceptive ploy it's been using to fool the public for almost a hundred [04:15.880 --> 04:24.000] years and the American people fall for it hook, line, and sinker every single [04:24.000 --> 04:29.640] time. The CTA is merely the latest example. In Income Tax Shattering the [04:29.640 --> 04:32.840] Mist, I show readers many of the deceptive mechanisms the government uses [04:32.840 --> 04:37.960] in legislation to mislead uninformed Americans into thinking a piece of [04:37.960 --> 04:42.560] legislation means one thing when in fact it means something else entirely. Today [04:42.560 --> 04:45.840] we're going to focus solely on the method the government uses in the CTA [04:45.840 --> 04:49.960] which also happens to be the government's primary go-to ploy when it [04:49.960 --> 04:55.080] wants Americans to wrongly believe a law applies to them. Let's begin by going up [04:55.080 --> 04:59.240] to the 35,000 foot level and looking at the only two forms of jurisdiction [04:59.240 --> 05:04.640] granted to Congress by the states of the Union in the US Constitution. One is [05:04.640 --> 05:09.760] subject matter jurisdiction. The other is territorial jurisdiction. Subject matter [05:09.760 --> 05:13.600] jurisdiction consists of the enumerated authorities the states of the Union [05:13.600 --> 05:17.880] granted the federal government in the US Constitution. These are matters the [05:17.880 --> 05:21.320] states decided are better addressed by one national government than by the [05:21.320 --> 05:27.240] states acting independently. Just a quick reminder, every authority not granted to [05:27.240 --> 05:30.720] Congress has been retained by the states and the citizens of the states. [05:30.720 --> 05:34.200] Examples of authorities the states agreed would be better addressed by the [05:34.200 --> 05:39.360] national government are coining money, levying taxes, and prosecuting people for [05:39.360 --> 05:44.600] treason. The federal government is not constrained by geography when exercising [05:44.600 --> 05:47.960] subject matter jurisdiction. As an example, a person can be arrested for [05:47.960 --> 05:51.760] treason in any of the Union states because Congress's authority regarding [05:51.760 --> 05:56.320] treason operates throughout the nation. Just to be clear, Congress can only [05:56.320 --> 06:01.520] exercise in the states of the Union subject matter authorities enumerated in [06:01.520 --> 06:05.760] the Constitution. The second form of jurisdiction known as territorial [06:05.760 --> 06:10.360] jurisdiction is what the name implies. It is geographically constrained. [06:10.360 --> 06:14.380] Congress's territorial authority is limited to Washington DC and US [06:14.380 --> 06:18.680] territories and possessions. Its territorial jurisdiction does not extend [06:18.680 --> 06:23.560] into the states of the Union. According to the US Supreme Court, when exercising [06:23.560 --> 06:29.160] territorial jurisdiction, Congress is not limited by the enumerated authorities [06:29.160 --> 06:33.800] in the Constitution. Distinguishing which jurisdiction Congress is exercising [06:33.800 --> 06:37.600] with any particular piece of legislation is incredibly important because the US [06:37.600 --> 06:40.840] Supreme Court has said that when legislating for the states of the Union, [06:40.840 --> 06:45.240] Congress is constrained by the Constitution, but when legislating for [06:45.240 --> 06:49.160] DC, the possessions and the territories, the Constitution is largely irrelevant. [06:49.560 --> 06:54.360] Returning to my earlier observation over the last 30 years, 99% of my fellow [06:54.360 --> 06:57.840] citizens have expressed zero interest in knowing the distinction between [06:57.840 --> 07:02.720] Congress's subject matter jurisdiction and its territorial jurisdiction. Having [07:02.720 --> 07:06.360] chosen to remain ignorant, it never occurs to the public that virtually [07:06.360 --> 07:10.920] everything they see as unconstitutional overreach is really Congress [07:10.920 --> 07:15.280] legislating under its territorial jurisdiction and then using the kind of [07:15.280 --> 07:20.520] deceptive ploy we'll see in just a moment. So tell me, where in the US [07:20.520 --> 07:24.680] Constitution did the states grant Congress the authority to compel citizens [07:24.680 --> 07:28.280] of the states of the Union to divulge information to the federal government [07:28.280 --> 07:33.560] about corporations created within the states of the Union? That would be nowhere [07:33.560 --> 07:37.720] because the states did not grant Congress that authority. So then, if [07:37.720 --> 07:42.840] Congress has only two types of jurisdiction, subject matter and [07:42.880 --> 07:47.400] territorial, and the states did not grant Congress authority to compel [07:47.400 --> 07:50.680] citizens of the Union to divulge information about corporations created [07:50.680 --> 07:55.680] within the states of the Union, then which jurisdiction do you think Congress [07:55.680 --> 08:00.880] was exercising when it created the CTA? Clearly, Congress was legislating under [08:00.880 --> 08:05.640] its territorial jurisdiction. If, for a moment, we set aside the dispositive [08:05.640 --> 08:08.520] fact that the states did not grant Congress that subject matter authority, [08:08.520 --> 08:12.440] so the Act must be territorial, is there anything in the Act itself that [08:12.440 --> 08:17.120] verifies its territorial nature? Well, yes, there are several verifications in [08:17.120 --> 08:21.560] the Act, but today we're just going to focus on the deceptive ploy Congress has [08:21.560 --> 08:26.520] been using for almost a hundred years, and that ploy is how Congress defines [08:26.520 --> 08:31.560] the word state. I recently put out a video showing, among other things, that [08:31.560 --> 08:35.960] Congress used this same deceptive practice in the Social Security Act, [08:36.120 --> 08:41.640] which has zero applicability in the states of the Union. If you find that [08:41.640 --> 08:46.160] statement preposterous, watch the video and you'll discover it's 100% factual. I'll [08:46.160 --> 08:50.880] put the link down in the notes. So, what is the definition of state in the CTA? [08:50.880 --> 08:56.440] What you're seeing is the definition directly from the CTA, which reads the [08:56.440 --> 09:01.000] term state means any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, the [09:01.000 --> 09:03.400] Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana [09:03.480 --> 09:08.120] Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, and any other [09:08.120 --> 09:12.960] Commonwealth territory or possession of the United States. Some folks might be [09:12.960 --> 09:16.760] thinking the words state of the United States means the states of the Union, [09:16.760 --> 09:21.520] but that's not how statutory definitions work. Before I break down what state of [09:21.520 --> 09:25.360] the United States means, let me show you how Congress defines state when it [09:25.360 --> 09:29.280] intends the meaning to include the states of the Union. One example is found [09:29.480 --> 09:36.600] in Title 26 of the United States Code, Section 6103B5A, and reads the term state [09:36.600 --> 09:41.800] means any of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto [09:41.800 --> 09:45.280] Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of Northern [09:45.280 --> 09:49.920] Mariana Islands. In other words, when Congress means the definition to include [09:49.920 --> 09:55.960] the states of the Union, the language it uses is the 50 states. This has been the [09:55.960 --> 09:59.160] way Congress identified the states of the Union and its definitions for a [09:59.160 --> 10:04.040] hundred years, except of course the number was less than 50 in the years [10:04.040 --> 10:10.440] before there were 50 states. In the phrase state of the United States, the [10:10.440 --> 10:19.160] word of means belonging to. So if we insert belonging to in place of of, the [10:19.160 --> 10:26.400] phrase reads this way, any state belonging to the United States. If you [10:26.400 --> 10:30.240] were awake during your junior high civics class, you know that the states [10:30.240 --> 10:34.560] of the Union do not belong to the federal government, but in fact the [10:34.560 --> 10:38.260] states of the Union existed before there was a United States and after the [10:38.260 --> 10:42.200] Revolutionary War, the independent states came together and created the [10:42.840 --> 10:51.680] So what are these states that belong to the United States? That would be Washington, [10:51.680 --> 10:55.680] DC, the territories and possessions. Let's go to Title 48 of the United States Code [10:55.680 --> 11:00.560] entitled Territories and Insular Possessions and have a look at section 731, [11:00.560 --> 11:01.840] which reads, [11:13.040 --> 11:17.360] Clear enough. Legislative draftsmen also attempt to fool the public by using the [11:17.360 --> 11:22.360] phrase the several states in definitions of state in legislation enacted under [11:22.360 --> 11:27.160] Congress's territorial jurisdiction. Whether a definition says a state of the [11:27.160 --> 11:32.640] United States or the several states, those phrases mean DC, the territories and [11:32.640 --> 11:37.160] possessions. Also, don't be fooled because the phrase state of the United States [11:37.640 --> 11:42.760] is followed by a list of the states of the United States, such as Puerto Rico, [11:42.760 --> 11:47.000] Guam, American Samoa, etc. Imagine Congress was defining items used in [11:47.000 --> 11:52.520] baseball and the definition read like this. As used in this chapter, the term [11:52.520 --> 11:59.040] equipment means all equipment used in baseball, home plate, bases, bats, bat [11:59.040 --> 12:03.000] weights, catcher's mask, catcher's chest protection, leg guards, knee protectors, [12:03.000 --> 12:06.600] catcher's glove, field gloves, batter's gloves, cleats, batter's helmet and [12:06.600 --> 12:12.400] baseballs. The fact that the definition began with a broad phrase, all equipment [12:12.400 --> 12:16.640] used in baseball, followed by an enumeration of those items, does not [12:16.640 --> 12:20.800] expand the meaning beyond the enumerated items. The same is true in the CTA. [12:20.800 --> 12:25.760] Beginning the definition of state with the broad descriptor, states of the [12:25.760 --> 12:30.640] United States, followed by an enumeration of those federal places, doesn't expand [12:30.640 --> 12:35.520] the meaning beyond DC, the territories and possessions. In March 2024, in a case [12:35.520 --> 12:40.800] entitled National Small Business United v. Yellen, and without the definition of [12:40.800 --> 12:45.200] state being raised as an issue, with plaintiffs and defendants both arguing [12:45.200 --> 12:49.680] that the act was intended to operate in the states of the Union, a federal judge [12:49.680 --> 12:54.200] in Alabama declared the act unconstitutional, stating that the act, [12:54.200 --> 13:01.360] quote, exceeds the Constitution's limits on the legislative branch and lacks a [13:01.360 --> 13:08.520] sufficient nexus to any enumerated powers. However, since neither party raised the [13:08.520 --> 13:12.120] issue that Congress passed the act under its territorial jurisdiction, the court [13:12.120 --> 13:16.480] did not rule on that. Phrased another way, plaintiffs council never bothered to [13:16.480 --> 13:20.000] look at the definition of state and the defendant, who was the federal government, [13:20.000 --> 13:24.200] sure as hell wasn't going to illuminate the government's hundred-year deceptive [13:24.200 --> 13:27.960] tactic by pointing to the definition of state and arguing that the act was merely [13:28.040 --> 13:33.600] territorial in nature. Unfortunately, the manner in which the case was filed resulted in the court [13:33.600 --> 13:38.080] limiting its ruling to the 65,000 members of the association that brought the suit, [13:38.080 --> 13:43.760] rather than the entire nation. Having covered that the act is territorial in nature, let's [13:43.760 --> 13:49.120] move on to where the act says the requirement to file a beneficial owner information report [13:49.120 --> 13:55.520] does not apply to domestic corporations. In the act's definition section, number 11 describes [13:55.640 --> 14:01.520] what is and is not a reporting company. In other words, which companies are required to [14:01.520 --> 14:07.720] file a beneficial owner information report and which are not. Subsection B is a list of entities [14:07.720 --> 14:14.320] that are not included in the definition of reporting company. The list of non-included [14:14.320 --> 14:20.160] entities is long and complex. It literally goes on for pages. Near the very end of that lengthy, [14:20.160 --> 14:38.800] highly detailed list, we find this. Not owned by a foreign person. What does that mean? It means [14:38.800 --> 14:45.240] owned by Americans. In short, entities owned by people like me and you are not a reporting [14:45.240 --> 14:49.600] company. Before I move on, please take a moment to subscribe to the channel and hit the like [14:49.600 --> 14:56.560] button so the algorithms will show this truth to more people. Also, if you think all 334 million [14:56.560 --> 15:02.960] Americans should know this type of information, please share it. How do you think our fellow [15:02.960 --> 15:08.160] citizens are going to wake up about this kind of thing unless you put the information out there? [15:08.880 --> 15:14.640] I can't do it without you. I can't do it alone. Even with state defined as DC, the territories [15:14.640 --> 15:21.360] and possessions, the governments of the states of the union usually jump on board in order to get [15:22.080 --> 15:27.200] federal money, which is the case here. Under the CTA, the federal government will give money to [15:27.200 --> 15:32.240] the states that send out CTA paperwork each year when entities are renewed and the annual franchise [15:32.240 --> 15:37.120] fee is paid. You can bet your bottom dollar that the information sent to you by your state's [15:37.120 --> 15:42.240] secretary of state's office will employ vague language encouraging you to submit a beneficial [15:42.240 --> 15:47.840] owner information report. Nothing in the state's information will tell you the CTA has no applicability [15:47.840 --> 15:54.320] within a state of the union. The only specific thing will be the part about the acts civil and [15:54.320 --> 15:59.520] criminal penalties for those who don't file a BOI report. I'll go out on a limb and predict that [15:59.520 --> 16:05.600] after receiving the state's propaganda, 99% of those who receive it will immediately file a BOI [16:05.600 --> 16:12.480] report out of fear. If you'd care to read the CTA regulations promulgated by the secretary of the [16:12.480 --> 16:18.080] treasury, they can be found in title 31 of the code of federal regulations, subtitle B, chapter 10, [16:18.080 --> 16:23.680] which pertains to crimes such as money laundering. While congress certainly has the prerogative to [16:23.680 --> 16:28.320] enact money laundering laws, nowhere in the constitution is it granted authority to conscript [16:28.320 --> 16:33.040] ordinary citizens of the states of the union into filing reports with the treasury department to [16:33.040 --> 16:39.040] support congress's anti-money laundering efforts. If you would like to purchase a letter you can [16:39.040 --> 16:44.320] send to the US treasury department should they contact you about a BOI report, email me at [16:44.320 --> 16:49.920] daviddoctorreality.news. The letter isn't free but it's also not expensive. It might be something [16:49.920 --> 16:55.360] you want to keep on hand. Let me close by giving you a short overview of the business guide to [16:55.360 --> 17:01.680] payroll withholding, the business handbook for W-9 and 1099, and body signs, all of which are [17:01.680 --> 17:08.000] 10% off when you use the coupon code EXIMUS24. The business guide to payroll withholding is 13 [17:08.000 --> 17:13.840] pages and was written to help people who know the truth about the income tax communicate what the [17:13.840 --> 17:20.240] law really says concerning payroll withholding to the company for which they work. Why would we need [17:20.240 --> 17:27.520] to tell a company what payroll withholding law says? They should already know, right? [17:28.480 --> 17:32.800] I've been in this space for more than 30 years and over that time I've spoken with hundreds of [17:32.800 --> 17:38.560] payroll department employees, managers of outside payroll companies like ADP, HR directors, CFOs, [17:38.560 --> 17:46.960] and company attorneys. As shocking as this may sound, in 30 years I've never met anyone [17:47.600 --> 17:54.320] in any of those positions who had read what payroll withholding law says. In other words, [17:54.320 --> 17:58.560] every single one of them simply did what someone else told them to do without bothering to see [17:58.560 --> 18:04.160] what the law said. That's why people who know the truth have to find a tactful yet compelling way [18:04.160 --> 18:09.920] to let the business know what the law really says. The business withholding guide was written to [18:09.920 --> 18:16.320] accomplish that. Spoiler alert! The law does not authorize or permit private sector companies in [18:16.320 --> 18:21.920] the states of the union to withhold from their workers pay, period, full stop. While the business [18:21.920 --> 18:26.320] guide to payroll withholding was written for the purpose just discussed, it is a fantastic [18:26.320 --> 18:32.000] tutorial for anyone who wants or needs to know what the law really says. It has a section that [18:32.000 --> 18:37.520] explains why accountants and attorneys always get the law wrong and contains a list of questions [18:37.520 --> 18:43.120] a business owner can ask the company's accountant or attorney to test whether they know the law [18:43.120 --> 18:48.800] or are just regurgitating falsehoods they were taught previously. What about the business handbook [18:48.800 --> 18:54.720] for W9 and 1099? All the things I just said about the withholding guide, they are equally true for [18:54.720 --> 19:00.320] someone doing work for a company as a contractor rather than an employee. A company demands a form [19:00.320 --> 19:07.520] W9, which has a very specific meaning in law, and then becomes angry or threatening when someone who [19:07.520 --> 19:13.760] knows the law says, that form isn't for me. Knowing what the form means in law, I'd be committing [19:13.760 --> 19:19.680] perjury to sign it. Accordingly, the person working as a contractor has the same need to present what [19:19.680 --> 19:25.520] the law really says clearly and concisely in a way the company can understand. And just like the [19:25.520 --> 19:31.840] withholding guide, the W9 1099 handbook is a fantastic tutorial for anyone who wants or needs [19:31.840 --> 19:39.760] to know what the law really says about forms W9 and 1099. What about body science? Body science is [19:39.760 --> 19:44.240] my groundbreaking work in health and human physiology. I'm sure you've heard of eating [19:44.240 --> 19:51.520] styles such as keto and carnivore, which puts a person's body into a state called ketosis. [19:52.160 --> 19:59.200] But I'm guessing not one in 10,000 Americans know what ketosis actually is, what it does, [19:59.840 --> 20:05.360] and how it does it. Names such as keto or carnivore may be seen by some as fad diets, [20:05.360 --> 20:11.360] but ketosis is a physiological state that dramatically alters how your body operates. [20:11.360 --> 20:18.720] It is that physiological state, which is defined by science, not by any fad, that is why you've [20:18.720 --> 20:24.320] heard so many amazing testimonials from friends and associates about keto or carnivore. Body [20:24.320 --> 20:30.720] science lays out the science of these two competing physiological states, which are ketosis [20:31.360 --> 20:38.720] and glucose. The body only operates in one or the other. There is no third, [20:38.720 --> 20:43.760] so understanding the science is pretty damn important. Body science lays out the science [20:43.760 --> 20:48.960] in a way everyone can understand. Body science does not promote any particular style of eating. [20:48.960 --> 20:53.600] It's a science book just written in a way everyone can understand. Once you understand [20:53.600 --> 20:58.400] the science of these two competing physiological states, you can make the decision you think is [20:58.400 --> 21:03.520] best. I should add that I practice what I preach. I haven't filed an income tax return or paid a [21:03.520 --> 21:08.080] penny of income tax in 31 years, and I live by the science you'll discover in body science. [21:08.080 --> 21:15.680] At 65 years old, I'm as healthy as I was at 18. Between now and December 24th, use the coupon code [21:15.680 --> 21:21.840] XMAS24, and you not only get 10% off, but I'll personally inscribe and autograph your copies of [21:21.840 --> 21:29.680] each book. So go to DrReality.News, DrReality.News, and pick up any or all of the items we've discussed. [21:30.400 --> 21:35.920] The four-pack, which contains all of them, is deeply discounted and already the best deal on [21:35.920 --> 21:42.160] the site, but if you use the coupon code XMAS24, you get an additional 10% off, and I will [21:42.160 --> 21:48.080] personally inscribe and autograph your copy of Income Tax Shattering the Mist and or Body Science. [21:48.080 --> 21:53.520] Also, purchasing any of my writings helps me to continue to be here for you [21:53.520 --> 21:56.640] with these revealing and thought-provoking presentations. [21:57.200 --> 22:06.800] Thank you for sharing your time with me today. Take care.