He\u2019s now selling British people US tax refunds they aren\u2019t entitled to (we described that scheme in May)<\/a>. Stamp says the IRS accepted $600m of refund claims but froze the money after people involved read one of our articles, and he says that cost him $120m.<\/p>\n The English courts have barred<\/a> Stamp from bringing claims without permission. So he\u2019s suing me in Wyoming instead.<\/p>\n His court filings appear to have been written by AI, and are full of invented cases, misrepresented judgments and extraordinary allegations. The lawsuit is absurd, but the fraud behind it is serious.<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s schemes have real victims. His mortgage scheme left vulnerable people thousands of pounds out of pocket, and many defaulted on their mortgages. His US scheme is now extracting thousands of dollars from some of the same people, unwittingly dragging them into an international tax fraud. <\/p>\n And in bringing this lawsuit, Stamp appears to have admitted, in documents filed under penalty of perjury, exactly how that fraud works.<\/p>\n The claim<\/p>\n Stamp filed a $438m defamation claim with the court on 6 August.<\/p>\n The plaintiffs were Stamp, a Wyoming company called MLITR Research LLC (which trades as \u201cEcclesia Law\u201d and sends me legal threats), and OSN Foundation, a Panamanian \u201cprivate interest foundation\u201d.<\/p>\n Here it is:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The document reads very oddly, a sign that it\u2019s AI generated. That\u2019s confirmed<\/a> by the reliable Pangram<\/a> AI detector.<\/p>\n The lawsuit has its own website<\/a>, also AI generated<\/a>, with a damages calculator that goes up to $567m. The site\u2019s only outbound link goes to the platform selling Stamp\u2019s tax scheme.<\/p>\n The Wyoming court\u2019s response<\/p>\n There\u2019s a long and inglorious tradition of forum shopping<\/a>: people trying to sue in the jurisdiction they think is going to be most favourable<\/a> for them. This is a particularly extreme form of forum shopping, because Stamp is British and I am British, and the obvious (and probably only) place he can sue me is in an English court. But the courts have barred<\/a> Stamp from suing without permission, so he\u2019s been trying very hard to find somewhere else.<\/p>\n At one point Stamp tried to sue me in the European Court of Human Rights<\/a> and the International Criminal Court<\/a> (as a war criminal). After the ECHR and ICC unaccountably failed to take up the case, Stamp decided to set up a company in Wyoming and sue me there. <\/p>\n Why Wyoming? Probably because Wyoming is one of only ten states<\/a> with no anti-SLAPP statute (see the Institute for Free Speech\u2019s 2025 report card<\/a>).<\/p>\n The tiny flaw in this is that neither a company nor a foundation can appear in a US federal court without a lawyer, and we doubt any lawyer would go near Stamp\u2019s case. <\/p>\n So on 6 October the Wyoming court (on its own initiative) ordered Stamp to explain why the case shouldn\u2019t be dismissed:<\/p>\n Here, it does not appear that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1332(a)(2).<\/p>\n IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs MLITR Research LLC, and OSN Foundation shall file their own Complaint or a joinder in Plaintiff Clifford\u2019s Complaint through Wyoming licensed counsel on or before October 16, 2026, or they will be dismissed from this case.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the court\u2019s \u201corder to show cause\u201d:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s answer: Neidle is a racketeer<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s brilliant idea for getting around the order was to turn his defamation claim into a RICO claim.<\/p>\n RICO is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act<\/a> of 1970, created to go after the Mafia<\/a>. RICO created both criminal offences and civil rights of action: anyone \u201cinjured in his business or property\u201d by racketeering can sue for three times the loss<\/a>. The great news for Stamp is that it\u2019s federal law, so a RICO claim gets you into federal court even if there\u2019s no US party.<\/p>\n If you like this article, consider subscribing to our free newsletter<\/p>\n No spam or advertising. Cancel anytime.<\/p>\n Not interestedAlready subscribed<\/p>\n And that\u2019s what Stamp did. On 13 October he amended his complaint to drop the companies and add a RICO claim, taking the total to $795m.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n It is, inevitably, again<\/a> AI generated.<\/p>\n The small difficulty Stamp has is that there is zero basis for suing a journalist under RICO.<\/p>\n RICO requires that the defendant helped run an \u201centerprise\u201d with a \u201cpattern of racketeering activity\u201d. The defendant has to commit at least two crimes from a list in the statute<\/a> (mail fraud, wire fraud, extortion, murder etc). A careful reading of the statute will reveal that journalism is not on that list.<\/p>\n Stamp claims that I published an article which was the \u201ccatalyst and signalling mechanism\u201d for a criminal enterprise. Supposedly I conspired with a bunch of people who I\u2019ve never met, spoken to, or had any dealings with:<\/p>\n Stamp admits he has no evidence, but thinks people reading an article<\/a> suggests a conspiracy by the author.<\/p>\n Stamp plays the same trick a few paragraphs further down. He\u2019s suing Amy Sanger, a former colleague, in a separate case in New York<\/a> over who owns about $900,000 of gold, silver and cash. Stamp tells the court he believes I\u2019m funding Sanger\u2019s lawyer:<\/p>\n Again he has no evidence, because I\u2019m not. I have zero desire to help Sanger, and have never had any contact with her or her lawyer.<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s \u201creasonable inference\u201d rests on her lawyer being expensive and three of her old companies having missed their annual filings in Colorado. That\u2019s not a \u201creasonable belief\u201d, it\u2019s a guess, and not a very good one.<\/p>\n The complaint admits Stamp\u2019s fraud<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s US tax scheme isn\u2019t unusual: the IRS has been warning about<\/a> it since 2009, and promoters are regularly sent to prison<\/a>.<\/p>\n The unusual element is that Stamp has now incriminated himself in his own court documents.<\/p>\n His court filings<\/a> claim that, when a British individual borrows under a loan, their \u201csignature credit energy\u201d means they are owed income by a US bank. This is gibberish, but Stamp often says it<\/a>, and would presumably claim he believes in it.<\/p>\n The problem is that he then says his trusts file a form telling the IRS that a bank withheld US tax from the borrower:<\/p>\n \u201cthe 98-series foreign grantor trusts \u2014 armed with HDC standing under UCC \u00a7\u00a7 3-203 and 3-302 \u2014 file the corrective Form 1099-OID in the stead of the investment bank nominees. \u2026 The trust lists the nominee bank as the payer (attaching its specific EIN and CUSIP identifier) and the trust\u2019s own 98-series EIN as the recipient, reporting the OID income and the associated federal tax withheld (Box 4).\u201d<\/p>\n Obviously, that did not happen. The information being put down on the form is false, and I think Stamp must know that it\u2019s false.<\/p>\n Stamp makes clear he expected to take a cut fromthe phoney refund claims:<\/p>\n \u201cWhen Defendants\u2019 conduct froze the recoupments, Plaintiff lost approximately $120 His declaration, under penalty of perjury, adds that his own trust\u2019s IRS transcript \u201cconfirms $4,477,610\u201d, and gives the trust\u2019s taxpayer identification number. <\/p>\n Stamp appears to have done the prosecutor\u2019s work for him.<\/p>\n Is Stamp misleading the court?<\/p>\n Aside from Stamp\u2019s unreasonable \u201creasonable beliefs\u201d, there are numerous points where his court filings contain statements that appear to be untrue:<\/p>\n Stamp says<\/a> that a case called SEC v Wyly<\/a> supports his position, and \u201caffirmed that foreign grantor trusts operate under private international law and are recognised as distinct taxable fiduciaries\u201d. The judgment says nothing of the kind. The term \u201cprivate international law\u201d doesn\u2019t appear anywhere in it. The court held that the offshore trusts in question were taxable to their American grantors, and rejected the purported independence of the foreign trusts. Stamp has cited a case in which a US court found that two businessmen used offshore trusts to perpetrate a massive securities fraud<\/a> and conceal hundreds of millions of dollars in profits from the US tax authorities \u2013 and is claiming it shows his own offshore trust arrangements are legitimate.<\/p>\n Stamp cites another case \u2013 \u201cNewsome v. Penobscot 391 F. App\u2019x 783 (10th Cir. 2010) \u2013 which doesn\u2019t appear to exist at all.<\/p>\n Stamp swears in his court filings that he is appealing the UK contempt ruling. Southwark Crown Court told us in August 2026<\/a> that it could find no record of an appeal.<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s Wyoming complaint swears that he is \u201can individual residing in the United Kingdom\u201d. The same complaint says he has been forced into \u201cconstructive exile\u201d. Those two statements cannot both be true. He makes the same two contradictory claims in his New York filings. His website<\/a>, his videos<\/a>, his \u201creferral\u201d to the International Criminal Court<\/a> and his own affidavit to Southwark Crown Court all say he is in Northern Cyprus, keeping out of reach of his prison sentence. I don\u2019t know where he is, but all these statements cannot be simultaneously true.<\/p>\n The lawsuit includes a declaration from Stamp\u2019s associate, William Kimball. There is a curious inconsistency in where Kimball claims to live. His sworn declaration from October 2026 says he is a \u201cWyoming resident\u201d. His filings include a notification from the IRS<\/a> sent to him at an address in Denver, Colorado. In the New York case earlier this year, his filings gave a New Hampshire business address and included a notarised New Hampshire driving licence. That\u2019s consistent with his LinkedIn account<\/a> (which appears to be actively maintained<\/a>), and says he works in Portland, Maine.<\/p>\n The complaint says the IRS \u201cvalidated\u201d Stamp\u2019s scheme. It also says the IRS froze every dollar of it. Both can\u2019t be true.<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s ridiculous damages claims depends on him personally having suffered $120m of loss (because it\u2019s him and his companies who is suing). So he told the court he holds MLITR Research LLC as \u201cbare trustee\u201d \u2013 someone who holds property for the benefit of somebody else. But, in the same document, he said he holds the \u201cbeneficial and equitable interest\u201d in the company. These statements can\u2019t both be true. And other documents contradict them. William Kimball\u2019s declaration on the same date says that he is the 100% owner of the company \u2013 suggesting he, not Stamp, is the bare trustee. And, just the day before, Stamp published documents showing completely different ownerships.<\/p>\n It\u2019s impossible to say what is a mistake, what is a lie, and what is an AI hallucination.<\/p>\n My response<\/p>\n Stamp\u2019s website<\/a> says I\u2019ve been served<\/a> with the Wyoming claim. That\u2019s not true, and the court documents are clear that I haven\u2019t been.<\/p>\n Cross-border service of a civil claim isn\u2019t straightforward, and I don\u2019t know if Stamp and his AI will ever figure out how to do it. I can\u2019t, however, completely ignore a $795m claim, so I\u2019ve instructed Laura Prather<\/a> of Haynes Boone, one of America\u2019s leading First Amendment litigation specialists. Laura helped write the Texas anti-SLAPP statute, and is the only American on the European Commission\u2019s expert group on SLAPPs<\/a>.<\/p>\n What happens next?<\/p>\n The court will decide whether the case survives the order to show cause, probably in the next few months.<\/p>\n![\"40.](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/media-x9KR2iq9.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"8.](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/media-DqHvEaNl.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"10.](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/media-t1pRERwc.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n
million in equitable trust property he was entitled to direct and receive \u2014 property he intended to shelter in the OSN Foundation for the benefit of the ROS Ecclesiastical Trust\u201d<\/p>\n