TTCM Tautachrome Inc (CE)

NOTES TO UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

JUNE 30, 2019

Note 1 – Organization and Nature of Business

History

Tautachrome, Inc. was formed in Delaware on June 5, 2006 as Caddystats, Inc. and hereinafter collectively referred to as “Tautachrome”, the “Company”, “we’ or “us”).

The Company adopted the accounting acquirer’s year end, December 31.

Our Business

Tautachrome operates in the internet applications space, uniquely exploiting the technologies of the Augmented Reality sector, the blockchain/cryptocurrency sector and the smartphone picture and video technology sector. We have high-speed blockchain concepts under development aiming to couple with the Company’s revolutionary patents and licensing in augmented reality, smartphone-image authentication and imagery-based social networking interaction.

Tautachrome is currently pursuing three main avenues of business activity based on our patented activated imaging technology, our blockchain cryptocurrency products, and the our licensing of the patent pending ARk technology (together banded “KlickZie” technology):

Since its public announcement on September 25, 2017 (via SEC form 8-K) that it would be using its Twitter site (@Tautachrome_Inc) (http://twitter.com/tautachrome_inc) to post important Company information, and finding this method of publicizing important Company information both fast and effective, the Company has continued to use this means of public communication almost exclusively, supplemented occasionally with Current Reports via SEC form 8-Ks. Shareholders are advised to follow us on Twitter to be current on the Company’s FD disclosures.

Note 2 – Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Consolidated Financial Statements

In the opinion of management, the accompanying financial statements includes all adjustments (which include only normal recurring adjustments) necessary to present fairly the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows for the period ending June 30, 2019. Preparing financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full year. The information included in this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with information included in our audited financial statements for the period ended December 31, 2018 (as amended), as reported in Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Management further acknowledges that it is solely responsible for adopting sound accounting practices, establishing and maintaining a system of internal accounting control and preventing and detecting fraud. The Company's system of internal accounting control is designed to assure, among other items, that 1) recorded transactions are valid; 2) valid transactions are recorded; and 3) transactions are recorded in the proper period in a timely manner to produce financial statements which present fairly the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company for the respective periods being presented.

Principles of Consolidation

Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Tautachrome, Inc. and all majority-owned subsidiaries. All significant inter-company accounts and transactions are eliminated in consolidation.

Long-Lived Assets, Intangible Assets and Impairment

In accordance with U.S. GAAP, the Company’s long-lived assets and amortizable intangible assets are tested for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. The Company assesses the recoverability of such assets by determining whether their carrying value can be recovered through undiscounted future operating cash flows, including its estimates of revenue driven by assumed market segment share and estimated costs. If impairment is indicated, the Company measures the amount of such impairment by comparing the fair value to the carrying value.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Net Loss Per Share

Basic and diluted net loss per share calculations are calculated on the basis of the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the year. The per share amounts include the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents in years with net income. Basic and diluted loss per share is the same for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019 as the effect of our potential common stock equivalents would be anti-dilutive.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In February 2016, the FASB established Topic 842, Leases , by issuing Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2016-02, which requires lessees to recognize leases on-balance sheet and disclose key information about leasing arrangements. The new standard establishes a right-of-use model (ROU) that requires a lessee to recognize a ROU asset and lease liability on the balance sheet for all leases with a term longer than 12 months. Leases will be classified as finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern and classification of expense recognition in the income statement.

The new standard was effective for us on January 1, 2019 and we have adopted it. A modified retrospective transition approach is required, applying the new standard to all leases existing at the date of initial application. An entity may choose to use either (1) its effective date or (2) the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements as its date of initial application. If an entity chooses the second option, the transition requirements for existing leases also apply to leases entered into between the date of initial application and the effective date. The entity must also recast its comparative period financial statements and provide the disclosures required by the new standard for the comparative periods. We expect to adopt the new standard on January 1, 2019 and use the effective date as our date of initial application. Consequently, financial information will not be updated and the disclosures required under the new standard will not be provided for dates and periods before January 1, 2019. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements as the Company has no leases whose term is greater than one year.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income . The guidance permits entities to reclassify tax effects stranded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income as a result of tax reform to retained earnings. This new guidance is effective for annual and interim periods in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted in annual and interim periods and can be applied retrospectively or in the period of adoption. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-05, Income Taxes (Topic 740) - Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118 . The amendment provides guidance on accounting for the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) and allows entities to complete the accounting under ASC 740 within a one-year measurement period from the Tax Act enactment date. This standard is effective upon issuance. The Tax Act has several significant changes that impact all taxpayers, including a transition tax, which is a one-time tax charge on accumulated, undistributed foreign earnings. The calculation of accumulated foreign earnings requires an analysis of each foreign entity’s financial results going back to 1986. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2018-07, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting , which expands the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. An entity should apply the requirements of Topic 718 to nonemployee awards except for specific guidance on inputs to an option pricing model and the attribution of cost (that is, the period of time over which share-based payment awards vest and the pattern of cost recognition over that period). The new guidance is effective for all entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

Note 3 – Going Concern

We have not begun our core operations in the technology industry and have not yet acquired the assets to enter this markets and we will require additional capital to do so. There is no guarantee that we will acquire the capital to procure the assets to enter this market or, upon doing so, that we will generate positive cash flows from operations. Substantial doubt exists as to Tautachrome’s ability to continue as a going concern. No adjustment has been made to these financial statements for the outcome of this uncertainty.

Note 4 – Related Party Transactions

For the six months ended June 30, 2019, we accrued $2,424 of interest to the 22 ^nd Trust (the “Trust”), the trustee of whom is Sonny Nugent, the son of our major shareholder and former Chief Executive Officer, Micheal Nugent. The outstanding balances of unpaid principal and interest at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 were $120,951 and $118,591, respectively.

According to our agreement with Mr. Nugent, we accrue interest on all unpaid amounts at 5%. Principal and interest are callable at any time. If principal and interest are called and not repaid, the loan is considered in default after which interest is accrued at 10%.

Convertible note payable, related party

On May 5, 2013 (and on August 8, 2013 with an enlargement amendment) the Company entered into a no interest demand-loan agreement with our current Chairman, Jon N. Leonard under which the Company may borrow such money from Jon as Jon in his sole discretion is willing to loan.

The terms of the note provide that at the Company’s option, the Company may make repayments in stock, at a fixed share price of $1.00 per share. Also, because this loan is a no-interest loan, an imputed interest expense of $3,417 was recorded as additional paid-in capital for the six months ended June 30, 2019. The Company evaluated Dr. Leonard’s note for the existence of a beneficial conversion feature and determined that none existed.

During the six months ended June 30, 2019, we borrowed $26,000 from and repaid $13,010 to Dr. Leonard. At June 30, 2019, the balanced owed Dr. Leonard is $94,330.

We also owe $37,825 to another officer for loans he made to the company, only $32,825 of which has been formalized into convertible notes. The additional $5,000 is treated as an advance. The notes bear interest at 5% and may convert at $0.0025 per share.

Note 5 – Capital

During the year ended December 31, 2018 we issued 246,542,274 shares as follows:

During the six months ended June 30, 2019, we issued 1,480,019,700 shares as follows:

Preferred Stock

During the year ended December 31, 2018, we accrued $1,837,000 in costs related to the 40,000 Series E Preferred shares promised in our ArKnet contract (see Note 4) containing a par value of $0.0001. This series of preferred shares have the following rights, limitations, restrictions and privileges:

These shares have yet to be issued as of June 30, 2019 and are included in stock payable at that date.

Imputed Interest

Certain of our promissory notes bear no nominal interest. We therefore imputed interest expense and increased Additional Paid in Capital. For the six months ended June 30, 2019, we imputed $8,369 of such interest.

Note 6 – Debt

Loans from related parties

As is discussed in Note 4, at June 30, 2019 we owed $253,106 in related-party debts consisting of $135,841 and $22,935 in unpaid principal and interest, respectively, to the 22 ^nd Trust and $94,330 owed to our CEO, Dr. Jon Leonard.

We also owe $37,825 to another officer for loans he made to the company, only $32,825 of which has been formalized into convertible notes. The additional $5,000 is treated as an advance. The notes bear interest at 5% and may convert at $0.0025 per share.

Convertible notes payable

During the year ended December 31, 2018, we issued eight new convertible promissory notes in the amount of $633,000, containing original issue discounts totaling $71,688, for net proceeds of $561,313. These convertible notes can convert to common stock at various different prices. We evaluated these convertible notes for beneficial conversion features and calculated a collective value of $209,040 which we are accounting for as debt discounts. The individual notes are discussed in Note 6 to the financial statements filed on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018 and are hereby incorporated by reference.

During the six months ended June 30, 2019 we issued eleven convertible promissory notes in the aggregate amount of $307,531, receiving proceeds therefrom of $298,200. These convertible notes can convert to common stock at various prices. We evaluated these convertible notes for beneficial conversion features and calculated a collective value of $212,456 which we are accounting for as debt discounts. These convertible notes are discussed below:

On January 29, 2019, we issued 3,623,055 to a certain Australian individual who made baseless claims against the Company other than two existing convertible promissory notes which the Company acknowledged. Rather than engage in a prolonged international legal matter, we issued these shares in complete satisfaction of any and all claims against the Company. We valued the shares at their grant date fair values, reduced unpaid principal and interest in the amount of $4,258 and $695, respectively, and recorded a $1,330 gain on this settlement.

During the six months ended June 30, 2019, we amortized $63,560 of debt discounts to interest expense and accrued $93,113 of interest on existing notes.

At June 30, 2019, $177,157 of our convertible notes payable were in default.

Convertible notes payable (excluding related-party convertible notes which is discussed in Note 4) at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 and their classification into long-term, short-term and in-default were as follows:

On May 2, 2019, the company entered into an amendment to one of the convertible promissory notes issued during 2018. The company allowed the creditor to own a larger percentage of the company’s total shares outstanding in exchange for a waiver of all default interest. As a result, we recorded a reduction of interest payable to this creditor and interest expense of $140,491. On July 19, 2019, we issued 30,414,329 shares to this creditor extinguishing all principal and interest owed to them.

Crypto-currency notes payable

On August 7, 2018, we issued a Crypto Exchange Promissory Note (“the Crypto Note”) in exchange for $100,000 in cash. The Crypto Note accrues interest at 4% until maturity which is 18 months from issue and 10% after maturity. The holder can convert unpaid principal and accrued interest into KLK20 tokens at any time at the rate of $0.25 per token. The holder may, for up to nine months after issuance, participate in a price guarantee: if the Company offers the tokens at less than $0.25 per token at any point for up to nine months after issuance, then the holder has the option of participating in the offer at the lower price.

For the six months ended June 30, 2019, we accrued $2,000 of interest on this note.

Derivative liabilities

The above-referenced convertible promissory notes issued during the six months ended June 30, 2019 were analyzed in accordance with EITF 07–05 and ASC 815. EITF 07–5, which is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The objective of EITF 07–5 is to provide guidance for determining whether an equity–linked financial instrument is indexed to an entity’s own stock. This determination is needed for a scope exception under Paragraph 11(a) of ASC 815 which would enable a derivative instrument to be accounted for under the accrual method. The classification of a non–derivative instrument that falls within the scope of EITF 00–19 “Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock” also hinges on whether the instrument is indexed to an entity’s own stock. A non–derivative instrument that is not indexed to an entity’s own stock cannot be classified as equity and must be accounted for as a liability. The EITF reached a consensus that would establish a two–step approach in determining whether an instrument or embedded feature is indexed to an entity’s own stock. First, the instrument's contingent exercise provisions, if any, must be evaluated, followed by an evaluation of the instrument's settlement provisions.

Derivative financial instruments should be recorded as liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet and measured at fair value. For purposes of this engagement and report, we utilized fair value as the basis for formulating our opinion which has been defined by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) as “the amount for which an asset (or liability) could be exchanged in a current transaction between knowledgeable, unrelated willing parties when neither party is acting under compulsion”. The FASB has provided guidance that its definition of fair value is consistent with the definition of fair market value in IRS Rev. Rule 59–60.

The Company issued Subscription Notes from 2015 through June 30, 2019 in the United States and Australia which are convertible at discounted market rates and market prices based on the average of 5 trading day closing bids. The notes are convertible after 1 year from issuance; mature in 18 months from issuance; accrued at 5% interest; and a 10% default rate. These convertible notes have become tainted (“The Tainted Notes) as a result of the issuance of convertible promissory notes issued in the United States since there is a possibility (however remote) that the Company would not have enough shares in the Treasury to satisfy all possible conversions.

The Convertible Note derivatives were valued as of issuance; conversion; redemption/settlement; and each quarterly period from March 31, 2018 through June 30, 2019. The following assumptions were used for the valuation of the derivative liability related to the Notes:

We recorded the initial derivative as both a derivative liability and a debt discount (or initial reduction in carrying value of the debt). We then amortized the debt discounts using the Effective Interest Method which recognizes the cost of borrowing at a constant interest rate throughout the contractual term of the obligation. The effective interest rates on the six instruments issued during the year ended December 31, 2018 range from 243% to 289%. The effective interest rates for the three instruments issued during the six months ended June 30, 2019 range from 250% to 564%.

At each reporting date, we determine the fair market value for each derivative associated with each of the above instruments. At June 30, 2019, we determined the fair value of these derivatives were $633,709.

Changes in outstanding derivative liabilities are as follows:

Note 7 – Litigation

Morgan Lawsuit

Background

The May 21, 2015 merger of the Company with Click Evidence, Inc. (“Click”) resulted in the transfer of Click’s assets and interests from Click to the Company and in Click becoming an asset-less entity inside the Company and then being disposed of on November 25, 2015. In the November 25, 2015 conveyance of the Click to the new owner, its name was changed to BH Trucking, Inc. (“BH”).

Filing and service

A first lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, Pima County, by a former consultant to Click, Richard Morgan (“Morgan”). This lawsuit was served on December 2, 2015, against Click/BH, with the Company also named in the lawsuit, but not served by it or effectively made aware of it until 2017.

Allegation

The lawsuit claimed that the consultant’s agreement with Click/BH permitted him to recover a finder’s fee for the cashless stock swap that achieved the merger on May 21, 2015. The new owner of Click/BH, the only party served, declined to defend the lawsuit allowing it to go to default.

Default judgment

On December 16, 2016, the Court issued a default judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendants in the amount of $2,377,915. The Company believes that having not been served or made aware of the lawsuit, it is not a target of the judgment.

Second Lawsuit

On January 23, 2017, the Company and its CEO were served in a second lawsuit by Morgan alleging that the Company’s intellectual property assets that were transferred to it by Click under the May 21, 2015 merger of the Company with Click, were fraudulently removed from Click/BH, and seeks to have them returned to Click/BH.

Effect on the Financial Statements

During the three months ended September 30, 2017 we included in liabilities the default amount of $2,377,915 plus $4,459 interest at 4.5% from December 16, 2016, the date of the judgment, to December 31, 2016.

On August 29, 2017, the Court set aside the judgment in the First Lawsuit resulting in the removal of the liability of $2,377,915 and accrued interest of $4,459 at December 31, 2016, as well as the additional accrued interest recorded during 2017 of $44,294, for a total gain of $2,426,668.

On August 14, 2018, we settled this lawsuit in full by issuing 10 million shares. We valued the shares at their grant date fair values, removing the judgment liability of $5,000 and recording a $55,000 loss on litigation.

McRae Lawsuit

On October 10, 2017, the Company received a letter from the lawyer of Eric L McRae (“McRae”) a person whose association with the Company was terminated by the Company on June 16, 2017. The letter demanded payment of 850 million unrestricted Tautachrome common shares to forestall his filing a laundry list of complaints in a variety of government agencies including with the US District Court in Kansas with complaints of contract breaches and fraud by silence, with the EEOC with complaints of termination by racial discrimination, with the OSHA with complains of termination for reasons of his being a whistleblower under Sarbanes-Oxley provisions, and with various regulatory agencies with accusations of an unspecified nature.

On October 12, 2017, McRae filed a complaint, later amended twice, against the Company in the US District Court in Kansas. The amended complaint alleges 1) that the Company breached a written agreement in an alleged employment by failing to pay him 35 million shares of the Company’s common stock and terminating his association with the Company on June 16, 2017 without proper notice. The complaint goes on to allege 2) that the Company committed fraud by silence for failing to inform him of an intent to receive the benefit of his services while harboring an intent to not compensate him, 3) that the Company breached an unwritten agreement with him to provide him with 185 million shares of the Company’s common stock, and 4) that the Company breached a convertible promissory note by failing and refusing to repay him the principal and accrued interest thereunder. Complaint number 4 is now moot in the belief of the Company since after the lawsuit was filed the Company continued to repay McRae’s convertible promissory note on schedule with interest due until paid in full on October 1, 2018, thus extinguishing the note and making the matter moot. These matters remain before the Court.

On December 12, 2017, McRae brought the Company before the Kansas Human Rights Commission and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging that on June 16, 2017 he was terminated from an alleged employment by the Company on the basis of race and for retaliation, and that the Company discriminated against him in the terms of this alleged employment because of race. The Company, knowing that all of McRae’s allegations before the EEOC are completely false, responded to the threatened complaint denying each of McRae’s allegations and providing its own presentation of the facts. The matter is presently stayed pending a claim for mediation by McRae who has so far failed to file a claim. Although the Company remains confident that should an investigation in this matter continue, it will fully prevail. We do not know when or if such an investigation will materialize.

On December 8, 2017, McRae filed a complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (the “OSHA”), alleging that his “investigation and reporting” to the Company’s CEO was a contributing factor in the termination of his alleged employment by the Company in violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower’s provisions. On January 2, 2018, the Company delivered its response to the complaint, denying each of McRae’s allegations and providing its own presentation of the facts. McRae dismissed the OSHA claim with prejudice, and the matter cannot be brought again.

On October 17, 2018, we offered McRae 50 million shares in settlement of all outstanding legal actions against us. McRae declined the offer. However, we re-evaluated the liability on these lawsuits from $49,000 to $250,000 based on the closing price of our common stock on the date of the offer. We recognized a loss on litigation of $201,000 in so doing during 2018.

The Company, believing that allegations made by McRae are largely fabricated and aimed at doing harm, has been vigorously defending itself and believes it will prevail in every instance. Despite this belief, to save legal expense the Company made a good faith settlement offer to McRae. The offer was rejected.

In assessing the realizability of future tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the future tax assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of future tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of future tax liabilities, projected future taxable income and tax planning strategies in making this assessment. Management has provided for a valuation allowance on all of its losses as there is no assurance that future tax benefits will be realized.

Our tax loss carry-forwards will begin to expire in 2030.