UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20549 FORM 10-KSB  (X) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934  For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 ( ) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 (NO FEE REQUIRED) For the transition period from _________ to _______  Commission File Number 333-119742  TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its
charter)  Nevada
                                                                         87-0448400 (State or other jurisdiction of
                                              (I.R.S.
Employer ID No.) Incorporation)  Securities registered
under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:  None.  Securities registered
under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:  Common Capital
Voting Stock, $0.001 par value per share (Title of Class)  Check whether the
issuer is not required to file all reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Exchange Act. [ ]  Check whether the
issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes [X] No [ ]  Check if there is no
disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-B
contained in this form, and no disclosure will be contained, to the best of the
registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10- KSB or any amendment to
this Form 10-KSB.  [X] The issuer is not
aware of any delinquent filers.  Indicate by check mark
whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act): Yes [X] No [  ]  1    State issuer's revenues for its most recent fiscal year:  $
N/A  State the aggregate
market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates
computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was sold, or the
average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of a specified date within
the past 60 days. (See definition of affiliate in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act.)  As of the close of business on
December 31, 2007, our fiscal year-end, and, as of the date of this annual
report, the aggregate market value of our voting stock held by non-affiliates,
an amount consisting of a total of 439,059 shares, was determined to be $65,859
or $0.15 per share.  This calculation is based on the fact that while there
is currently a thinly traded public market for our shares, shares which trade on
the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) under the symbol TMGG, we had no
trades in our stock during our fourth quarter ended December 31, 2007, even
though the last trade was at $0.50 per share.  Based on the recent lack of
trading activity in our stock, we believe that valuing these shares at $0.15 per
share for the purpose of this annual report is reasonable under the
circumstances.  This is not to ignore that no common equity stock was sold
by the Company during the fiscal year from which an alternative computation
could be made under the above-formula.  (ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST
FIVE YEARS)  Not applicable.  (APPLICABLE ONLY TO
CORPORATE REGISTRANTS)  State the number of
shares outstanding of each of the Registrant's classes of common equity, as of
the last practicable date: As of the date of this
document, the Issuer had 2,109,643 shares issued and outstanding.  DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE  None.  Transitional Small Business
Disclosure Format: Yes [  ]; No [X ].  NOTICE AND
DISCLAIMER REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS  Certain matters
discussed herein may be forward-looking statements that involve a variety of
risks and uncertainties. In this regard, reference is made to the "Risk Factors"
section below. Such disclosure purports or attempts to list and describe a
variety of risk factors that we believe are material to a person investing or
considering investing in us. In light of the risks
involved with or facing us, actual results may differ materially or considerably
from those projected, implied or suggested. As a result, any forward-looking
statements expressed herein are deemed to represent our best judgment as of the
date of this filing. We do NOT express any intent or obligation to update any
forward-looking statement because we are unable to give any assurances regarding
the likelihood that, or extent to which, any event discussed in any such
forward-looking statement contained herein may or may not occur, or that any
effect from or outcome of any such forward-looking event may or may not bear
materially upon our future business, prospects, plans, financial condition or
our plan of operation.   2     TABLE OF
CONTENTS  RISK
FACTORS 4 PART
I 8 ITEM 1.
 DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS 8 ITEM 2.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 14 ITEM 3.
 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. 18 ITEM 4.
 SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND REPORTS TO
SHAREHOLDERS.19 PART
II 19 ITEM 5.
 MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS. 19 ITEM 6.
   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF
OPERATION. 21 ITEM 7.
 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 33 ITEM 8.
 CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE.46 ITEM 8A.
 CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES. 46 ITEM 8B.
 OTHER INFORMATION. 46 ITEM 9.
 DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND CONTROL PERSONS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE; COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT.46 ITEM 10.
 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION 48 ITEM 11.
 SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT. 49 ITEM 12.
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE.50 ITEM 13.
EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K. 50 ITEM 14.
 PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES 51 SIGNATURES 52     3    RISK FACTORS  Any person investing
or considering investing in the securities of Tintic Gold Mining Company, a
Nevada corporation ("Tintic Gold," "Company, us, or we) should consider the
following material risks before investing in us. If any one or more of these
risks occur, our business, results of operations, or financial condition may be
significantly impaired or otherwise adversely affected. There may also be a
concomitant adverse effect on the value of our securities and anyone investing
or seeking to invest in our securities may lose part or all of his or her
investment.  Investment in our
securities should be considered highly speculative. We have no recent operating
history and are subject to all of the risks inherent in a developing business
enterprise.  Because our securities
involve a high degree of risk, the reader is cautioned to carefully read this
document in its entirety and to consider all of the factors and financial data
that are disclosed in this document, in particular, the specific material risks
described below.  1. EXPLORATION STAGE
COMPANY/LACK OF RECENT OPERATING HISTORY MEANS THAT THERE IS NOTHING ON WHICH TO
JUDGE OUR PROSPECTS FOR SUCCESS. From a mining industry standpoint, we are
considered an exploration stage company. Since our 2004 inception in Nevada as a
wholly owned subsidiary of Tintic-Utah, our former parent (all as explained
further below), we have not actively engaged in any mineral exploration, mining
or energy-related activities. Instead, all of our recent activities have been
related to acquiring, from our former parent corporation, our existing mineral
claims located in the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah ("Mineral
Claims"), and subsequently filing a registration statement with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.  Such registration statement, which went effective
on October 18, 2006, has enabled us to disseminate a prospectus in November 2006
and thereby distribute our shares to those persons who were shareholders of
Tintic-Utah on March 5, 2004. Businesses that are starting up or in their
initial stages of development present substantial business and financial risks
and suffer significant losses from which they may not recover. We, as
Tintic-Nevada or Tintic Gold Mining Company, a Nevada corporation, will face
all of the challenges of a new business enterprise. Because we are in the
exploration stage, there is little, if any, history on which to judge our
financial condition or potential success. We, as such, have had no operating
history as a mining or mineral exploration company; therefore, we are dependant
on management for the implementation of our new business plan.  2. TO CARRY OUT OUR
BUSINESS PLAN WE MAY BE REQUIRED TO RELY ON CONSULTANTS, OUTSIDE EXPERTS AND
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS, WHICH WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY ADD TO OUR COST OF DOING
BUSINESS. Because our members of management are neither experienced nor educated
in the mining industry, we will likely be required to rely on consultants,
outside experts and other independent contractors in our efforts to implement
our business plan. These stages will include staking, evaluation, permitting or
licensing and assessment activities. If and when funding for these purposes
becomes available, if it does, these stages will also likely include cleaning
and dewatering old mine workings in order to conduct sampling and assaying, not
to mention possible drilling in old shafts and stopes (i.e., underground lateral
tunnels) in anticipation of locating favorable or prospective mineralization.
Assuming we become financially able to initiate exploration activities, we will
have to rely on others to perform such exploratory services, with all the
inherent and attendant risks of employing others for important, if not
dangerous, functions. No assurance can be given that we will be able to locate
contractors with which we will work, within acceptable fee arrangements, or that
these persons or entities will be competent. At the same time, no assurance can
be given that such persons, if any, will have the experience and skill necessary
to assist us in successfully executing and carrying out our proposed business
plan and plan of operation. This is not to ignore that we may also be at risk
for any violations of the law committed by those persons, their employees or any
contractors we would use or hire to conduct staking, drilling, testing, and
other exploratory work.  3. WE ARE NOT
CURRENTLY ENGAGING IN ANY EXPLORATORY DRILLING ACTIVITY OF ANY KIND AND
THEREFORE, THERE IS NO GUARATEE THAT WE WILL. AT THE SAME TIME, WE DO NOT INTEND
TO ENTER INTO THE MINE MANAGEMENT BUSINESS. Currently, and
other than formulating an exploration plan or program as set forth in our Plan
of Operation discussion below, we are not now engaged in any mineral exploration
drilling activity of any kind on our claims. Furthermore, because of our current
lack of funding necessary to engage in any test drilling activity, we have no
immediate plans or other ability to implement and carry out any  drilling activity on our own.
At such time as we locate an exploration partner or joint venturer for such
purpose, if we do, we will assume all of the risks and liabilities of any
enterprise engaging in actual mineral drilling exploration activity, activity
that is highly risky, expensive and inherently dangerous. In addition, current
management, all of whom lack direct mining-related experience and training, do
NOT intend to have us enter into the mine or mining management business.
 If we engage in a business arrangement with an exploration partner or
joint venturer for the implementation of a drilling exploration program on our
claims, or, more specifically, the Emerald Mine, we will rely on other mineral
exploration experts and their employees, advisors and consultants to carry out
such a program.  4    4. NO ASSURANCE CAN BE GIVEN THAT A COMMERCIALLY VIABLE MINERAL
DEPOSIT EXISTS ON OUR MINERAL CLAIMS. As disclosed further below, our only
mineral property consists of the three Mineral Claims we currently own in fee
simple (other than the surface rights and a 3% net smelter return retained by an
individual named Chase Hoffman) located approximately 1/4 mile from the town of
Mammoth, Utah.  These properties were acquired from our parent corporation
on or about March 12, 2004. Because of the lack of recent exploratory or other
activity and other meaningful or recent geologic information concerning our
Claims, we can make NO assurance that a viable mineral deposit of any kind
exists on our Claims. See the section below titled "DESCRIPTION OF
PROPERTY."  5. DRILLING
EXPLORATION ACTIVITY HAS SUBSTANTIAL INHERENT RISKS AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO
ASSURANCE THAT ANY DRILLING EXPLORATION ACTIVITY WE UNDERTAKE, IF WE DO, WILL BE
SUCCESSFUL. Though we currently lack the partnership resources necessary to
implement a specific drilling or earth disturbing exploration program on our
claims, drilling exploration activity has many significant and inherent risks,
any one of which may prevent ultimate success, not the least of which is the
fact that significant mineralization may not be encountered. Not only is
drilling exploration highly speculative and costly in nature, it is also
hazardous and frequently or often nonproductive. Such risks may be considerable
and may add unexpected expenditures or delays in overall plans. There can be no
assurance that any drilling exploration activities we undertake, if and when we
do, will be successful or fruitful or that our claims will have the type of
favorable mineralization that would lead to further development.  Drilling exploration
activity is also subject to a number of specific hazards including rock falls,
subsidence, cave-ins, flooding and other weather conditions. Insurance for some
or all of these hazards may be too expensive or not available. Exploratory
drilling activities can also be affected by unanticipated changes in permitting
requirements, environmental factors, changes in law, work interruptions,
operating circumstances beyond anyone's control, lawsuits, unstable or
unexpected ground conditions and other technical issues or problems.  6. WE CURRENTLY LACK A
MINERAL EXPLORATION PARTNER TO FINANCE OR ASSIST US IN CARRYING OUT A DRILLING
EXPLORATION PROGRAM ON OUR MINERAL CLAIMS. WE ALSO LACK SUFFICIENT CAPITAL TO
CONTINUE INDEFINITELY AS A REPORTING COMPANY. FOR THESE REASONS, INVESTING IN
OUR COMMON STOCK IS HIGHLY SPECULATIVE. We currently lack the capital resources
to implement and carry out a full fledged drilling exploration program on our
Mineral Claims, though we do have the capital resources to carry out our "work
sequences" described below, which shall put us in a favorable position to search
out and find a joint venture mineral exploration partner. Our business plan or
Plan of Operation necessitates locating and partnering up with a mineral
exploration partner to finance and oversee the exploration of our Claims for
their possible favorable gold and zinc mineralization. We cannot provide any
assurance that we will be able to obtain a joint venture partner willing to
assist or finance us in completing a drilling exploration program, or, for that
matter, that we will obtain future capital beyond what is necessary to maintain
our reporting obligations, or if so, that the amount raised or obtained will be
sufficient to establish us as a going concern. See Risk Factor No. 13
below.   We need a joint
venture mineral exploration partner in order to obtain the necessary permits and
to then explore our Mineral Claims. Currently, we do NOT have royalty interests
in any mining production or properties. While we intend to vigorously seek a
joint venture mineral exploration partner on an on-going basis, there can be no
assurance that such sources or partners can or will be found, or that if
available, the terms of such a partnership will be commercially acceptable to
us.  While we can make no
assurance that we will be able to locate a joint venture partner willing to
oversee and finance the exploration of our Mineral Claims, it is noteworthy that
the prices of precious metals have improved dramatically in the last 3 or 4
years. Furthermore, the EPA, which was conducting clean-up operations in the
Eureka, Utah, area, approximately 3 miles from our Claims, will complete such
operations over the next 2 to 3 years. We believe that these two factors greatly
enhance the prospects of attracting a joint venture partner experienced in
mineral exploration, certainly more than in recent years past, though no
assurance can be made in this or any other regard.  Having said this, we
have not been successful during the last two years in our efforts to attract a
joint venture mining partner.  Our current lack of success is discussed in
more detail in the Item 6 of Part II below titled MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION.  The cost of becoming a
reporting company is not insubstantial and the cost of continuing to file all
necessary reports with the Commission and obtain the necessary audits and other
accountings will continue to drain our capital reserves. Because we were running
out of capital at the end of our fiscal year, in January of this year, 2008,
four affiliates of us advanced or loaned the Company a total of $15,000.
 This new infusion of investment capital has given us the funding to pay
outstanding bills incurred in 2007 and to further finance our accounting costs
and fees and thus, our reporting obligations into the near future.  7. MINERAL DRILLING
EXPLORATION ACTIVITY INVOLVES REGULATORY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS THAT WILL
SIGNIFICANTLY ADD TO OUR COST OF DOING BUSINESS. Environmental and other
government regulations at the federal, state and local level pertaining to our
business and properties may include: (a) surface impact; (b) water acquisition
and treatment; (c) site access; (d) reclamation; (e) wildlife preservation; (f)
licenses and permits;  5    and (e) maintaining the environment. Regulatory compliance in the
mining industry is complex and the failure to meet and satisfy various
requirements can result in fines, civil or criminal penalties or other
limitations. Assuming that we acquire or obtain the money and funding necessary
to implement a bona fide exploration program, we will be subject to regulation
by numerous federal and state governmental authorities, but most importantly, by
the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the federal Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), and a host of comparable or corollary state agencies such as
the Utah Department of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM). The failure or delay in
obtaining regulatory approvals or licenses will adversely affect our ability to
explore our Mineral Claims and otherwise carry out our business plan.  8. WE ARE DEPENDENT
UPON OUR DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS AND THEREFORE, THEIR LOSS WOULD LIKELY HAVE AN
ADVERSE MATERIAL IMPACT UPON US. At present, we are wholly dependent upon the
personal efforts and abilities of our officers and directors, persons who served
on and with our predecessor and prior parent corporation since 1981 and who
exercise control over our day-to-day affairs. As set forth above and at such
time as we exhaust our current capital reserves, we are also reliant upon these
same officers and directors to financially support us in our reporting
obligations. Though we will likely be able to maintain our reporting obligations
over the next two (2) years, there can be no assurance that, in that time, we
will succeed in finding a suitable joint venture mineral drilling exploration
partner willing to explore our claims or any others that we might acquire in the
future, or that our proposed Plan of Operation will, in that time, prove
successful. To be sure, and even with the recently enhanced price of gold, we
have not been at all successful during the last two years attracting any joint
venture mining partner interest in us or our properties.  If we cannot
carry out our business plan, we will be required to entertain or pursue another
business course of action for the Company.  Though our current
officers and directors lack experience and education in the mining or mineral
exploration industry, we depend on them to continue us as a going concern and to
pursue our Plan of Operation. Though our officers and directors are neither
experts nor experienced in mineral exploration drilling activity and have never
been employed by a mining or mineral exploration company, their individual loss
would likely have a significant adverse impact on our future and our affairs,
particularly when each of them owns a relatively large number of our shares.
Nonetheless, we do not believe the loss of any of our officers and directors
justifies the purchase of key man insurance, even assuming that we could afford
it, which we cannot at this time.   9. A SPARCE TRADING
MARKET CURRENTLY EXISTS FOR OUR STOCK AND BECAUSE WE CAN MAKE NO ASSURANCE THAT
A TRADING MARKET IN OUR SECURITIES WILL EVER DEVELOP, PERSONS WHO INVEST IN OUR
SECURITIES MAY HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING OUT OF THEIR INVESTMENT. Since our
inception in March 2004, no market has existed, or presently exists, for our
common capital stock. During our 2007 fiscal year, we obtained an
Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) symbol for our common stock.  It is
TMGG.OB. Having obtained an OTCBB symbol, we believe that the market price for
shares of our common stock may likely continue to be volatile and otherwise
trade at a large spread between the bid and asked prices. To be sure, numerous
factors beyond a company's control may have significant impact, from time to
time, on the price of its common stock, with adverse consequences. Though our
stock is not as yet trading, and no assurance can be made that it will, stock
markets generally or often experience extreme price and volume fluctuations that
can, and do, greatly affect the stock trading of "small capital" or Penny Stock
companies such as ours. These fluctuations often are unrelated to the operating
performance of the company itself. Further, in conjunction with existing
economic and political conditions, all such factors and uncertainties, including
others, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.  10. WE CAN MAKE NO
ASSURANCE THAT THERE WILL NOT BE FUTURE STOCK ISSUANCES THAT WILL DILUTE BOTH
EXISTING AND EVEN FUTURE SHAREHOLDERS. It is not now known what stock issuances
we might find advisable or otherwise be required to undertake in the future in
order to attract a joint venture mineral exploration partner, stock issuances
which, if they occurred, would substantially dilute existing shareholders.
Further, such sales or issuances, if substantial, might also adversely affect
our ability to raise additional equity capital in the future. In addition to the
foregoing, a secondary public offering and consequent issuance of additional
securities would also have a dilutive effect on the holdings of existing
shareholders and would otherwise, more than likely, have a depressive effect on
the market price of our common stock. Having said all this, we currently have NO
plans at this time to engage in any public or secondary offering of our
securities.  At such time as we are
successful in implementing our Plan of Operation or we otherwise find an
investor, partner, joint venturer or lender to undertake actual drilling
activity on our Mineral Claims, it is almost certain that additional shares will
be issued and that current shareholders will be substantially diluted. It is
also possible that a reverse split of our shares will be effectuated in the
future though there are NO plans whatsoever at the present time to undertake any
such action and we are not presently aware of any circumstances that would
dictate such a course of action.  The foregoing is not
to ignore that when we issue restricted stock to insiders and affiliates in
order to raise the cash necessary to pay our expenses and continue in our
reporting obligations, such stock issuances have a dilutive effect on existing
shareholders.  We have had two such stock issuances.  One occurred in
August 2004 and more recently, in December 2006.  6    11. CURRENT MANAGEMENT'S LACK OF EXPERIENCE IN AND/OR WITH MINING
AND, IN PARTICULAR, MINERAL EXPLORATION ACTIVITY, MEANS THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO
ASSESS, OR MAKE JUDGMENTS ABOUT, OUR POTENTIAL SUCCESS. Our current officers and
directors have never been employed in any fashion or capacity in the mining
industry. Also, no director or officer has an education or college or university
degree in mining, engineering, geology or in a field related to mining. Our
management thus lacks technical training and experience with regard to exploring
for, starting, and/or operating a mine. With no direct training or experience in
these areas, management may not be fully aware of many of the specific
requirements related to mineral exploration, let alone the overall mining
industry as a whole.  As a result, our operations, earnings, and ultimate
financial success could suffer irreparable harm due to our management's future
possible mistakes, lack of sophistication, judgment or experience in this
particular industry. See PART III, ITEM 9 below, titled Directors, Executive
Officers, Promoters and Control Persons. As a result, if we do obtain the
funding or other means to implement a bona fide mineral exploration program,
such program will be implemented and carried out by joint venturers, partners or
independent contractors who would have the requisite mineral exploration
experience and know-how that we currently lack.  12. OUR CURRENT
INABILITY TO SATISFY ANY DEBT INCURRED, OR TO BE INCURRED, BY THE COMPANY MEANS
THAT WE CAN GIVE NO ASSURANCE OF CONTINUING INDEFINITELY IN
BUSINESS. We currently lack any ability to satisfy any debt that we may have to
incur in the future. To the extent we do incur any necessary debt, we have no
intention of mortgaging our Mineral Claims as collateral security on the same.
We also have no history of operations on which anyone can determine whether we
will have the ability to repay any debt.  13. BECAUSE OF THE
START-UP NATURE OF OUR BUSINESS PLAN, OUR AUDITORS HAVE EXPRESSED DOUBT ABOUT
OUR ABILITY TO CONTINUE AS A GOING CONCERN. Our auditors have expressed
substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Continuation
of us as a going concern is dependent upon obtaining additional working capital
for future planned activity.  14. OUR OFFICERS AND
DIRECTORS ARE UNABLE TO DEVOTE THEIR FULL TIME AND ENERGY TOWARDS OUR BUSINESS
AND AFFAIRS AND THEREFORE, OUR BUSINESS PLAN WILL LIKELY NOT PROGRESS LIKE IT
MIGHT OTHERWISE WOULD. Our current officers and directors have other full time
employment as more particularly disclosed in PART III, ITEM 9 below, titled
Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters and Control Persons. As a
consequence, they can only devote a minimal or nominal amount of time to us and
our affairs.  These officers and directors intend to only devote between 1%
and 10% of their monthly time and energy to our business and affairs. We
suspect, though we are not certain, that this will involve no more than 5 or
more hours per week of each officer and director's time. Much of the time spent
will also depend upon how our business plan and our ability to attract interest
in our Mineral Claims unfolds, something that cannot be predicted with any
certainty or accuracy at this time.  15. NO ASSURANCE THAT
OUR OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE THE TYPE OF EQUITY INVESTMENT
NECESSARY TO EITHER SUSTAIN US OR ENABLE US TO LOCATE A MINERAL EXPLORATION
PARTNER/JOINT VENTURER. In August 2004, over a year and a half ago, our officers
and directors and another individual made a $25,000 equity investment in us in
exchange for 500,000 shares of restricted stock. In December 2006, these same
persons invested another $30,000 in exchange for 600,000 shares of restricted
stock.  While a few hundred dollars of such money remains in our checking
account, this money will likely NOT be sufficient to sustain us in our
reporting obligations beyond the next year. Accordingly, our officers and
directors will likely be making an additional equity investment in us when
future working capital is needed, at least for the next 2 years. While this
obligation to infuse more capital into us for 3 years from the date our
registration statement on Form SB-2/A became effective, this obligation is not
in writing.  Nonetheless, our officers and directors are committed to
seeing if we can in fact attract a joint venture mining partner and therefore,
we believe that we can rely on this representation until such time as our board
determines that we are simply unable to attract a joint venture mining partner.  Risk Factors
Related to Our Mineral Claim Assets  1. THE ABSENCE OF
RECENT MINERAL EXPLORATION ACTIVITY ON OUR CLAIMS MEANS THAT WE HAVE LIMITED
KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT EXPLORATION OCCURRED IN THE PAST AND WHAT MINERALIZATION
EXISTS ON OUR CLAIMS. There have been no significant mineral exploration
activities or operations on our Claims recently, except for limited assessment
and exploration work performed during the late 1980's and early to mid-1990's by
Centurion Mines Corporation and its successor, Grand Central Mining. While we
are aware that significant exploration occurred at one time on our Claims, this
activity, including the drilling of the Emerald Mine or Shaft, occurred as long
as 80 or 100 years ago. We do not know for sure. The results of such efforts are
thus largely lost, unknown and unaccounted for at the present time. Accordingly,
much of these efforts will likely have to be repeated in the event that we
engage in a mineral exploration program, repeated efforts that would only add to
our exploration costs.  2. UNCERTAINTY OF
DEMAND FOR TINTIC-TYPE, OXIDIZED ORE. Due to the development of modern
hydrometallurgical processes, the absence of suitable smelters, and the
availability of more cost-effective techniques, it is  7    uncertain what the future level of demand will be for the type of
oxidized mineralization present in the vicinity of our properties. Also, the
amount it could cost to reopen and finance an exploration operation is likely to
be dependent upon several factors. These include: acceptable price levels of the
relevant metals; milling and smelting availability; fluctuations in market
demand over time; extent of competition with other
companies; availability of acceptable construction costs; availability of
acceptable labor costs; feasibility of obtaining economical housing facilities;
manageable equipment costs; realistic capital costs; and the acceptability of
other price and cost variables.  3. RELIANCE UPON
ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS IS RISKY AND COSTLY BUT NECESSARY. Exploration stage
mining companies, which are defined in Industry Guide No. 7 as companies engaged
in the search for mineral deposits (reserves) which are not in either the
development or production stage, use the evaluation work of professional
geologists, geophysicists, and engineers to make estimates in determining
whether to acquire an interest in property, or to commence exploration work.
These estimates generally rely on scientific and economic assumptions, and in
some instances may not be correct. The economic viability of a property cannot
be determined until extensive exploration work has been conducted and a
comprehensive feasibility study performed. This work could result in the
expenditure of substantial amounts of money on a property before it can even be
determined whether or not the property contains economically recoverable
mineralization. No feasibility studies have been performed on our properties
because considerable exploration work remains to be done. Moreover, market
prices of minerals produced are subject to fluctuation, which may adversely
affect the economic viability of properties on which expenditures have been
made. We are not able to presently determine whether or not, or the extent to
which, such risks may adversely affect our strategy and business plan.  4. UNCERTAINTY OF
TOPOGRAPHICAL EFFECT ON EXPLORATION COULD ADD TO EXPLORATION COSTS. Our
properties are located on the top of a hill approximately 1/4 mile from the city
limits of Mammoth, Utah. Because the surface of the land has some topographic
relief, any inaccessibility could affect the location of drilling sites and
shafts, as well as the construction of industrial facilities. It also could
require that additional exploration or drilling on the property be accessed
below ground, though we do not believe this is likely. These outcomes are
uncertain at present, and we cannot provide assurances that they will not have a
materially adverse effect on the ability of us or a third-party business partner
to conduct mineral exploration activities.  5. UNCERTAIN CONDITION
OF MINE WORKINGS COULD SIGNIFICANTLY ADD TO EXPLORATION COSTS. Other than the
Emerald Shaft or Mine mentioned below which contains an old head frame, there
are no other surface mine shafts or usable head frames on our property.
Moreover, the underground workings have been inactive for many years due to the
absence of significant exploration activities on our properties since the 1930's
and 1950's. Considerable cost would be incurred to recondition shafts, drifts,
tunnels, winces and other workings, to the extent they exist, as well as to
re-equip hoisting bases and framework. It is uncertain whether and to what
extent the workings themselves, as well as any rehabilitation of them, could
expose us to significant environmental and safety concerns. If so, remediating
these concerns could require expending an uncertain amount of funds to render
the workings safe, acceptable, and environmentally sound. No assurance can be
made that we will have sufficient capital to absorb these costs and expenses,
costs and expenses that could significantly add to any exploration costs.  6. SUBSTANTIAL
LIKELIHOOD THAT OUR CLAIMS DO NOT CONTAIN ORE OR RESERVES (OR SUFFICIENT ORE OR
RESERVES TO JUSTIFY A DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM). We do not know, and have no way of
predicting, whether, upon the completion of any drilling exploration program,
ore or reserves will be found. As with any mineral exploration endeavor, we
believe that there is a high probability or likelihood that that the discovery
of commercial quantities of ore or reserves on our claims is remote, even
considering that ore may have been found on our Claims 80, 90 or 100 years ago
when 1,800 tons of material were removed. If so, or if such is determined upon
completion of a drilling exploration program, any funds spent on exploration
will be lost.      PART I    ITEM 1.
 DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS  Business Corporate
History.  Tintic Gold Mining
Company, a Nevada corporation ("Tintic-Nevada", Company, "we" or "us"), was
originally formed as a wholly owned subsidiary of Tintic Gold Mining Company, a
Utah corporation ("Tintic-Utah"). We were organized and incorporated under the
laws of the State of Nevada on March 8, 2004, as required by the terms of a
certain Distribution Agreement between us and Tintic-Utah dated March 12, 2004.
 This agreement was entered into for the purpose of acquiring all of
Tintic-Utah's mineral claim properties and related assets, including its
remaining cash after payment of related expenses. As a result, we are the owner
of the subsurface mineral rights previously owned by Tintic-Utah, on
approximately 44 acres of land located in the Tintic Mining District of Juab
County, Utah, near the town of Mammoth, Utah, property that our predecessor or
parent corporation had owned since 1933 and which was conveyed to us by Special
Warranty Deed on March 18, 2004, copy of which was attached as Ex. "10.1" to our
original Form SB-2 registration statement.  8     Our predecessor,
Tintic-Utah, was incorporated on June 14, 1933 as a Utah corporation, and was,
until the effective time of its 2004 merger discussed below, a mineral resource
and exploration company. Under Industry Guide No. 7, it was classified as an
exploration stage mining company. This is defined as a company engaged in the
search for mineral deposits (reserves), which is not in either the development
or production stage. Unfortunately, Tintic-Utah did not engage in any mineral
exploration activities during the early 2000's, that is, at a time when it was a
"reporting company" with the Commission and also quoted on the OTC Bulletin
Board.  There are two reasons for this. First, the prices of precious
metals were depressed and remained depressed during the early 2000s, a fact
which did not provide an investment or other financing incentive or opportunity
for mineral exploration activities. Secondly, in the summer of 2002, after
having conducted various contamination testing in the area since 2000 and 2001,
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared the nearby Eureka, Utah, area
as a "Super-Fund" clean-up site. Because of potential "clean-up" liability for
contamination, Tintic-Utah was to discover that mineral exploration companies
were not the least interested in spending the money necessary to undertake any
mineral exploration activities of any kind until the EPA had completed its
"clean-up" operations and gone after or pursued alleged "polluters." In fact, to
our knowledge, there was virtually no mineral exploration or other mining
activity whatsoever in the Tintic Mining District between 2000 and 2004. To be
sure, the Trixie Mine, the only operational mine at this time in the District, a
mine operated by Chief Consolidated Mining, was closed down. This negative trend
now appears to have changed. Precious metals prices have substantially improved.
 To be sure, as of the date of this report, gold has recently traded at
over $1,000 per ounce and silver has traded at over $20 per ounce.  By
contrast, the price of gold at the time Tintic-Utah was reporting was as low
as $250 per ounce and silver was as low as $4.25 per ounce.  In addition to
prices of precious metals improving substantially over the last 3 or 4 years, we
are informed that the EPA will be completing its "clean-up" operations in
Eureka, Utah, area over the next 2 years or longer; further, we are informed
that the EPA has finished going after or pursuing alleged "polluters" in the
Eureka area. We believe these changes of events make the investment environment
more friendly or suitable for mineral exploration activities.  Having said this, we must
acknowledge that the substantial improvement in precious metals prices over the
last several years hasnt generated much interest in the Tintic Mining District
by any large mining companies, not to mention our mining claims.  We
honestly dont know why.  In spite of
Tintic-Utahs inability to attract investment capital or locate a mineral
exploration program partner during the early 2000's, Tintic-Utah's management
nonetheless continued to develop the company's long-term business plan to
re-establish itself as an active business and to seek capital funds to operate
and continue in business. As part of this long-term business plan, and because
mineral exploration in the Tintic Mining District was at that time an
impractical if not impossible endeavor, Tintic-Utah's management was authorized
to entertain and negotiate with potential merger candidates who were not engaged
in the business of mineral exploration and/or mining. Pursuant to this
authority, Tintic-Utah acquired Kiwa, in exchange for its securities, as an
operating company.  Tintic-Utah did so due to Kiwas experienced management
and its potential for profitable growth. In doing so, Tintic-Utah acquired all
the of cash and assets that were then owned and held by Kiwa and thus,
Tintic-Utah obtained the capital and business prospects necessary to both
operate and continue in existence in a profitable manner. Prior to the merger transaction with Kiwa discussed below, George Christopulos,
Hugh Coltharp and Jack Coombs, our existing directors and officers, served as
the directors and officers of Tintic-Utah.  The shares of common
stock of Tintic-Utah, until the time of completion of the merger discussed
below, traded on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol "TTGM." These shares
now trade under the corporate name of Kiwa Bio-Tech Products and under the OTC
Bulletin Board symbol "KWBT.OB."  Following the merger,
stockholders of Kiwa became stockholders of Tintic-Utah. Selected executive
officers and directors of Kiwa then became executive officers and directors of
Tintic-Utah. Because Kiwa was in a totally different type of business and did
not want to own or engage in mineral exploration activities, Tintic-Nevada was
formed for the purpose of conveying Tintic-Utah's mineral claims into it and
effectuating a spin-off of shares, the very subject of our registration
statement on Form SB-2/A, all as further explained below.  The patented Mineral
Claims that we received on March 18, 2004, under the Distribution Agreement with
Kiwa, are located within the historic Tintic Mining District (organized on
December 13, 1869) in Juab County, Utah. These Mineral Claims were part of a
once-thriving mining district with worldwide acclaim. In 1979, the Tintic Mining
District was listed in the National Register of Historic Places.  Our predecessor
corporation, Tintic-Utah, had been authorized to conduct business in Utah and
has conducted business in Utah since 1933. It owned our existing patented
Mineral Claims since 1933, properties that had been acquired from the Emerald
Mining Company. These properties are owned free and clear of any lien or
encumbrance other than the fact that a prior director from some-25 years ago,
Mr. C. Chase Hoffman, owns the surface rights. Mr. Hoffman also retains a 3% net
smelter return interest on any mineral production, if any ever occurs.  None of our officers
and directors has been involved in any bankruptcy, receivership or similar
proceeding and none is involved in any litigation that would have any direct or
indirect impact or bearing on us or our business. Considering that we were
incorporated in March 2004 to receive Tintic-Utah/Kiwa's mineral claim assets
and implement the terms of the  9    Distribution Agreement with Kiwa, there has been no material
reclassification, consolidation, merger, or purchase or sale of any significant
amount of assets.  Presently, we have no
operations other than our operations necessary to complete the terms and
conditions of the Distribution Agreement. Since incorporation, our primary
business activity to date has been to complete our Form SB-2 registration
statement with the Commission and distribute our securities to the March 5, 2004
shareholders of Tintic-Utah, something we accomplished late last year.  The March 12, 2004
Merger or Reorganization with Kiwa.  On March 12, 2004,
pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") dated as of
March 11, 2004, by and among Tintic Gold Mining Company, a Utah corporation
("Tintic-Utah"), TTGM Acquisition Corporation, a Utah corporation and
wholly-owned subsidiary of Tintic-Utah ("Merger Sub"), and Kiwa Bio-Tech
Products Group, Ltd., a privately-held British Virgin Islands ("BVI")
corporation ("Kiwa-BVI"). Merger Sub merged with and into Kiwa-BVI with Kiwa-BVI
surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tintic-Utah (the "Merger"). Each share
of Kiwa-BVI common stock was converted into 1.5445839 shares of Tintic-Utah's
common stock, resulting in Tintic-Utah issuing an aggregate of 7,722,919 shares
of its common stock to the former shareholders of Kiwa-BVI. Tintic-Utah also
assumed Kiwa-BVI's outstanding stock options. The Merger resulted in a change of
control of Tintic-Utah, with former Kiwa-BVI shareholders and optionees owning
approximately 89% of Tintic-Utah's common stock on a fully diluted basis
immediately following the closing of the Merger. A copy of the Merger Agreement
is attached to our third amended registration statement on Form SB-2/A as
Exhibit 10.2 and is available for review on the Commission's Edgar database. The
Merger Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions of the merger transaction
between the two companies that closed on March 12, 2004.  Upon consummation of
the Merger on March 12, 2004, Mr. Wei Li was appointed as Chief Executive
Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Tintic-Utah and Mr. Da-chang
Ju was appointed as a director. Mr. George Christopulos resigned as Chief
Executive Officer, President, Chief Financial Officer and
Chairman of the Board. On or about March 27, 2004, upon compliance with Section
14(f) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 14f-1
thereunder, Jack Coombs and Hugh Coltharp resigned from the Board of Directors
and Lian-jun Luo, James Nian Zhan and Yun-long Zhang were appointed as
directors. No agreements existed among present or former controlling
stockholders of Tintic-Utah or present or former members of Kiwa-BVI with
respect to the election of the members of Tintic-Utah or Kiwa's board of
directors, and to our knowledge, no other agreements existed which might have
resulted in a change of control of Tintic-Utah.  On March 15, 2004,
Tintic-Utah changed its corporate name from "Tintic Gold Mining Company," a Utah
corporation, to "Kiwa Bio-tech Products Group Corporation" ("Kiwa"). During the
later part of 2004, Kiwa changed its domicile from Utah to that of Delaware.  For more information
in this regard, interested persons should look up and review Kiwa's public
filings on the Securities and Exchange Commission's database known as EDGAR.  Reasons for the
Merger  In early 2004,
Tintic-Utah's management was presented with the opportunity to merge or
reorganize with Kiwa Bio-Tech Products, Ltd. ("Kiwa-BVI"), a company engaged in
the agri-products business in the People's Republic of China. At the time,
Tintic-Utah was running out of capital. Upon review of Kiwa-BVI and its business
activities and affairs, including its management's resumes, business plan,
products and services, and industry niche, Tintic-Utah's management believed
that a merger or business combination transaction with Kiwa-BVI would provide an
opportunity to enhance Tintic-Utah's shareholder value. Tintic-Utah's management
found many factors of the Kiwa business plan attractive, including but not
limited to the following:  Kiwa-BVI was
represented as a development stage company that develops, manufactures,
distributes and markets innovative, cost-effective and environmentally safe
bio-technological products for agriculture, natural resources and environmental
conservation. Kiwa-BVI's products were represented as designed to enhance the
quality of human life by increasing the value, quality and productivity of crops
and decreasing the negative environmental impact of chemicals and other wastes.  In 2002, Kiwa-BVI and
its predecessor entities chartered Kiwa Bio-Tech Product (Shandong) Co. Ltd.
("KIWA-SD"), a wholly-owned subsidiary organized under the laws of China, as its
offshore manufacturing base to capitalize on low cost, high quality
manufacturing advantages available in China. In October 2003, Kiwa-BVI completed
Phase I construction of its state-of-the-art manufacturing facility. In November
2003, Kiwa-BVI began shipping its first commercial product, a bio-fertilizer, to
the agricultural market in China. Kiwa-BVI was represented as working on
existing product improvement and new product development while it continued its
three-phase facility build-up.  While Kiwa-BVI was basically a start-up
company, by the time negotiations had occurred with Tintic-Utah, it had had at
least $50,000 in sales.   10    Effect of the Merger  As a condition of the
Merger, we, that is, Tintic-Nevada, were formed for the purpose of conveying
Tintic-Utah's mineral claim rights and interests to us, its Nevada subsidiary
(an act which occurred on March 18, 2004). This conveyance was done in exchange
for the issuance of a total of 1,009,643 shares of our stock.  This stock
was physically issued or registered in certificate form in the name of
Tintic-Utah as of March 5, 2004.  This stock certificate was signed over by
Tintic-Utah and signature guaranteed and was held by our stock transfer agent,
Cottonwood Stock Transfer located in Salt Lake City, Utah, for the benefit of
Tintic-Utahs shareholders. Through the Distribution Agreement we had entered
into with our former parent corporation, Tintic-Utah, it was our intention to
physically effectuate the distribution of those shares to the shareholders of
Tintic-Utah immediately following the effective time of a registration statement
registering the shares covered  thereby (the "Spin-Off").
The purpose of, or rationale for, the Spin-Off is based on Tintic-Utah, now
Kiwa, taking a different business direction and no longer either needing or
wanting our Mineral Claims, not to mention any environmental liability that
might have been associated with them. This Spin-Off transaction was registered
with the Commission on Form SB-2/A under provisions of, and in compliance with,
the Securities Act of 1933. The Distribution Agreement dated on or about March
12, 2004, by and among Tintic-Utah (Kiwa's predecessor in
name), Tintic-Nevada, and their directors and officers provides that no
shareholder of either Tintic-Utah and/or Kiwa, who acquired their shares in
either entity AFTER March 5, 2004, could participate in the Spin-Off. In other
words, only shareholders of record of Kiwa (Tintic-Utah) as of the record date
of March 5, 2004 would be (and were) entitled to receive shares in the
Spin-Off.  CURRENT STATUS OF
TINTIC-NEVADA.  In addition to being
defined in Industry Guide No. 7 as a mineral exploration company, we are also
defined under Commission rules and regulations as a Small Business Issuer.
 This is an issuer that has revenues of less than $25 million, is a U.S. or
Canadian issuer and is not an investment company.  We are also subject to
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  This Act was enacted to curb auditor
abuses and strengthen auditor independence.  It also institutes certain
steps to make senior members of management more directly responsible for the
content and accuracy of a companys financial reporting.  On December 21, 2006,
we filed a 34 Act registration statement with the Commission on Form 8-A.
 This act registered our securities under Section 12(g) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  As a result, we are required to comply with the
proxy rules as set forth in Regulation 14A.  For example, if we call a
special or annual meeting of our stockholders, we are required by law to provide
our stockholders with the information set forth in Schedules 14A or 14C of
Regulation 14.  Preliminary versions this information must be filed with
the Commission at least 10 days prior to the date that final or definitive
copies of these materials are forwarded on to our stockholders.  As a reporting
company, we are required to regularly file, with the Commission, annual reports
on Form 10-KSB and quarterly reports on Form 10-QSB.  In the event certain
material events occur, the law requires us to timely report any such events on a
Form 8-K.  We have not been
involved in any bankruptcy, receivership or similar proceeding; and, other than
in the ordinary course of business, there has been no material reclassification,
consolidation, merger, or purchase or sale of any significant amount of assets.
None of our officers and directors or majority shareholders has been involved,
directly or indirectly, in any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding and none is
involved in any litigation that would have any direct or indirect impact or
bearing on us or our business.  Our common stock currently trades on
the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol TMGG.OB.  For more information in
this regard, reference is made to Item 5 of Part II below titled MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED SHAREHOLDER
MATTERS.  During our 2007 fiscal
year, we had serious difficulty attracting any interest in our mining claims.
 We believe that this has been due to the fact that the land ownership in
the Tintic Mining District is very fragmented, meaning that ownership is held in
the names of numerous, numerous corporations and individuals, many possibly
having conflicting ownership rights and interests.  At the same time, we
believe that a serious mining company or joint venture mining partner would want
to be able to tie up an extended or large area or block of land.
 Fragmented land ownership therefore means that a mining company or joint
venture partner would have to spend a lot of time and energy on land and title
work and, when all is said and done, may not be able to lock up or amass a large
block of land.  Accordingly, extensive land and title work in the overall
area of our mineral claims would likely be a significant expense and cost that a
prospective joint venture mining partner is not willing to assume.  We also believe that
the significant EPA presence in the Eureka, Utah, area, while it completes its
Superfund clean up operations, may also have a negative effect or impact on a
potential mining company or a joint venture mining partner, simply because they
may fear that the EPA would require them to do remediation, etc., that they
wouldnt otherwise be required to do if the EPA were not highly present and
active in the area.  11     For more information
on the current state of our Companys business and affairs, reference is made to
ITEM 6below titledMANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN
OF OPERATION.  Executive
Offices.  Our executive or
principal offices remain located at 3131 Teton Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah
84109.  No Subsidiaries or
Related Companies.  As of December 31,
2007, we did NOT have any subsidiaries or related companies or entities. None of
our officers or directors currently serves on the board or otherwise act as
officers of any other company, partnership or limited liability company engaged
in mining or involved in the mining business.  No Joint Venture
Arrangements at the Present Time.  We have neither
entered into, nor participate in, any joint venture arrangements nor do we have
any plans, at the current time, to engage in any joint venture with any
particular person or party.  No Patents,
Trademarks, Licenses or Franchises.  We do NOT own any
patents, trademarks, licenses, franchises, or concessions, except for patented
mining claims granted by the government to private landowners.   No
Royalties.  We do not currently
received royalties from mining activities or any other activities.  Long-Term Goals and
Objectives.  Our long-term business
goal has been focused on advancing the exploration of our Mineral Claims. Our
intermediate objectives for advancing this goal have been two- fold: First, we
have sought to re-establish ourselves as an active business operation by
completing our registration statement with the Commission on Form SB-2/A, a task
that we completed on October 18, 2006, after two years of going through the
review process.  Accomplishing this preliminary goal, which took over two
years, has been met in that we are now a fully "reporting company" and have
otherwise obtained audited financial statements. To accomplish the second of
these objectives, we have sought, and continue to seek, a joint venture business
partner willing to finance the exploration of our Mineral Claims.  Over the last two
years we have been focused almost exclusively on accomplishing the first of
these intermediate objectives. Having completed that objective, we are now
better able to more specifically determine the necessary short-term plans and
strategies best suited to accomplishing the second of our intermediate
objectives. This will require entering into strategic alliances or partnerships
with others having greater capital resources and experience in mining. Reference
is made to our Form SB-2/A-7 registration statement filed with the Commission on
October 6, 2006, a document that further explains our plans and objectives in
greater detail.  Business
Plan.  For a detailed
discussion of the second objective of our long-term goals, namely, the pursuit
of a bona fide exploration program on our Mineral Claims, reference is made to
our Part II, ITEM 6 below titled Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan
of Operation.  Seasonability.  Our business is not
seasonal in nature except to the extent that weather conditions at certain times
of the year may affect access to our Mineral Claims.  No Customers or
Suppliers.  We do not provide any
goods or services at this time. As such, we do not have any customers or
suppliers.  Governmental
Regulation and Environmental Concerns.   12    Though we are currently NOT operating any mining assets and
currently lack the capital to operate any mining assets in the immediate future,
management believes it is important to be familiar with mining rules and
regulations as they would affect or pertain to our Mineral Claims. The mining
industry is subject to extensive and developing federal, state and local laws,
rules and regulations relating to the exploration for, development, mining and
production of precious metals, as well as other environmental and safety
concerns. Legislation affecting the mining industry is under constant review for
amendment and expansion, frequently increasing the regulatory burden. This is
particularly true in the Tintic Mining District where lead, a substance highly
toxic to humans, is present. Numerous agencies, federal, state and local, have
issued rules and regulations applicable to the mining industry, some of which
carry substantial penalties for failure to comply. Various laws, rules and
regulations require permits for exploratory drilling and the maintenance of
bonding requirements in order to conduct mining activity on a variety of scales.
Such rules and regulations also regulate the spacing and location of mine shafts
and provide requirements for surface use and restoration of land on which
drilling activity is undertaken, the plugging and abandoning of shafts or holes,
the prevention of waste and water pollution and the prevention and cleanup of
pollutants. These departments and agencies often require periodic reports on
exploration, development and production and other matters.
Such laws and regulations have generally become more stringent in recent years,
often imposing greater liability on an ever-larger number of potentially
responsible parties. We are also subject to laws, rules and regulations covering
occupational safety and health matters. Because the requirements imposed by such
laws and regulations frequently change, we are unable to predict the ultimate
cost of compliance with these various requirements. The regulatory burden on the
mining industry increases its costs of doing business and, consequently, affects
not only its profitability but its ability to obtain financing or raise equity.
Reference is made to the subsection in Item 2 below titled  Government
Regulation/Obtaining Necessary Permits to Conduct Exploration Activities, which
briefly outlines the exploration and mining permitting process in Utah. In the
interests of not avoiding repetition, we do not repeat this disclosure here.  Some risk of costs and
liabilities related to environmental, health and safety matters is inherent in
the mining industry as a whole. As set forth in the Risk Factors section listed
above, in the event that we undertake exploration of our Mineral Claims, we put
ourselves at risk to incur significant and substantial costs and
liabilities.  To the extent we ever
commence actual exploratory operations, we will be subject to regulation by
numerous federal and state governmental authorities. The most significant will
be the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and
comparable or corollary state agencies. If we do not comply, meet or satisfy the
various rules and regulations promulgated by these regulatory authorities, we
would be exposed to fines, bars or other significant penalties. To date, we have
not been ordered or required to spend anything on compliance with environmental
laws because we are not currently operating any mining assets. Our Mineral
Claims were leased to other mining companies in the 1980's and 1990's but, other
than assay work, no exploratory mining activity was undertaken. At the same
time, however, there are no significant mineral tailings on our mineral claims
to the knowledge of management and therefore, to the extent that either the EPA
or a corollary Utah state agency adopts or implements a program in the Mammoth
area requiring the clean-up of any left-over environmental hazards, we would not
expect such to materially affect us or our affairs.  This is also because,
having only been in existence since 2004, we are not the same entity that may
have contributed to, or caused, any environmental hazards between the 1930s and
the 1990s.  This gives us a legal argument to rely on as a defense to any
clean-up action against us, though we can make no assurance that we would
prevail with such an argument.  Competitive
Position.  We have no competitive
economic position in the mining industry as no mineral production has ever been
realized. To date, there has been no mining activity on these properties other
than the exploratory holes drilled in the past and mentioned in further detail
below, all with inconclusive results. Furthermore, we have not received revenue
from our mineral rights for the last several years since the lease we once had
with Centurion Mines Corporation and its successor-in-interest was
terminated.  Mining companies of
all calibers compete to obtain favorable mineral claim properties and to
evaluate prospects for drilling, exploration, development, and mining.
Naturally, we face competition from other similarly situated junior mining
companies similarly interested in acquiring mineral claims worthy of exploration
for favorable or prospective gold, zinc, silver, copper and other
mineralization, companies that have substantially more capital or access to the
capital markets than we do. This includes other mining companies either
operating, or considering operating, in the Tintic Mining District or who own or
control properties within the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah, where
our Mineral Claims are located.  We are unable to
ascertain the exact number of competitor companies, or whether or when such
competitors' competitive positions could improve.  Business Offices
and Administrative Support.  Mr. George
Christopulos provides office space and the necessary administrative and clerical
support for the corporate affairs of Tintic-Nevada without any cost to us.   13     Employees.  We have no employees
and our current officers and directors serve without established compensation.
Should we succeed in obtaining sufficient working capital, we may contract for
the services of 1 or 2 part-time employees, and we may also enter into
contractual arrangements with 1 or more consultants. We may contract with
consultants from time to time, depending upon the circumstances and whether such
a course of conduct is warranted. Any consultants retained by us shall be
considered independent contractors who it is not anticipated will be able to
bind the Company in any way as an agent of the Company.  No Present
Agreements with any Consultant.  We currently have no
agreement with any consultant. This does not mean that we will not explore the
possibility of hiring or retaining a consultant(s) or other expert or
professional in the future to assist us in our search for a mineral exploration
partner, acquisition or funding candidate. As of the date of this document, we
have also been in no discussion with any such individual or company for such
purpose.  Transfer
Agent.  During most of the
year, Cottonwood Stock Transfer Corporation had acted as our stock transfer
agent.  However, in November 2007, Cottonwoods owner retired and sold its
book of stock transfer business to Standard Registrar & Transfer located at
12528 South 1840 East, Draper, Utah 84020, phone no. 801-571-8844, fax no.
801-571-2551  We currently have approximately 358
shareholders of record.     ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION
OF PROPERTY  Description of Our Mineral Assets
and Property Acquired as a Result of the 2004 Merger.  As contemplated in
Industry Guide 7(b), our mineral claim property consists of three (3) patented
mining claims located in the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah,
between a quarter and a half a mile from the city limits of Mammoth, Utah,
approximately 90 miles south of Salt Lake City. The mineral claims can be
accessed through the town of Mammoth, Utah. There is an unpaved, dirt road that
goes up to the property from the town of Mammoth.  There are no
conditions to our ability to retain title to the property other than our annual
obligation to pay minimal property taxes to the Juab County Treasurer.  The rock formation and
mineralization of existing or potential economic significance is described in
detail in the section below titled "Type of Property/ Exploration, Development
and Production History."  The work completed on
the property, including the current state of exploration of the property and
present condition of the property, is set forth in detail in the Plan of
Operation section below.  We have no equipment
or other infrastructure facilities, including power than can be utilized on the
property, other than what is indicated in the Plan of Operation section below.
This section also details our planned future exploration costs.  Our mineral assets and
property are without known reserves and our proposed program is exploratory in
nature.  For a view of our
property, we have attached, in two PDF files, an Index Map and a Property
Location Map as exhibits to this document.  These two maps show the actual
location of our Mineral Claim properties.  Form of
Ownership   Tintic-Nevada does not
hold "unpatented" mining claims. (An unpatented mining claim is a parcel of
property located on federal lands that the U.S. government continues to own,
though it has granted the private party claimholder the right to explore and
mine the claim.) Instead, we own patented mining claims. (A "patented" mining
claim is land originally held as unpatented, to which the private-party
claimholder has been conveyed fee  simple title by the U.S.
government, after meeting the federal patenting requirements.) The important
distinction or difference in the type of mineral interest it represents is that
the patent gives the claimholder full and complete ownership, outright, of the
land on which the claim is located. In this case, however, a former officer and
director named C. Chase Hoffman own the surface rights. Such rights were
conveyed to Mr. Hoffman in 1980 in consideration for money Mr. Hoffman had
advanced the Company over the years. Mr. Hoffman also retains a 3% net smelter
return royalty interest in the event of any mineral production on the
property.  14     The Effect of
Regulatory Changes on Holding Unpatented Mining Claims  The U.S. Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) promulgated new regulations in 1997 regarding hard rock
unpatented mining claims (see 43 CFR 3809). Compliance with the 1997 regulations
is both time-consuming and costly. Therefore, Tintic-Nevada does NOT intend to
purchase or locate any unpatented claims, but instead, to concentrate its
exploration activities on its own privately-held land and perhaps on land that,
at some point in the future, it may decide to acquire, including but not limited
to a possible Utah state mineral leasehold of some kind. Management believes
that these BLM regulations will have little or no effect on our activities.  Type of Property/
Exploration, Development and Production History  Our three (3) patented
mineral claims are lode claims. (Such claims contain deposits of minerals, in
this case, gold and zinc in solid rock. A placer claim, on the other hand, is a
deposit of sand and gravel containing valuable minerals.)  Our mineral claim
property, which our predecessor, Tintic-Utah owned since 1933, lies within the
Central portion of the Main Tintic Mining District, Juab County, Utah,
approximately 90 miles south of Salt Lake City. The property is bounded on the
north and east by the Centennial Eureka, the Grand Central, and Mammoth mines,
and on the south and west by the Empire Mines property. The property consists of
three (3) patented lode mining or mineral claims known as the Emerald, Ruby and
Diamond Lode Mining Claims. These claims embrace a portion of Sections 19 and
30, Township 10 South, Range 2 West and Sections 24 and 25, Township 10 South,
Range 3 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, bearing Mineral Survey Number 188,
and together designated as Lot No. 224, more particularly described in the
patent recorded at Book 60, Page 406, of the records of Juab County, Utah. These
properties comprise an area of approximately 44.43 acres. These claims cover an
area 3,000 feet north-south and 550 to 900 feet east-west.  Structurally, these
properties lie along the west flank of the northward plunging asymmetric trough
of the Tintic syncline. Beds strike approximately due north and dip steeply to
the east. Surface exposures show the predominant rock type to be Ajax Dolomite
of Cambrian Age. The central portion of the property is cut by the trace of the
northeast striking Emerald-Grand Central fault. The east-west striking
Sioux-Ajax fault zone is inferred to cut through the property and could
intersect the northeast structure within the boundaries of the property. Due to
soil cover, their exact position cannot be readily determined.  The property is
located on the outcrop of the Ajax limestone. This has been one of the most
favorable ore-bearing formations of the Main Tintic Mining District.  Because of general
geological conditions, our property has three favorable prospects. One is in
deeper development in the northern part of the property; two, in a mineralized
vein near the main shaft on the 1,000 level; and three, above the 600 level on
the southern end of the property.  There are several
prominent fissures in our property. Fissures north of the shaft show calcite and
oxidized iron. This suggests possibilities for improved mineralization at depth.
Close to the shaft an east-west cross fissure reportedly carries substantial
values in lead from the 200 to 1,000 levels in workings presently inaccessible. This fissure should be prospected for
intersections and at greater depth. South of the shaft are two main north- south
fissures. One known as the Diamond fissure shows jasperoid quartz.  A spur line of the
Union Pacific Railroad with loading ramps lies less than two miles to the
northeast.  The property has been
explored by numerous shallow shafts, surface workings, and a one and one-half
compartment shaft sunk one thousand feet deep, with levels driven at the 400,
500, 600, 700 and 1,000 foot levels. This shaft is known as the Emerald Mine or
Shaft. The Emerald Mine is the largest historic mine working on the Tintic Gold
Mining Company's claims group. The shaft is located on the south end of the
Emerald patented lode claim near the crest of a small ridge. The mine lies
between the Grand Central and the Mammoth Mines. The 1100 foot level is
developed from a winze on the 1000 foot mine level. Only a small amount of ore
-- approximately 1,800 tons -- was historically removed from the Emerald Mine.
The grade of this ore is not known.  The Emerald Shaft is
about 1,900 feet south-southwest from the Grand Central Mine shaft and
approximately 2,000 feet west of the Mammoth Mine glory hole. The Emerald Shaft
is collared in the highly productive Ajax Formation which hosts the bulk of
copper-gold mineralization in the district and lies on strike from the Grand
Central mineralizations in the same unit. The Emerald Mine is presently
inaccessible and the shaft collar is partially blocked with debris and mine
timbers. Several additional small shafts, declines, and pits on the claim group
explore surface exposures of silicification and weak mineralization. These
workings are also in the highly productive Ajax Formation and may represent
"leakage" of mineralization along faults from unexploited deposits developed at
depth adjacent to the existing Emerald Mine underground  15    workings.  It is not anticipated
that the opening up or rehabilitation of the old workings will be attempted at
the present time or at any future time. Any possible exploration will be in the
nature of surface assay sampling or testing and, if sufficient evidence is
obtained, exploratory drilling may be considered. In such event, we will be
subject to regulation by the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM). It
should be again noted that the potential for pursuing an extensive permitting
process in order to further drill the property is dependent on the prices of
gold and zinc.  The mineralization of
interest is believed to be of the siliceous copper-gold-silver category.
However, the possibility of this property attaining the status of a gold, zinc
or silver producer will depend upon the results of any future exploration
testing and drilling program engaged in by us. At the present time, this
property has no known ore reserves. Accordingly, we cannot be considered a
"development mining company." The objective of the proposed geological mapping
and other work would be to determine what exploration program, if any, to
pursue.  It should be noted
that although smelting facilities have historically been located within at least
seventy (70) miles of the property, management believes that it would be
premature and perhaps misleading to discuss milling and smelting contracts with
ore purchasers inasmuch as we not only need to conduct exploratory work but no
ore has been discovered and thus, no development plan or program exists. There
is no assurance that ores, if they exist and if developed, could ever be sold,
let alone sold for a profit.  As to our Claims'
exploration, development or production history, if any, the extent of
exploration or even development on our mineral claim properties is unknown.
Management believes and is informed that approximately 1,800 tons of ore were
once removed from our property. Our lack of precise knowledge as to what
production or extraction occurred, when it occurred, what it sold for, what it
was exactly, or was worth at the time it was extracted is understandable in that
precious metals were first discovered in the Tintic Mining District area in
1870, over 135 years ago. Nonetheless, our property does contain the Emerald
Shaft or Mine which existing data and other information suggests is at least
1,000 feet deep. There are also two other significant holes, shafts or
"prospecting pits" on the property. As discussed further below in the Plan of
Operation section and in order to devise and implement an exploration plan or
program of some kind on our properties, we commissioned and obtained a
comprehensive geology report on our property.  Exploration and
Rehabilitation Work   There has been no
exploration or other mining-related activity of any kind on our properties since
the 1930's and 1940's, except perhaps briefly before World War II. Only a
limited amount of exploration or development work has been conducted on our
properties since World War II. ("Exploration" is the work involved in searching
for ore. "Development" is the construction and other work necessary to be
carried out for the purpose of extracting ore from the deposit or mine.) In
1987, Centurion Mines Corporation ("Centurion"), later to be known and now known
as Grand Central Mining Company, negotiated a five-year lease with Tintic-Utah
to explore its patented mineral claims.  Centurion carried out
mapping and limited assay and sampling work on our properties starting in 1987
and its successor, Grand Central Mining, terminated its lease with Tintic-Utah
in 1997. The assay and sampling results it provided to us has been, in turn,
provided to our consulting expert and geologist, Mr. Bruce Yeomans, who has
incorporated that information into his reports to us. To the best knowledge,
information and belief of current management, no more than 1,800 tons of ore
production has ever come from our properties and we know little more than this.
Prior to that time, our properties were inactive from World War II until 1987,
when Centurion carried out limited exploration consisting mainly of geologic
mapping and sampling. Centurion also performed some maintenance and
rehabilitation work on our properties though it is not believed that Centurion
did any maintenance or rehabilitation on the underground workings of the Emerald
Mine. Centurion continued its activities through its successor until 1997. No
additional work has been done on the properties since that time. Under
Tintic-Utah's prior lease agreement with Centurion, Centurion was obligated to
do a certain amount of assessment work every five (5) years. This was done and
we possess limited copies of the assessment and sampling work carried out by
Centurion and its successor.  Future Plans for
Exploration.  To date, management
has NOT applied for exploration permits for work on any of its patented mineral
claims. However, during 2007 and into 2008, we may consider conducting
geological mapping, geochemical sampling, and geophysical surveys, but only if
sufficient funds are available for such purpose, and if all goes well and we
have sufficient capital, to possibly file applications for permits that would
permit exploratory sampling or drilling to be carried out. We currently lack the
investment or working capital to carry out any type of drilling exploratory
operations at this time. This will depend on sources of and the availability of
a joint venture partner who would contribute funds for this purpose.  It
would also depend upon the prices of gold, zinc and silver. Accordingly, no
assurance can be given that exploration will in fact be either undertaken or
carried out.  16     As of the date of this
document, none of our officers, directors, or major shareholders has had any
preliminary contact or discussions with any specific business or financial
opportunity, directly or indirectly, nor are there any present plans, proposals,
arrangements or understandings regarding the possibility of an acquisition,
exchange or other financing arrangement with any specific business opportunity,
potential partner or other person. There are also no mineral claim properties,
other than those we currently own and hold, that we are currently
evaluating.  In order to be able to
present a realistic exploration plan or program to a potential mineral
exploration partner or venture capital partner or investor, we commissioned and
obtained a comprehensive evaluation report dated April 24, 2005. Among other
things, this report identifies a work sequence to be undertaken in order to
carry out a mineral exploration program. This report specifically identifies
exploration targets on our Claims, a task that we believe will work as a
positive inducement to prospective mineral exploration partners interested in
our claims inasmuch as this is something they will not be required to spend
money on themselves.  Research and
Exploration Activities.  Other than a
comprehensive evaluation report we commissioned and obtained from our consulting
geologist, a report which provides us with an exploration work sequence on our
Claims, we have not incurred any material costs for research or exploration
activities since our inception. We have only been in existence since March 8,
2004, and therefore our research and exploration costs to date have been
minimal.   Compliance with
Environmental Laws.  We do not believe that
we will incur any material costs relating to efforts to comply with
environmental laws or other governmental regulations. This is because, at this
time, we do NOT have a specific exploration program that we intend to implement.
In the event that we undertake a mining exploration program, we must comply with
various federal, state and local provisions that regulate the discharge of
materials into the environment and which further govern the conduct of mining
activities for the protection of the environment. To our knowledge, we were in
full compliance with these environmental regulations during all of 2007 and we
intend to continue to fully comply in 2008 and beyond.  To management's best
knowledge, information and belief, we are neither listed on any known
environmental cleanup roster, nor is our property listed on or within any
"Superfund" site.  In the summer of 2002, the federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) listed the Eureka, Utah, area (an area within the Tintic
Mining District) as a Superfund site because it was concerned about possible
lead contamination of Eureka, Utah, inhabitants.  Nonetheless, our
properties are located near another town, Mammoth, Utah. While we understand
that a state agency has, within the few years, taken soil samples on or near the
town of Mammoth, we have received no notice that the EPA or any corollary state
agency intends to do any environmental clean-up or other work to or with any
property located in or near the town of Mammoth, let alone our own properties.
See the section below titled "Legal Proceedings."  In the event that we
undertake a mining exploration program on our properties and, in order to
fulfill environmental compliance obligations, we must be aware of and attend to
the complex requirements of both state and federal laws encompassing matters
affecting land, mineral rights and/or the surface under which mining exploration
activities are proposed. Such compliance would likely materially affect our
capital expenditures, earnings and competitive position in the following general
areas:  1) surface impact, 2)
water acquisition, 3) site access, 4) reclamation, 5) wildlife preservation, and
6) permit and license qualification. To date, compliance has not had a material
financial effect or other impact on us because our activities have not had a
material and significant impact on the environment.  In the event that we
become active in exploring our properties, compliance with environmental
regulations could substantially impact or drain whatever capital resources we
would have. Such future compliance could include performing feasibility studies
on the surface impact of our proposed operations; minimizing surface impact,
water treatment and protection; reclamation activities including rehabilitation
of various sites; and on-going efforts at alleviating the exploration impact on
wildlife. Moreover, governmental agencies may require permits or bonds from year
to year to ensure our compliance with applicable regulations.  During fiscal 2007, we
did not engage in any activity that would have required us to obtain any permits
or bonds; nor did any governmental agency cause us to expend any funds to comply
with any material environmental regulation. Moreover, we do not anticipate that
any reclamation bonding will be required of us during 2008, or in the reasonably
foreseeable future.  We do NOT anticipate
any material capital expenditures for environmental control facilities during
fiscal 2008. The cost of future compliance affecting our mineral properties will
depend upon the extent and type of exploration and testing that we  17    decide to undertake or have the financing to undertake.  There can be no
assurance, however, that we will be able to comply with all requirements imposed
on any such future development, or that we will be able to economically operate
or pursue exploration activities under existing or future regulatory
requirements.  Government
Regulation/Obtaining Necessary Permits to Conduct Exploration
Activities.  As we currently have
no exploratory operations, we do not believe we are subject to governmental
regulations, which may relate to our business.   At such time as we
engage in exploration activities on our Claims, if we do (and no assurance can
be given that we will), we must undergo an extensive state and federal
permitting process. Operating and environmental permits will be required to be
obtained from applicable regulatory bodies utilizing technical applications
filed by us. Once we have obtained the necessary funding and financing to do so,
we will identify external mining and geology consultants to assist us with
preparing and filing permits with all applicable state and federal regulatory
authorities.  The rules and
regulations of the Utah Department of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM) are complex
relative to obtaining a permit for exploration or for conducting small mineral
extraction operations (defined as involving less than 5 acres of total
disturbance). The process is essentially as follows: The applicant first files a
permit application with DOGM and, pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) by and among the various state and federal agencies having competing
regulatory authority, the application is reviewed on a coordinated basis by
DOGM, the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service
(USFS) and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The applicant is
notified of any deficiencies in his application and is generally requested to
submit additional information. If all of these agencies pass off on the
application, the applicant is given a permit. If the applicant seeks to conduct
a large scale mineral extraction operation (defined as in excess of a 5 acre
disturbance), the process is more complex, detailed and extensive. For example,
the regulatory review then involves an assessment of technical adequacy of the
applicant's plans and more extensive environmental concerns are involved such as
potential contamination of ground water. Once DOGM gives tentative approval of a
large scale mineral extraction operation, notice must be provided to adjacent
land owners, the county zoning authority, the Resource Development Coordinating
Council (RDCC), and newspapers for publication. Public hearings are then called
and held. Even if approval is obtained, the applicant must then provide adequate
reclamation surety documents to ensure adequate reclamation upon completion of
operations. In addition to the foregoing, DOGM has recently been required to
seek an historical and archeological consultation/clearance from the Utah
Division of State History. DOGM notifies this agency that it has received a new
exploration or mining notice application and the Division of State History
notifies DOGM within 15 days (exploration or small mining notice) or 30 days
(large mining notice) if they believe a formal survey of the proposed area
should be conducted by the applicant. This process applies to both private and
state-owned land. If the area involved is federal ground, we are informed that
the federal government does its own archeological clearance during its own
NEPA/EA review process.  The above permitting
process is time consuming and expensive and we currently lack the resources and
capital to initiate a permitting process relative to our Claims. At the same
time, current management lacks the qualifications and other expertise necessary
to engage in this process without the assistance of experts or mineral
exploration company partners.     ITEM 3.  LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS.  As of the date of this
filing, we are NOT a party to any legal proceeding, either as plaintiff or
defendant. Tintic-Nevada is also not aware of any pending legal proceeding
contemplated by a governmental authority concerning our business or properties.
Our financial statements, as set forth below, have therefore NOT been adjusted
to reflect any material uncertainty regarding exposure to liability in any legal
proceeding.  To management's best
knowledge, information and belief, our property is neither listed on any known
environmental cleanup roster nor otherwise listed on or within any designated
"Superfund" site. We are aware, however, that in 2002, the federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) declared the town of Eureka, Utah, as a Superfund site
for lead contamination, an area approximately 3 miles from our properties. We
have received no actual or direct notice or knowledge of these events and
management knows nothing further in this regard as it may potentially relate to
our Mineral Claims. During 2002, the Utah Department of Air Quality undertook
soil sampling in and around the town of Mammoth, Utah, an area near our
properties. We are informed that some of these samples showed elevated levels of
contaminants. However, we have received no notice that these findings have any
impact or other bearing on our Mineral Claims and management does NOT believe
that our properties can, or will, be considered a source of any such alleged
contamination.   Measures Taken To Insulate Us
Against Future Mineral Claim Asset Liability   18    In 2001 and in an effort to insulate our predecessor, Tintic-Utah,
the prior owner of the property, from future liability, our predecessor (which
at that time owned our Mineral Claims) hired a geologist and environmental
engineer named Bruce Yeomans of B. Yeomans Consulting, Inc., an expert, who
constructed a six foot high chain link fence, with four 30-foot runs, around the
Emerald Shaft or Mine located on the property. The fence was also stranded with
barbed wire along the upper edge. This was done to mark the shaft and otherwise
prevent intruders and trespassers from getting injured by possibly falling into
the mine shaft, a shaft which existing data suggests is at least 1,000 feet
deep. The shaft had been partially collapsed around the collar and campers
appeared to have lit bonfires adjacent to the open shaft on the flat topped dump
around it. After this fence was built, a "dangerous/no trespassing" sign was
posted on it. In a further effort to insulate us from and against future
liability, this work was also photographed. In addition, Mr. Yeomans further
erected a 12 foot long, three stranded, 4-foot high barbed wire fence across the
access road to the Emerald shaft at the approximate eastern boundary of the
property. This was done to further discourage intruders and trespassers, the
large majority of whom are hikers and campers in the summer and snowmobilers in
the winter.    ITEM 4.  SUBMISSION OF
MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND REPORTS TO SHAREHOLDERS.  From October 2004
through October 2006, we were tied up getting our SB-2/A registration statement
through the Commission.  As a result, we had no direct communications with
our shareholders during that period.  However, in November 2006, we mailed
out our Form SB-2/A prospectus to our current shareholders, all with
then-current financial statements.  This is the only report, proxy
statement or information statement sent to security holders during the fiscal
year.  During 2007, we
received an OTCBB symbol, namely, TMGG.OB.  Because of our receipt of an
OTCBB symbol and because we are a fully reporting company, our shareholders, not
to mention the public at large, is better able to  review our filings on
Edgar, the Commissions public company database.  As a result, we did not
find it necessary during 2007 to engage in any direct communications with our
shareholders.  We are subject to the
information reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
"Exchange Act"), and, in accordance therewith, we file reports and other
information with the Commission. Reports and other information filed by the
issuer with the Commission can be inspected and copied at the Commission's
Public Reference Library in the Commission's own building located at 100 F
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such material can be obtained
from the Public Reference Section of the Commission at prescribed rates. An
interested person may also obtain information about the operation of the Public
Reference Room by calling the Commission at 1-800-SEC-0330.  Inasmuch as we are an
electronic filer, and the Commission maintains an Internet site that contains
reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding
issuers that file electronically with the Commission, an interested person may
access this material electronically by means of the Commission's home page on
the Internet at www.sec.gov.com. To facilitate such access for an interested
person, our CIK number is 0001301839.  As of the date of this
filing, we have not established our own web address or web page nor do we have
any plans, at present, to do so.      PART II    ITEM 5.
 MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS.  Market Information.  Our common shares are
quoted on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) administered by the
Financial Regulatory Authority (FINRA), formerly the NASD, under the symbol
TMGG.OB. Since that date, the trading activity in our stock has been as
follows:  TMGG - TINTIC GOLD MINING CO.





Year Ending December 2007BID

ASK

PRICEEND DATE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

VOLUME12/29/2007

.25

0.2

0.25

0.5

0.45

0.5

-

-

-

-09/28/2007

0.20

0

0.20

0.50

0

0.50

0.50

0.20

0.50

5,27006/29/2007

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0  19     03/30/2007

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0  We currently have no outstanding
warrants, options, incentive stock option or employee compensation plans of any
kind or nature. At the same time, and though there are currently no plans to do
so, no assurance can be given that such derivative securities will not be issued
in the future.  Shares Held by
Affiliates.  At present, none of
our officers and directors own or control any shares that are not "restricted"
or which do NOT bear a restrictive legend of some kind such as a control
person legend.  Of the 2,109,643 shares currently
issued and outstanding, 1,670,584 are held by affiliates and are therefore
restricted in some fashion. This means that there are 439,059 shares that are
not "restricted" in any way.  These 439,059 shares thus comprise what is
called the float, that is, the shares that can trade freely in interstate
commerce.  Reference is made to Item 11 of Part III below titled SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS
AND  MANAGEMENT.  No Warrants or
Stock Options Issued or Outstanding.  We currently have no
outstanding warrants, options, incentive stock option or employee compensation
plans of any kind or nature. At the same time, and though there are currently no
plans to do so, no assurance can be given that such derivative securities will
not be issued in the future.  Holders  According to our stock
transfer agent, Standard Registrar & Transfer located in Draper, Utah., as
of the date of this Annual Report, we have 358 holders of record of our common
capital stock.  Description of Our
Securities  Our authorized capital
stock consists of 50,000,000 shares of common capital stock, $0.001 par value,
of which 2,109,643 shares are considered issued and outstanding as of our fiscal
year-end, December 31, 2007.  As of the date of this annual report, no
additional shares have been issued.  We have no preferred
shares either issued or authorized.   Voting
Rights  Stockholders are
entitled to one vote on all matters to be voted upon for each share of common
stock held. The shares do not have the right to cumulative voting for directors,
meaning that holders of more than 50 percent of the shares voting for the
election of directors can elect all of the directors if they choose to do
so.  Liquidation
Rights  In the event of
liquidation, dissolution or a winding up of us or our affairs, holders of common
stock would be entitled to receive pro rata all of our remaining assets that are
available and distributable to the shareholders after first satisfying claims of
creditors and anyone else having rights that are superior to those of the common
stockholders.  Preemptive
Rights  Stockholders do NOT
have a preemptive right to acquire our unissued shares of common stock.  Dividends and
Dividend Policy  Our Board of Directors
has NOT declared or paid cash dividends or made distributions in the past and we
do not anticipate that we will pay cash dividends or make distributions to
shareholders in the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain and invest
future earnings, if any, to finance our operations.  The holders of our
common stock are entitled to receive such lawful dividends as may be declared by
the Board of Directors. As of this date, no such dividends have been declared
nor does management believe it likely that dividends will be declared in the
near or distant future. The payment of any future dividends will depend upon,
among other things, future earnings, capital requirements, our financial
condition and general business conditions. As a result, there can be no
assurance that any  20    dividends on common stock will be paid in the future. We also have
no redemption or sinking fund provisions applicable to any shares of common
stock.  Securities
Issuances/Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities.  Currently, there are
2,109,643 shares of our common stock issued and outstanding. As of the date of
this Annual Report, only 439,059 of these shares may be sold without
restriction. This is because such shares were registered with the Commission on
Form SB-2.  As to the additional 1,670,584 shares currently held by our
affiliates, 1,100,000 of such shares were issued by the Company in exchange for
investment capital, 500,000 of which were issued in August 2004 for $25,000 and
600,000 of which were issued in December 2006 for $30,000.  All of these
1,100,000 restricted shares were issued to insiders and affiliates pursuant to
the Section 4(2) exemption from state and federal securities registration. These
1,100,000 "restricted" shares represent approximately 52% of our total number of
issued and outstanding shares.  While 570,584 shares of a total of
1,009,643 shares were registered on Form SB-2/A and are held by insiders and
affiliates, these 570,584 shares nonetheless bear control person legends.
 As a result of bearing such legends, these shares are not included by us
in our calculation of shares that may be sold without restriction.  Of the total of
1,670,584 shares issued to and held by insiders and affiliates, none of such
shares are eligible for transfer or resale in the absence of an effective
registration statement covering such shares, or an available exemption, all as
contemplated in Item 201(a)(2) of Regulation S-B.  With respect to
dilution of current shareholders by virtue of recent or future stock issuances
that are necessary to raise working capital, see Risk Factor No. 10 above.    ITEM 6.
   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF
OPERATION.  Our discussion
hereunder is based on certain reasonable expectations concerning mining
exploration in general and, in particular, our ability or inability to obtain
the type of financial capital or funding necessary to
implement or engage in a mining exploration program of some kind on our
properties located in the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah.
 These expectations involve "forward-looking statements."  We do not
intend to forecast what may or may not occur in the future, nor can we predict
that any particular event may or may not occur. Management emphasizes that it
can neither control nor predict many of the risks and uncertainties applicable
to, or involving, a mining exploration company that currently lacks investment
capital and funding.  During our 2007 fiscal
year, we had serious difficulty attracting any interest in our mining claims.
 We believe that this has been due to the fact that the land ownership in
the Tintic Mining District is very fragmented, meaning that ownership is held in
the names of numerous, numerous corporations and individuals, many possibly
having conflicting ownership rights and interests.  At the same time, we
believe that a serious mining company or joint venture mining partner would want
to be able to tie up an extended or large area or block of land.
 Fragmented land ownership therefore means that a mining company or joint
venture partner would have to spend a lot of time and energy on land and title
work and, when all is said and done, may not be able to lock up or amass a large
block of land.  Accordingly, extensive land and title work in the overall
area of our mineral claims would likely be a significant expense and cost that a
prospective joint venture mining partner is not willing to assume.  We also believe that
the significant EPA presence in the Eureka, Utah, area, while it completes its
Superfund clean up operations, may also have a negative effect or impact on a
potential mining company or a joint venture mining partner, simply because they
may fear that the EPA would require them to do remediation, etc., that they
wouldnt otherwise be required to do if the EPA were not highly present and
active in the area.  Because of the
difficulty we have had over the last 2 years getting a mining company interested
in our properties, let alone the overall Tintic Mining District, we have no way
of predicting or making any judgments, at the present time, about the viability
of our business plan.  We are surprised at the basic lack of interest in
our mineral claims, particularly given the enhanced prices of precious metals
over the last few years.  If we are unable to attract a joint venture
mining partner within the next year or two and perhaps less, we will be forced
to look at other business opportunities for the Company and we may be forced to
do so sooner rather than later.  Management's Plan
of Operation, General  Since our
incorporation on March 8, 2004, our only business activity has been
organizational matters and pursuing what is necessary to carry out our
Distribution Agreement with Tintic-Utah, a copy of which was attached to our
original registration statement. As of our year end, we had $471 in our checking
account.  However, as of the filing date of this Annual Report, we have
approximately $14,895 in cash in our bank account. This money is the result of
$15,000 that was advanced to us in January from our officers and directors and
one shareholder.  Unlike the past, we did not issue any stock on this
occasion in  21    exchange for an equity investment in us.  Our Plan of
Operation is set forth in the section immediately below.  Plan of Operation
for the Next Twelve to Eighteen Months  As per our agreement
with Tintic-Utah, in consideration for the stock that was eventually distributed
by us in November 2006, we were conveyed, in March 2004, the subsurface mineral
rights on approximately 44 acres of land located in the heart of the Tintic
Mining District of Juab County, Utah, near the town of Mammoth, Utah (subject to
a 3% net smelter royalty in favor of an individual named Chase Hoffman). During
the next twelve to eighteen months, we will complete a specific work sequence
and thereafter attempt to identify and contract with a mineral exploration
company that will agree to search for minerals that may underlie our Claims.
During the time our search is in progress, the small amounts of cash required to
maintain our operations, as well as the costs associated with the identification
of and contracting with a mineral exploration company partner, will be provided
by what cash we now have on hand and if that money is exhausted, by our officers
and directors. Our officers and directors have agreed to make the type of equity
investment in us that is necessary for us to complete our work sequences
identified below. At the same time, our officers and directors are NOT under any
contractual obligation with the Company to finance us; they are doing so because
they want to. We do NOT have any written agreement with them in this regard nor
do we intend to enter into one. Future funding by our officers and directors may
come from the exercise of options to purchase our common stock and/or through
future agreements between Tintic-Nevada and our officers and directors
negotiated on terms equivalent or better than those terms negotiated on an
arms-length basis. As a result, we do not believe there will be the need to
raise additional funds during at least the next twelve to eighteen months, other
than through our officers and directors, if and when required. Since our
officers and directors' have agreed to provide us with the funding necessary to
complete our work sequences or "milestones" identified below, work sequences
that are essentially now completed, we consider this a legal obligation to such
extent simply because investors and shareholders may rely on this funding
commitment.  Management does not
have the ability, at this time, of directly raising, on a secondary offering or
private placement basis, either $517,000 or $2.141 million to engage in drilling
exploration programs of our own and on our own, particularly when we lack the
expertise ourselves to implement and oversee such a project. See the paragraph
below titled "The Phased Nature of Our Planned or Proposed Exploration Program."
We are not interested in doing so because we do not know whether such efforts
would be successful. We also believe and are informed that such an effort would
be very expensive in terms of the cost thereof and we would rather spend what
limited resources we have on pursuing exploration. We also have no idea what
securities brokerage firm, if any, would possibly be interested in underwriting
such an effort. Since the increased price of metals since early 2004 would
appear to have made the overall exploration environment more financing-friendly
(silver, for example, having recently attained a price of nearly $20 per ounce
and gold currently trading at over $970 per ounce) and based on the history of
the Tintic Mining District, we believe that it makes far more sense to do what
is necessary to attract an experienced and well financed mineral exploration
partner or joint venturer. This is our basic plan of operation at the present
time.  Unfortunately, over the last 2 years, we have been unable to attract
much interest in our mineral claims and we do not know why, particularly given
the substantially improved pricing for precious metals.  In order to attract
mineral exploration company partners and pursue an exploration program of our
mineral claims, we need a specific and realistic business plan for this purpose.
Accordingly, while we have obtained a preliminary
evaluation report from an environmental and geological engineer named Mr. Bruce
Yeomans, our expert. Mr. Yeomans has since provided us with a more detailed and
comprehensive report and analysis of our mineral claim properties. While Mr.
Yeomans' initial report was dated December 11, 2004, his revised and more
extensive report is dated April 24, 2005. Because this modified report provides
a more comprehensive evaluation of our properties, including exploration
targets, we have included or summarized portions of such report below. Our plan
to explore our mineral claims now focuses on, based on such report, not only
evaluating the certain specific exploration targets identified below but also
completing eight (8) separate work sequences identified below, the cost of which
shall be borne by us with what capital we have and if not, current officers and
directors have communicated their commitment to fund the cost of these work
sequences, including the cost of paying future Edgarization, accounting and
legal fees and expenses, all by making an additional equity investment in us.
See Risk Factor No. 15 above. This agreement on the part of our officers and
directors is NOT in writing but we believe that it is a legal obligation of such
persons on which the Company can rely, as do they. At such time as an additional
equity investment is made in us as necessary to continue to fund our limited
operations, those persons so investing will sign investment letters and what
stock they receive will be subject to a restrictive legend.  The specific steps or
sequence of events necessary to attract a mineral exploration partner or joint
venturer and otherwise implement a mineral exploration program are:  1) Locate the claim
corners in the field so that property boundaries are known. (This step was
accomplished two or three years ago by our consulting geologist when we
commissioned his geology report. If we need more specific or exact markers, we
will hire a surveyor to do so. We anticipate that the cost would be between
$1,000 or $2,000. As of now, and unless requested or required by a mineral
exploration partner, we do not believe that this cost or expense will be
necessary.   22    2) Evaluate the status of adjacent mineral claims, so that
investor interest will not be limited to the three claims we hold. Several of
the mineral targets trend off of our claims. (The adjacent claims to which we
refer are known as the Grand Central Claims. While we have not thoroughly
evaluated the status of these adjacent claims, we know the owner and have been
in discussions with the owner over the last several years. This individual, who
is also a geologist, has indicated to us that he would be willing to work out a
suitable arrangement with a mineral exploration partner, if we can bring one to
the table. There is no cost associated with this step or sequence of events as
what information needs to be known about the Grand Central Claims and their
geology can and would be supplied by the owner. Accordingly, this step or
sequence is essentially complete.)  3) Collect additional
surface rock samples, as indicated by surface mapping or inspection. If so
indicated, sampling will be conducted in accessible portions of the scattered
surface mine diggings and in areas of exposed hydrothermal alteration. Samples
will be analyzed for gold, silver and "pathfinder" elements, including arsenic
and barium. Anomalous areas at the surface may indicate "leakage" of
hydrothermal fluids along faults and fault intercepts from potential mineralized
zones at depth. These areas will be incorporated into a three-dimensional
evaluation of the property for potential drill testing. (Based on what our
consulting geologist tells us, we are not aware that rock samples are necessary
to be obtained at this point. We believe that if an interested mineral
exploration partner is interested in our mineral claims, they would likely want
to do sampling themselves, as they would likely want to analyze the results
themselves. Having said this, our geologist would charge us by the hour for
sampling if necessary and then we would pay for assaying at a recognized
assaying laboratory. This, we believe, would cost between $1,000 and $2,000. We
are not aware that this step or work sequence is necessary at this time.)  4) Update our more
recent, April 24, 2005, report if necessary as a result of any surface sampling.
Contact and distribute report to target groups familiar with high-grade
underground mineral exploration ventures. (This report was authored by our
consulting geologist and we know of nothing at this point that would require us
to update it. Accordingly, there is no cost that we know of at the present time
associated with this sequence of events or step. As of the date of this annual
report, we have provided our geology report to three large US and Canadian
mining companies, one junior Canadian mining company, and one junior mining
company located in England.  We are also informed that our consulting
geologist provided a copy of our report to a small mining company that, during
2005, was doing exploration work in the Carlin, Nevada, area.)  5) Keep abreast of
ongoing E.P.A. response activities in the District. (There is no cost associated
with this step or work sequence and we intend to do it ourselves as an incident
to our business. At the same time, our consulting
geologist is aware of EPA and Utah Department of Oil, Gas & Mining responses
in the district and he had indicated an intent to communicate any changes to us
if they are material to us and our Plan of Operation.)  6) Contact as many
mining and mineral exploration companies as possible who we believe might be
interested in partnering or joint venturing with us to explore our mineral
claims. (This is a task that comprises the principal part of our business plan
and we have been doing it in the ordinary course of our business over the last 3
years. In this regard, while we have contacted several mining companies to date,
unfortunately we have not been able to get any potential exploration partner or
joint venturer interested in either our Mineral Claims, the Mammoth area, or the
overall Tintic Mining District.  We are not sure why.)  7) Conduct property
tours with interested parties. (The only cost associated with this step is
whether we would be accompanied by our consulting geologist. If so, we would pay
him by the hour. The only additional cost is transportation. To date, we have
conducted two Mineral Claim property tours, one with a large US mining company
whose stock trades on the NY Stock Exchange and another with a junior Canadian
Mining Company.  Neither have expressed any interest in our claims.)  8) Negotiate mineral
agreement to explore the mineral claims. (This task has obviously not been
accomplished and we believe that the only cost associated with this might be
attorney's fees, if in fact we got to the point where we would need or want an
attorney to review a draft agreement.)  We have NOT identified
any one potential mineral exploration partner. There are several mining
companies in the United States and elsewhere that we are hopeful may, at some
point, become interested in our Mineral Claims.  Unfortunately, we can make
no assurance that anyone will ever become interested in us or our Mineral
Claims.  Because we have not been successful in our efforts to attract a
joint venture mining partner, we have nothing to report in that regard at this
time.  EXPLORATION
TARGETS  The following
discusses certain specific and suggested exploration targets on our mineral
claims that we currently believe would be suitable for exploration. We believe
by identifying such targets, we have done significant work, in advance, on
behalf of a potential or prospective mineral exploration partner or joint
venturer.  1.
Background.  23     The limited past
development and production to date from our claims is in part due to the fact
that the stratigraphic (i.e., geology dealing with the earth's strata) and
structural controls to ore formation were not well understood when the Emerald
Mine was originally dug or excavated. The Emerald Mine exploration and most of
the District's exploration and development work was completed (1880's to 1920's)
before G. W. Crane ("Crane"), an engineer for U.S. Smelting and Refining,
compiled the first district-wide mapping in 1930. U.S. Smelting and Refining
owned and operated the Centennial-Eureka Mine, the largest producer of gold and
copper in the District. After reaching an agreement with the numerous
independent mine owners in the Main Tintic District, Crane was authorized to
determine stratigraphic and structural controls to ore deposit formation by
mapping each mine. For the first time in the District's history, but
unfortunately after the District was into the end of its productive life, ore
controls on mineralization that crossed property boundaries were determined.
Centurion Mines Corporation, a former lessee of our mineral claims, built on
Crane's work in the late 1980's and early 1990's, by having access to all of his
underground mapping and sampling. Crane's ore controls were evaluated within the
more newly developed understanding of the structural complexities of wrench
fault systems, systems that are prevalent in the Tintic Mining District.   Exploration work
relating to our Emerald Mine intersected scattered weak mineralization on all
levels of the mine but not in large enough quantities to contribute to
significant development or production. Favorable gold values were reported on
the 600 foot level of the mine and were documented and evaluated by G.W. Crane
during his District-wide ore controls evaluation. Crane felt that this
mineralization was evidence of the southerly continuation of the Centennial Ore
Channel mined in the Grand Central and Centennial-Eureka Mines. Crane wrote in
an internal report to U.S. Smelting and Refining:  "The Emerald Mine
happens to be at the extreme southern, or gold/ copper end of the Gemini or
Centennial Channel, the largest producer of five major ore zones, and for this
and other reasons, is due to become a producer of ore consisting of gold. On the
same fissure, to which recent developments in the Emerald Mine have been
directed, ore bodies on the lower levels of the Grand Central Mine have their
principle values in gold and copper, indicating the trend in the direction of
the Emerald" (G. Crane, March 28, 1933).  2. Generalized
Exploration Targets on the Tintic Gold Claims.  The majority of all
Tintic Main District ore is preferentially developed within only five of the
numerous Paleozoic carbonate formations that have been found to be present in
the District. Of these units, a formation named the Ajax Formation has hosted
most of the copper-gold production in the District. The Ajax Formation crops out
extensively on the Tintic Gold mineral claims group and is cut by intersecting
faults which are known to be mineralized in the Emerald Mine workings and in the
adjacent Grand Central, Mammoth and Centennial-Eureka Mines. The Ajax Formation
on our claims is near vertical to steeply west dipping and lies on the western
limb of the broad Tintic Syncline. The most persistently mineralized portion of
the formation is the Emerald Unit which lies in the lower half of the 640 foot
thick Ajax Formation. The Emerald is a medium grained grayish-white colored
massive dolomite bed that lies about 100 to 180 feet above the base of the unit
and averages about 30 feet thick. Ore mined in the deepest portions of the Grand
Central (Grand Central Ore Channel) and Centennial-Eureka Mines (Oklahoma
Stopes) which are located directly north of the Tintic Gold ground, is also
hosted by the Ajax Formation. In those mines, however, the Ajax Formation dips
about 45 degrees to the north and the bedding conformable ore is subhorizontal
since they lie near the axial plane of the syncline at a mine depth of from
1,900 to 2,300 feet.  We believe, at the
present time, that the up dip extension of the mineralized Ajax host in the
Grand Central and Centennial-Eureka Mines is the best exploration target on our
claims. The Ajax Formation -- especially the Emerald member --- is cross cut by
the ore controlling, generally steeply west dipping, north trending sinistral
faults, namely, the Iron Break Fissure (Grand Central and Centennial-Eureka
Mines), the West Break Fissure (Grand Central Mine), the West Mammoth Split
Fault (Mammoth Mine), the Mammoth Fault (Mammoth Mine) and the Grand Central
Fault (Grand Central Mine). The sinistral or northerly trending faults provide
the conduits and structural preparation for potential ore development in the
reactive and brittle carbonates that are present there. We believe that these
faults in the Ajax Formation are especially good targets for exploration where
they are intersected by east-west faults.  3. Specific
Exploration Targets on the Tintic Gold Mineral Claims.  On the 600 Level
(6,224 feet above mean sea level ("amsl")) of the Emerald Mine, southeast of the
shaft (6,830 feet amsl), a winze was sunk on a vein of gold bearing quartz in
the Ajax Formation. The vein is reported by G. Crane to have positive gold
assays in the winze and small sublevel drift. The vein lies on the intersection
of the east-west striking 245 Fissure in the Emerald Mine and the sinistral,
northeast striking Iron Break Fissure which carries 2 to 3 opt silver in the
Centennial-Eureka Mine 1800 foot level drift (4,935 feet amsl). The Iron Break
Fissure controls north trending ore deposition in the Opohonga Formation in the
Grand Central Mine 1300 to 1800 foot levels (5,828 to 5,347 feet amsl) and in
the large westerly trending Ajax Formation stopes on the 2000 to 2300 foot
levels (5,147 to 4,845 feet amsl). Crane believed that this intersection and the
gold-bearing quartz was the top of an irregular ore pipe that was 5 to 6 feet in
diameter where exposed in the workings. He felt that additional prospecting
should be conducted below this mineralization in the Ajax and Opex Formation  24    carbonates.  On the Emerald 600
Level (6,224 feet amsl), drifting on the level to the south of the quartz vein
described above cut various positive gold results approximately 350 feet and 950
feet away in the Ajax and underlying Opex Formations. The
lowest of the assay results was on the lower Ajax formation probably on a fault
but it is not described. The higher or more positive assay value is on a
north-north east striking 60 to 72 degree west dipping fault where it is cut by
an east-west striking fault. Another positive gold result was collected by Crane
on the 600 Emerald Level where the same south drift in the Ajax Formation
crosses into the underlying Opex Formation. We believe that these scattered gold
values found by Crane deserve testing for potential bonanza grade mineralization
in the receptive lower Ajax and underlying Opex Formation carbonates.  We also believe that
the 1300 foot long by 1000 foot wide exploration gap between the
southwestern-most stopes on the Grand Central Mine 2000 to 2300 foot levels
(5,147 to 4,845 feet amsl) and the northern-most drifts on the Emerald 700, 900
and 1000 foot levels (6,124, 5,924 & 5,824 feet amsl) should be evaluated.
The northeast trending steeply west dipping West Break (Grand Central Mine),
Iron Break Fissure (Grand Central and Centennial-Eureka Mines), and West Mammoth
Split (Mammoth Mine) should be tested, especially where they are cut by the
steeply dipping east-west striking cross faults. We believe that the prime area
for exploration and possible ore development in this exploration gap is at fault
intersections which occur in the Ajax Formation as it dips towards the Grand
Central stopes.   25    Glossary
of Terms to Assist the Reader in Understanding Technical
Terminology.  Amsl
                                  
 Above mean sea level.  Anomalous
areas           
 Rocks that contain gold and/ or other pathfinder elements that may
indicate proximity to mineralization.  Assay
values                   
  Metals content of a sample submitted to a laboratory for assay.
There are. various standardized assay methodologies used depending upon the
grade and. element being determined.  Axial plane of the syncline A syncline is a fold in the rock that
can incorporate one rock strata or numerous formations that contain many rock
strata.  Synclines are "U" shaped folds with. the open end up. The axial
plane of a syncline is used to describe the orientation of the syncline in
space. The plane equally divides the syncline down the middle such that equal
portions of the syncline lie on either side of the axial plane.  Bedding conformable ore  Bedding conformable means that the
ore lies within a certain layer or bed of rock and that the outline of the ore
conforms to the outline or some portion of the outline of the rock layer.  Bonanza grade
                  
 Any high grade metals enrichment sampled, generally regardless of the size
of the zone.  Core
drilling                       
Core drilling is slower and more expensive to complete than reverse circulation
drilling. A continuous section of rock is recovered during core drilling. Core
allows the geologist and mine engineer to better evaluate rock types, structure,
and hydrothermal alteration among other rock attributes as compared to reverse
drilling.  Dip and strike
                    
Dip and strike are used to define the orientation of the rock strata in space.
The plane that defines the orientation of a rock unit will dip in one direction
and strike in two directions.  Dolomite bed
                     
Dolomite is a magnesium-bearing carbonate rock. A dolomite bed is a layer or
horizon of dolomite rock.  Hydrothermal alteration     Rocks that have been
changed partially or completely in mineral composition and/ or texture and/ or
have pathfinder elements added to them by hydrothermal
(warm water) solutions.   Hydrothermal solutions have deposited the
minerals in the Tintic District that make up the historically mined ore.
Geologists and mine engineers are trained to recognize hydrothermal alteration
as an aid in delineating ore and the proximity to ore.  "Leakage" of hydrothermal Hydrothermal fluids formed the Tintic
ore fluids bodies. "Leakage," or the movement of hydrothermal fluids along zones
of  permeability, potentially leading to or from areas of mineralized rock
can result in hydrothermal alteration. The "leakage" of  hydrothermal
fluids from a mineralized zone at depth along a fault might lead to hydrothermal
alteration in rocks at the surface above the mineralized rock.  Mineralization
                  
 Mineralization is metals anomalous hydrothermal alteration that is not ore
grade.  Ore is defined as mineralized rock that is economic to mine.
Mineralization may not be ore due to a variety of factors including current
metals prices, size and/ or grade of mineralization, depth to mineralization,
and  others.  Opt
                                   
   Ounces per ton. 1 troy ounce per short ton equals 34.2857
grams per metric tonne, or 34.2857 parts per million.  Paleozoic carbonate formations-Paleozoic is an era and refers to
the age of the rocks ranging from 542 to 251 million years ago. Carbonate rocks
are sedimentary rocks that are deposited as chemical precipitates, such a
limestone or many dolomites. A formation is a scientifically established
grouping of rocks with specific characteristics that geologists have developed
to understand the geology of an area or region. See also: "strata" below.  Pathfinder elements        
  Elements such as barium, silver, thallium, arsenic or mercury and
others that may be deposited in association with gold mineralizing
 hydrothermal solutions and commonly form larger anomalies than gold
itself. Pathfinder elements can vary between mining districts and within mining
districts depending upon the geologic type of the ore deposit. Areas of
anomalous pathfinder elements can  26    be used to aid in delineating gold mineralization at depth and
laterally, both from surface samples and from  samples collected below the
surface, such as in drill cuttings. Gold itself is one of the best pathfinder
elements for locating gold deposits.  QA/ QC program
              A
quality assurance and quality control program to help ensure that the sampling
and assaying program portion of the mineral evaluation project are
representative of what is actually going on. The QA/ QC program typically
includes using a reputable assay lab which uses its own QA/ QC program to ensure
assay result validity, check assays of mineralized intercepts sent to a second
reputable assay lab, and the incorporation of blanks (rock samples with no
detectable metals), standards (rock samples with established metals values) and
sample duplicates to arrive at a statistically valid sampling protocol. QA/ QC
programs also require sample security to ensure that samples are not
contaminated either unintentionally or intentionally.  Sinistral faults
                  
  Sinistral faults are fault planes of movement in rock that have a
left lateral displacement, such that as seen by the observer, the relative
movement of the rock on the other side of the fault plane from the observer is
to the left.  Dextral faults have right lateral movement.  Strata
                                
 Geologists group sedimentary rocks (rocks  formed by erosion of
preexisting rocks or rocks like limestones and many dolomites that form as
chemical precipitates) into age and often rock-type packages to help define the
geology of a region. Sedimentary strata or rock strata are these groupings of
rocks or parts of these rock packages that can be
identified at various localities throughout a region or mining district.  Stratigraphic
controls        These are the controls
to potential ore deposition provided by the rocks themselves. In each mining
district, certain strata are more favorable to ore development within the
district than are other strata. At Tintic, the bulk of  historic gold
production has come from the Ajax Formation. Drill testing the Ajax Formation
where a fault intersection cuts the unit (structural controls) may be a logical
place to expect the formation of a potential ore body.  Structural
controls            Structural
controls are the controls to potential ore deposition provided by rock
structures: especially areas of potentially high hydrothermal fluid flow along
faults and fault intercepts with other faults. Geologists map faults to
determine potential structural controls to district ore deposition. See also
wrench fault systems.  Stope
                                   
A step-like open excavation in an underground mine left by the mining of ore.
Depending upon the mining method and size of the ore body, an open cavity (a
stope) may be left with no pillars to support the roof.  Reverse circulation drilling A relatively rapid drilling method
whereby drilling is completed with air and either a rotary or hammer bit is used
to complete the drill hole. Reverse circulation drilling usually involves using
dual walled drilling pipe with high pressure air passing through the outer
annulus of the pipe and rock cuttings exiting through the inner annulus of the
pipe. Drill cuttings are typically logged, collected and assayed in 5 foot
intervals.  Winze
                               
   An internal underground shaft that was constructed by digging
downwards from the access point.  Wrench fault systems        Wrench
faults are defined by the relative movement along the fault plane. The Tintic
District lies in a wrench fault system. These faults are lateral-type faults
with rocks on one side of a fault having a relative displacement to the left or
right of the rocks on the other side of the fault plane of movement.
 Wrench fault systems are systems because other fault types often form as a
result of the directionally focused compressional forces the rock has been
subjected to. Wrench faults often result in a system of orthogonal faults
between the regional planes of wrench fault movement as well as smaller
"S"-shaped lateral faults (Riedel shears) that merge at their ends with the
wrench-fault planes of movement. These fault systems and where these faults
intercept each other can become transmissive areas for the potential movement
and focus of mineralizing hydrothermal fluids.     27    The Phased Nature of Our Planned or Proposed Exploration
Program.  The following
discussion sets forth the two-phase exploration program that we would recommend
or which we would suggest to an interested joint venture exploration
partner:  A two-phase
exploration program is recommended and which may involve a total expenditure of
US $2,658,000. We believe our claims have excellent targets for drill testing as
shown by geology, structural controls to known mineralization, and historic
underground sampling results in the Ajax and Opex Formations. The program would
utilize both reverse circulation and core drilling to confirm the presence,
tenor and characteristics of mineralization indicated in the historic
underground sampling results.  An initial surface
drilling program of ten reverse circulation drill holes approximately 840 feet
deep would target the 1,000 foot long area of gold anomalous ground intersected
on the Emerald 600 foot level. This area is located east and southeast of the
Emerald Shaft. The drill holes would be collared to test areas of historic high
grade gold sampled by Crane in the late 1920's. Two additional reverse
circulation drill holes would be collared to test the northeast extension of
potential mineralization along the Iron Break Fissure, located northeast of the
Emerald Shaft. Results of historic sampling in the Centennial-Eureka Mine
workings by Crane indicate significant silver mineralization on the fissure.
Drill holes collared in this area would have completion depths of approximately
1,000 feet and would also test the prospective Ajax Formation located above the
mineralized fissure. Drill holes in this program would be spaced relatively
close to one another because of the discrete, high-grade nature of
mineralization in the Tintic District.  Prior to drilling,
patented claim corners would be reestablished in the field using a licensed
surveyor to ensure project activities are conducted within the our claims'
boundaries. Surface rock chip samples should be collected by a qualified person
from the scattered cuts and altered rocks that crop out on the property to
determine the potential for additional drill targets.  Upon conclusion of the
first phase of exploration, data compilation and analysis, interpretive drawing
of geology, grade and mineralized envelopes in sections and plans should be
completed. Initial metallurgical studies would also be conducted. The second
phase drilling program is contingent upon the compiled results from the initial
drill program.  Second phase drilling,
provided that the first phase is successful, would target and expand on
mineralized areas intersected in the first phase of drilling and should include
both core and reverse circulation drilling. Core drilling provides a better
sampling media and a better control for structural analyses, engineering and
metallurgical studies, and on geology. The drilling program should include a
rigorous QA/QC program which includes blanks, repeats, standards, paired assays
and variance studies to ensure that sample preparation and analytical protocols
are not adding unreasonable variance to assay data. More detailed feasibility
and metallurgical studies would also be completed during this phase and include
mineral speciation, mineral liberation/ recovery and waste stream
evaluations.  The recommended budget
for Phase I is US $517,000. The recommended budget for Phase II is US
$2,141,000. If feasibility studies conducted as part of Phase II indicate the
economic viability of mining zones intersected in drilling, then mine
development will probably require the construction of underground access to
develop the claims.  28        Recommended Phase I ExpendituresItem
Expenses in U.S.Drilling: Reverse Circ: 10 holes, 8400 ft @ $45/ft
$
                  378,000Roads and sites
$
                      7,500Reclamation
$
                      8,500Bonding
$
                     20,000Assays: FA/AA, 1680 samples @ $25
$
                    42,000Supplies: splitter, boxes, bags, etc.
$
                      5,000Geological Consultants 1 @ 2 months @ $8000/mo
$
                     16,000Resource Estimate
$
                     10,000Lodging, meals, expenses
$
                       5,000Contingency +/- 5%
$
                      24,600TOTAL PHASE I RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURE
$
                     516,000Recommended Phase II ExpendituresItem
Expenses in U.S.Drilling: Reverse Circ: 20 holes, 20000 ft @ $45/ft
$
                  900,000Core-HQ-size: 10 holes, 10,000 ft @ $65/ft
$
                  650,000Roads and sites
$
                     15,000Reclamation
$
                     18,000Bonding
$
                     40,000Assays: FA/AA, 6000 samples @ $25
$
                   150,000Supplies: splitter, boxes, bags, etc.
$
                     20,000Geological Consultants 3 @ 4 months @ $8000/mo
$
                     96,000Resource Estimate and Engineering Studies
$
                    100,000Lodging, meals, expenses
$
                      50,000Contingency +/- 5%
$
                     101,950TOTAL PHASE II RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURE
$
                  2,140,950 The foregoing
recommended expenditures are estimates devised by our consulting geologist. We
have no way of predicting, at this time, whether these estimates are too high or
too low. We have simply come up with these estimates in order to give a
prospective exploration program partner or joint venturer an initial idea of
what it might be looking at spending on any such program(s).  Phased Exploration
Plan and How the Results of Prior Phases Will Determine Whether to Proceed with
Further Phases.  Surface exploration
work is conducted first, with the purpose of generating valid drilling targets.
Prospecting work is done on the ground by a field geologist to identify areas
with high metal content and showing the signs of hydrothermal alteration. These
data are then compiled on to maps and a report is prepared. A meeting with the
geologist, project manager, property owner and the joint venture partner would
then be held. If the decision is made to conduct the drilling program, a budget
is set up and then managed and administered by the project manager.  Drilling is the most
effective way to locate the suspected mineral deposits that could occur beneath
the our claims. Samples of the drill cuttings are collected for each 5 foot to
10 foot drill interval. These samples are labeled as to hole number and depth
and stored in plastic or cloth bags. In addition, a small reference sample of
each 10 foot interval is placed in a chip tray with several compartments. The
drill cuttings are carefully logged by a geologist and a description of each
drill hole is prepared. This description includes the rock type and any evidence
of mineralization or hydrothermal alteration. Based on this inspection,
promising samples are selected for assaying and submitted to a certified
commercial laboratory. All available information is then reviewed by the
geologist. Particular attention is paid to any promising assays, the depth of
any mineral deposits and the potential size of the deposit. A report is then
prepared which discusses the potential mineral deposit, the risks involved and
additional recommended work. If drilling is recommended the drill sites, the
footage and estimated costs are also included. Another meeting with all the
involved parties is then held and a decision would be made as to whether or not
Phase II drilling, or other additional work, would be conducted.   29     The determination as
to whether to proceed with further phases upon the completion of each phase will
be made by those persons financing the same.  Locating an
Exploration Program Joint Venturer or Partner and Plan to Contract with such
Joint Venturer or Partner.  The specific steps
that we intend to undertake in order to find a suitable joint venture or
partnership candidate will include but not be limited to the following: First,
we intend to identify those mining or mineral exploration companies that are
currently conducting exploration and extraction operations or activities in
Utah, Nevada, Wyoming and Idaho. We will also identify those companies we know
and whose principals we have met in the past who are located in Salt Lake City,
Utah, Carlin, Nevada, Spokane, Washington, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada,
and London, England. We intend to target these particular companies because we
are aware that they own, or have owned, mineral claim properties in Utah, Nevada
and Idaho, including Alaska, Canada and South America. In fact, some are in the
process of doing exploratory work, or have done extensive exploratory work, on
those claims and others. We thus believe that these contacts would be suitable
partnership and joint venture candidates to approach. At the same time, we also
intend to identify additional companies or operators by checking records with
DOGM and the federal Bureau of Land Management or any other state or
governmental agency in which information about current mining-related activities
in Utah and surrounding states is publicly available. In doing so, we will also
have the opportunity to confirm the identity of those mining or mineral
exploration companies whose principals we already know or have met personally,
either directly or indirectly, all of whom are currently engaged in exploratory
mining activities. We also believe that our geologist/environmental engineer,
who is currently employed full-time by a large mining company, and who works on
the side for a Canadian mining company, has the ability to give us names of
companies operating in the Tintic Mining District and nearby (though it will be
our obligation to contact such persons or companies). After identifying various
possible candidates, we shall first attempt to telephone them one by one and
speak with appropriate persons involved in their respective mineral exploratory
decision- making process. After reaching each such person or persons, we will
learn from each what each is looking for in this regard or
otherwise interested in pursuing and whether our claims might be something they
would be interested in. If any of these candidates or possibilities communicates
an interest in our mineral claims, we will find out exactly what information
they desire from us and we will provide it to them as quickly and efficiently as
possible. After that, and as the list of serious interested candidates gets
smaller and smaller, we will follow up with each of such entity more closely and
more aggressively and determine what additional information they need, if they
are interested, what they would like to do next, whether they would like to tour
the property, for example, whether they would like to conduct their own sampling
or assays on our claims (to which we would have no objection) and if they are
not interested, learn why. After providing our geology reports and doing on site
inspections and tours of our mineral claims, we will then sit down with such
persons and find out exactly what they believe it would take to work with them
on a project to explore our claims. We intend to actively seek out and
investigate potential partnerships, joint ventures and other funding
arrangements by doing our due diligence and otherwise locating companies who we
believe would be interested in exploring our claims for their precious metals
mineral potential. Some of these candidates we know and are already aware of
because of having owned mineral claim property in the Tintic Mining District
since 1933. Others we hope to learn of through referrals and through our own due
diligence and contacts in the Tintic Mining District and overall mining
industry. Organizations such as the Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation
headquartered in Colorado and also, the Utah Mining Association headquartered in
Salt Lake City, both of which have websites, are good sources of information
concerning the identities of which companies are doing what in Utah and the
surrounding states.  Back in September
2006, our president and chief executive officer, along with our corporate
counsel, conducted a day-long property tour of our mineral claims with a project
manager of a large US mining company whose stock trades on the NY Stock
Exchange. While we had a few follow up communications with this individual and
provided him with a copy of our geology report, our efforts to get this company
further interest in our property have failed.  We can only assume that, for
the time being, this US mining company is not interested in our claims or in the
Tintic Mining District.  During January of our
first quarter of this last fiscal year, 2007, a principal of a large Canadian
mining company whose stock trades on the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) also
spent time touring the Tintic Mining District and meeting with at least one
large property owner in the Mammoth, Utah, area, an area where our claims are
located.  We had brief conversations with this principal at that time.
 We subsequently provided this company with a copy of our geology report.
 During our second quarter of 2007, we learned that this company abandoned
its interest in the District for reasons, we are told, unrelated to the
Districts mining potential.  Specifically, we are told that, among other
reasons, the company was unable to get adequate assurances from the EPA that it
wouldnt be liable for past contamination caused by another operator if it were
to do exploratory work or engage in mining operations, particularly in the
Mammoth area, an area NOT within the EPAs current Superfund designation.
 As a result, this company has decided, for now, that it would be unduly
expensive and difficult to engage in exploration activity in the District.
 It could be that this company was also unable to negotiate with other
property owners in the District whose property it would have wanted to acquire
or lock up in some fashion.  Unfortunately, we are not privy to all the
reasons or details.  This reality may unfortunately hamper our ability to
attract a suitable joint venture mining exploration partner in the near future.
 That is to say, if the reason that this particular mining  30    company lost interest in the District is because it felt that it
couldnt work with the EPA and/or other land owners, or both, this could
unfortunately mean that Phase Two of our Plan of Operation will be very
difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish either in the near future or at
all.  In January of this
year, our president and chief executive officer had a discussion with another
mining company headquartered in Idaho but it turned out that this company was
similarly not interested in the Tintic Mining District and thus, our
properties.  As of the date of this
report, we have had NO discussions with any mining or mineral exploration
company about entering into a joint venture agreement of any kind or nature.
 Furthermore, based on our lack of success in this regard over the last 2
years, we are not particularly optimistic that we will in fact be able to locate
and eventually enter into an agreement with a joint venture mining partner.  During December 2007,
we met with officials with the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
and talked to them about whether there would be any special remediation efforts
required of us or a joint venture partner if we engaged in any exploratory
activity on our mining claims.  We contacted them because we were informed
that the Canadian mining company mentioned above had also met with them.
 As a result of the meeting, we learned that the DEQ really lacks
jurisdiction over any mining operations or clean up unless a particular and
unique environmental hazard or problem arises that DOGM cant handle.  The
DEQ thus referred us to the EPA.  In January of 2008, we
contacted the EPA in an effort to learn whether or not we, or a joint venture
mining partner, would be required to finance or undertake any special clean up
or remediation of possible contamination undertaken by others in the past, if
that contamination were on or near any exploratory activity that we undertake.
 We asked this question because we were under the impression that this
possible requirement or obligation may have scared off the Canadian mining
company mentioned above, a mining company that was interested in the Mammoth,
Utah, area, an area where our properties are located.  The following
summarizes the EPAs response to our inquiry, a response we received by email as
recently as March 6, 2008:  1.   
The EPA isn't in the position of giving legal advice to a company suchas
yours wanting to conduct mining operations and the EPA does not
provide"comfort letters".2.    If your company
intends to mine in an area already contaminatedor that is part of a
Superfund site, you should refer to theprovisions of CERCLA including
section 122.  Unless we were enteringinto a settlement, the EPA is not
in the position to define exactly what acompany can or can not do in its
mining operations to avoid incurringliability - anything we said could be
open to interpretation and couldbe seen as limiting our enforcement
discretion and ability to enforceCERCLA.3.    If the
company does not cause or contribute to the release orthreat of release of
hazardous substances, it should be able to avoidincurring liability under
CERCLA.4.    We believe that your property is outside the
Eureka Superfund Siteboundary as it is currently defined.  We don't
believe that we haveconducted much if any sampling on your property or in
the vicinity ofyour property so it would be difficult to say whether or not
yourproperty is contaminated.  In spite of the
foregoing events and information concerning our present inability to locate and
negotiate with a joint venture mining partner, our plan, nonetheless, to
contract with a mining company or mineral exploration partner, upon completion
of the work sequences we have detailed above, includes:  * An investigation of
mining and mineral exploration companies, which are currently operating in the
general area of our mineral claims. This investigation may include the use of
industry databases, as well as the investigation of governmental records and
industry experts. We do not expect this cost to exceed $2,500.  * Initial discussions
with those potential mineral exploration company partners as determined from our
investigation. We do not expect this cost to exceed $5,000.   31    * Contract negotiations with an interested mineral exploration
partner. We do not expect the costs, legal or otherwise, to exceed $10,000.
Though no formal agreement exists between us and our current officers and
directors, our current officers and directors have agreed to fund the costs of
such plan to the extent that these costs do not exceed $25,000. If we are able
to contract with a mineral exploration company, we anticipate that all expenses
for exploration and possible exploitation of our mineral claim properties will
be borne by the mineral exploration company and not by us. In return, we would
receive a royalty fee based on a percentage of the proceeds from the sale of
those minerals the mining or mineral exploration company may recover from our
properties.  It is noteworthy that
even if we were to complete a successful mineral exploration program and we
successfully identify a mineral deposit (something to which there can be no
assurance whatsoever), we will nonetheless have to obtain substantial additional
funds from a joint venture partner in order to undertake further drilling and
engineering studies (i.e., development) to determine if that mineral deposit
does in fact have commercial viability and if so, how the same can be extracted
through an actual mining extraction program. In short,
there are three phases to mining: exploration, development, and extraction.
Accordingly, if in fact we embark upon and undertake a successful exploration
program, we will still be required to complete the second phase, namely, that of
"developing" the claims in order to determine if it is commercially feasible to
embark upon the final phase, namely, actual mineral extraction.  We are unable to make
any guarantees that:  * we will be able to
identify and negotiate an arrangement with a mining or mineral exploration
company within the next twelve to eighteen months,  * our mineral claim
properties will be found attractive to a prospective mining company partner,  * we will be able to
attract sufficient outside funding or financing necessary to undertake and
complete an exploration program, or  * if commercial
quantities of mineralization is found after an exploration program is carried
out, that our properties would produce any saleable minerals or metals that
would result in our receiving any income.  While we believe that
such opportunities can be investigated, reviewed and consummated for minimal
costs, we cannot give any assurances that related costs will be minimal or that
we can ultimately afford them or, that our officers, directors or significant
shareholders will agree to continue to make the continued equity investments
necessary to do so.  We have no employees.
Our officers and directors serve our company without receiving a salary.
However, from time to time as appropriate, they may receive expense
reimbursements and possible stock options. Though we have no formal written
agreement in place, our office space and administrative support is provided by
Mr. George Christopulos, our Chairman of the Board, President, and CEO out of
his home. Other than those costs and expenses previously discussed, we do not
plan on any significant expenditures for new projects of any sort within the
next twelve to eighteen months.  Time Frame Involved
in Investigating and Negotiating a Contract with a Joint Venture
Partner.  We do not know and
have no way of knowing the anticipated time frame involved in which our
management would investigate each prospective or potential joint venture mineral
exploration partner, let alone how long it would take any such a prospective
partner to investigate us or negotiate a contract with us. As we have stated in
this document, we have approached large mining companies over the last 2 years
that have, or have had, the funding to finance exploration in the United States
or which have otherwise done mineral exploration work in Utah and the
surrounding states. Unfortunately, as set forth above, our efforts to generate
such interest have so far been unsuccessful.  We are not exactly sure why.
 Accordingly, based on what has occurred, or failed to occur during the
last 2 years, we have no way of predicting how long investigating us and our
mineral claim properties would take a potential joint venture mining partner to
undertake nor do we have any way of predicting how long it would take to
negotiate any kind of contract with a prospective joint venture mining partner.
 The fact is that as of the date of this report, we do NOT have any joint
venture mineral exploration partner prospects.  Our "Day-to-Day"
Operations.  With respect to our
"day to day" operations, we have no employees or formal office facilities. Our
officer and directors have other full time employment or engagements, all as
stated elsewhere in this document. They will therefore NOT be devoting their
full time and energy, on a daily basis, to our Company or the completion of our
Business Plan. We can say, however, that completion of, and carrying out, our
Plan of Operation involves reliance on other experts and we expect to line up
and hire, as necessary, whatever experts are needed to complete our Plan of
Operation and our various work sequences. To the extent that this requires us to make a phone call or two at least every
day, and otherwise follow up with people, we will do that. To the extent it
requires more, we are committed to doing that also, even if it is on a daily
basis. At some point, we will  32    be waiting for prospective mineral exploration partners to get
back to us on their evaluation of our mineral claims or what more information
that they need or want from us in order to make an informed decision about us
and our mineral claims. When that is the case, there will be little we can do
"day to day," other than to wait for those tasks to be completed by them,
circumstances that will largely be beyond our direct control. We will also have
to wait for prospective joint partner candidates to "get back to us" while they
are reviewing materials we will have provided them. If and when we are waiting
for such persons "to get back to us," there is little that we will be able to do
on a "day to day" basis.  Maps  A map of our mineral
claims is an exhibit to this Annual Report. This map shows the actual location
of our mineral claims near the town of Mammoth, Utah. This map also shows where
the Emerald Mine is located. See the PDF file attached and which is identified
in our List of Exhibits below as Exhibit 99.1.  We have also inserted
below an index map showing where our mineral claims are situated in relationship
to the state and county in which they are located. See the PDF file attached.
This second map exhibit is identified in our List of Exhibits below as Exhibit
99.2.     ITEM 7.
 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.   33                TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  December 31, 2007                           34          REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM    Board of Directors Tintic Gold Mining Company Salt Lake City, UT  We have audited the accompanying balance
sheet of Tintic Gold Mining Company [an exploration stage company] as of
December 31, 2007, and the related statements of operations, stockholders'
equity (deficit) and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006
and for the period from inception on December 31, 1997 through December 31,
2007.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's
management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits.  We conducted our audits in accordance with
the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).
 Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to
perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our
audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a
basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances,
but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the
Companys internal control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we
express no such opinion.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.
 An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.  In our opinion, the financial statements
referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Tintic Gold Mining Company as of December 31, 2007, and the results
of its operations and its cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006 and for the period from inception on December 31, 1997 through December 31,
2007, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America.  The accompanying financial statements have
been prepared assuming that Tintic Gold Mining Company will continue as a going
concern.  As discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements, Tintic Gold
Mining Company has incurred losses since its inception and has not yet
established profitable operations.  These factors raise substantial doubt
about the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern.
 Managements plans in regards to these matters are also described in Note
5.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of these uncertainties.  /s/Pritchett, Siler & Hardy, P.C.  PRITCHETT, SILER & HARDY, P.C. March 21, 2008 Salt Lake City, Utah     35    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  BALANCE SHEET    December 31,2007ASSETSCURRENT ASSETS:Cash

$
                             471Total Current Assets

471$
                             471LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT)CURRENT LIABILITIES:Accounts payable

$
                             436Related party advances

1,210Accrued Liabilities - related party
15,000Total Current Liabilities
16,646STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT):Common stock, $.001 par value,50,000,000 shares authorized,2,109,643 shares issued andoutstanding December 31, 2007.

2,110Capital in excess of par value

194,165Deficit accumulated during theexploration stage

(212,450)Total Stockholders' Equity (Deficit)

(16,175)$
                             471             The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  36    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS    From inception ofexploration stageon December 31,For the Year Ended

1997, throughDecember 31,

December 31,2007

2006

2007Revenues
$
                       -

$
                   -

$
                                      -Total Revenues
-

-

-ExpensesGeneral & Administrative
27,358

24,020

145,129Failed acquisition costs
-

-

85,758Total Expenses
27,358

24,020

230,887Loss From Operations
(27,358)

(24,020)

(230,887)Other IncomeInterest Income
-

-

8,632Interest Expense
-

-

(44)Gain on Sale of Securities
-

-

8,084Total Other Income
-

-

16,672Loss Before Income Taxes
(27,358)

(24,020)

(214,215)Current Income Taxes (Benefit)
-

-

(1,765)Deferred Tax Expense
-

-

-Net Loss
$
                 (27,358)

$
            (24,020)

$
                          (212,450)Loss per Share
$
                    (0.01)

$
               (0.02)           The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  37    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company] STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
(DEFICIT) FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION ON DECEMBER
31, 1997 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2007  UnrealizedDeficit

GainsAccumulated

(Losses) onAdditional

During the

Available -

TotalCommon
Stock

Paid-In

Exploration

For-Sale

Shareholders'Shares

Amount

Capital

Stage

Securities

EquityBalance - December 31, 1997
231,797

$    232

$  39,743

$
             -

$
            -

$
       39,975Net Income for December 31, 1997through December 31,2000
-

-

-

11,007

-

11,007Unrealized losses available-for-sale-securities,
net of tax
-

-

-

-

(278)

(278)Stock issued for services in December,2001 at $.30 per share
50,006

50

14,950



-

15,000Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2001
-

-

-

(35,530)



(35,530)losses available-for-sale-securities, net of
tax
-

-

-

-

278

278Balance December 31, 2001
281,803

282

54,693

(24,523)

-

30,452Stock issued for services in December,2002 at $.175 per share
134,153

134

23,343

-

-

23,477Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2002
-

-

-

(34,774)

-

(34,774)Balance December 31, 2002
415,956

416

78,036

(59,297)

-

19,155Stock issued for services inFebruary, 2003 at $0.10 per share
536,611

537

53,124

-

-

53,661Stock issued for services inDecember, 2003 at $0.10 per share
57,076

57

5,651

-

-

5,708Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2003
-

-

-

(81,978)

-

(81,978)Balance December 31, 2003
1,009,643

1,010

136,811

(141,275)

-

(3,454)Issuance of 500,000 shares of Common Stock
for$25,000 or $.05 per share, August, 2004
500,000

500

24,500

-

-

25,000Related party debt forgivenessrecorded as capital contribution
-

-

3,454

-

-

3,454Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2004
-

-

-

(7,552)

-

(7,552)Balance December 31, 2004
1,509,643

1,510

164,765

(148,827)

-

17,448Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2005
-

-

-

(12,245)

-

(12,245)Balance December 31, 2005
1,509,643

1,510

164,765

(161,072)

-

5,203Issuance of 600,000 shares of Common Stockfor $30,000 or $.05 per share, November,
2006
600,000

600

29,400

-

-

30,000Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2006
-

-

-

(24,020)

-

(24,020)Balance December 31, 2006
2,109,643

2,110

194,165

(185,092)

-

11,183Net loss for the year ended December 31,2007
-

-

-

(27,358)

-

(27,358)Balance December 31, 2007
2,109,643

$  2,110

$ 194,165

$    (212,450)

-

$
      (16,175)        38    The accompanying
notes are an integral part of these financial statements.  39    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS From inception ofexploration stageon December 31,For
the Year Ended

1997, throughDecember 31

December 31

December 31,2007

2006

2007Cash flows used in operating
activities:Net income (loss)
$
    (27,358)

$
    (24,020)

$
          (212,450)Adjustments to reconcile net loss to cash
usedin operating activitiesNon-cash stock issued for services rendered
-

-

97,846Loss from sale of securities
-

-

(8,086)Change in operating assets and liabilities:Increase (decrease) in accounts payable
(2,313)

2,636

289Accrued liabilities - related party
15,000

-

15,000(Decrease) in income taxes payable
-

-

(565)Net cash used in operating activities
(14,671)

(21,384)

(107,966)Cash flows from investing activities:Purchase of securities
-

-

(7,609)Proceeds from sale of securities
-

-

23,962Net cash flows provided by investing
activities
-

-

16,353Cash flows from financing activities:Proceeds from note payable - related party
-

-

3,501Proceeds from related party advances
-

-

1,210Proceeds from sale of common stock
-

30,000

55,000Net cash flows from financing activities
-

30,000

59,711Net increase (decrease)  in cash
(14,671)

8,616

(31,902)Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of
period
15,142

6,526

32,373Cash and cash equivalents at end of
period
$
         471

$     15,142

$
                 471Supplemental Disclosures of Cash
Flow Information:Cash paid during the periods for:Interest
$
             -

$
            -

$                    -Income taxes
$
             -

$
            -

$
              3,565Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Investing and
Financing Activities$
             -

$
            -     The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  40    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS  NOTE 1 -- ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES  History and Nature
of Business -Tintic Gold Mining Company (the Company) was organized under
the laws of the State of Nevada on March 8, 2004 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Tintic Gold Mining Company (Parent), a Utah corporation, (now known as KIWA
Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation).  The Company was founded for the
purpose of continuing the exploration of the mining claims of its former Parent.
 On March 12, 2004 as part of an acquisition agreement, Parent acquired
KIWA Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation (KIWA).  Following the
organization of the Company, Parent transferred all of its mining claims to the
Company in exchange for 1,009,643 of the Companys common stock.  The
mining claims include three patented mining claims known as the Emerald, Ruby
and Diamond Lode Mining Claims located in the central portion of the Tintic
Mining District, Juab County, Utah.  Tintic Gold Mining
Company ("Parent") was incorporated in the State of Utah on June 14, 1933.
 Parent was incorporated for the purpose of mining, milling, ore reducing,
and smelting. At the time of its incorporation, Parent acquired certain patented
mining claims from the Emerald Mining Company, which mining claims the Company
continues to own.  These mining claims are located in the Tintic Mining
District of Juab County, Utah. Prior to December 31, 1997, the Parent was
dormant.  Quasi-Reorganization.   On June 21, 2001, a
majority of the shareholders of Parent approved a quasi-reorganization of
Parent, retroactive to December 31, 1997. On June 21, 2001, the Parent amended
its articles of incorporation to reduce the par value per share from $0.10 to
$0.001. As a result of the quasi-reorganization, the common stock of Parent was
written down to its par value of $0.001 per share, the accumulated deficit of
$191,797 was eliminated, and additional paid-in capital was adjusted to reflect
the difference between the historical cost of existing assets and liabilities as
of December 31, 1997.  Financial Statement Presentation.The accompanying
financial statements include the prior operations of Parent from its inception
of exploration stage activities on December 31, 1997 through the spin-off of the
Company, and include the accounts of the Company from its date of incorporation
to the date of the financial statements.  Exploration Stage.  The Company is considered to be an
Exploration Stage Company, however, the Company does not have any current mining
exploration, development or production activities on its existing properties.
 The Company is currently unable to estimate the length of time necessary
to initiate an exploration stage program and has no assurance that a
commercially viable ore body exists in its properties until appropriate
geological work and testing of the mineralized areas can support an economically
feasible evaluation which the Company is unable to perform due to a lack of
working capital.  Stock-Based
Compensation.   Compensation or services that are received in
exchange for the issuance of common stock is recognized based on the fair value
of the services received or the fair value of the common stock issued, which
ever is more reliably measured.  Cash and Cash
Equivalents - The Company considers all highly-liquid debt investments
purchased with a maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.  41     TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage
Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  NOTE 1 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT
ACCOUNTING POLICIES [Continued]  Mining Properties -Pre-operating and mine development costs including acquisition costs
relating to mining properties are capitalized until such properties are placed
in production, disposed of, or abandoned.  The Company periodically reviews
its mining property for impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of
Long-Lived Assets.  Income Taxes -The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes [See
Note 6].  Loss Per Share -
The computation of loss per share is based on the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding during the period presented in accordance with
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, Earnings Per Share
[See Note 7].  Accounting
Estimates - The preparation of financial statements in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosures of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amount of
revenues and expenses during the reported period.  Actual results could
differ from those estimated.  Recently Enacted
Accounting Standards -Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS)
No. 155, Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments  an amendment of
FASB Statements No. 133 and 140, SFAS No. 156, Accounting for the Servicing of
Financial Assets, SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements, SFAS No. 158,
Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement
Plans  an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R), SFAS No.
159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities 
Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115, and SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interest in Consolidated Financial Statements (as amended),
were recently issued.  SFAS No. 155, 156, 157, 158, 159 and 160 have no
current applicability to the Company or their effect on the financial statements
would not have been significant.  NOTE 2 - MINING CLAIMS  At the time of
organization, the Company acquired certain patented mining claims from Parent
which were recorded at the carryover basis of $0 [See Note 3].  The
mining claims are located in the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah.
 The Company does not have any current mining exploration, development, or
production activities on its existing properties.  The Company intends to
explore its existing properties in the future and to acquire additional mining
properties that contain potential exploration opportunities if funding becomes
available for such purpose.       42     TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage
Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS  NOTE 3 - CAPITAL STOCK  Common Stock -The Company has authorized 50,000,000 shares of common stock with a par
value of $.001.  In November 2006 the
Company issued 600,000 shares of common stock.  The shares were issued for
cash of $30,000, or $.05 per share.  In 2004 the Company
issued a total of 1,509,643 shares of common stock of which 500,000 shares were
issued for cash of $25,000, or $.05 per share and 1,009,643 shares were issued
for mining claims of Parent valued at carryover basis of $0.  NOTE 4 - RELATED PARTY
TRANSACTIONS  Related Party
Advances As of December 31, 2007 officers and shareholders of the Company
had advanced the Company a total of $1,210.  The advances bear no interest
and are due on demand.  Accrued Liabilities
-A shareholder of the Company has performed legal services for a total of
$15,000 which has been accrued for on the Companys books.  Management
Compensation - For the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company
did not pay any compensation to any officer or director of the Company.  Office Space -
The Company has not had a need to rent office space.  An officer of the
Company is allowing the Company to use his address, as needed, at no expense to
the Company.  NOTE 5 - GOING CONCERN  The accompanying
financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplate
continuation of the Company as a going concern.  However, the Company was
only recently formed and has not yet been successful in establishing profitable
operations.  These factors raise substantial doubt about the ability of the
Company to continue as a going concern.  In this regard, management is
proposing to raise any necessary additional funds not provided by operations
through loans or through additional sales of its common stock or through a
possible business combination.  There is no assurance that the Company will
be successful in raising this additional capital or in achieving profitable
operations.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that
might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.  NOTE 6 - INCOME TAXES  The Company accounts
for income taxes in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.  SFAS No. 109 requires the Company
to provide a net deferred tax asset/liability equal to the expected future tax
benefit/expense of temporary reporting differences between book and tax
accounting methods and any available operating loss or tax credit
carryforwards.  43    TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An
Exploration Stage Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS  NOTE 6 - INCOME TAXES 
CONTINUED  The Company has
available at December 31, 2007 an unused operating loss carryforward of
approximately $70,985 which may be applied against future taxable income and
which expires in 2027.  The amount of and ultimate realization of the
benefits from the operating loss carryforwards for income tax purposes is
dependent, in part, upon the tax laws in effect, the future earnings of the
Company, and other future events, the effects of which cannot be determined.
 Because of the uncertainty surrounding the realization of the net deferred
tax assets, the Company has established a valuation allowance equal to their tax
effect and, therefore, no deferred tax asset has been recognized.  The net
deferred tax assets are approximately $10,648 and $6,544 as of December 31, 2007
and 2006, with an offsetting valuation allowance of the same amount.  The
change in the valuation allowance for the year ended December 31, 2007 is
approximately $4,104.  NOTE 7 - LOSS PER SHARE  The following data
shows the amounts used in computing loss per share:  For the Year EndedDecember 31,2007

2006Loss from continuing operations availableto common shareholders (numerator)

$
       (27,358)

$
       (24,020)Weighted average number of commonshares outstanding used in loss pershare for the period (denominator)

2,109,643

1,575,396  Dilutive loss per share
was not presented, as the Company had no common stock equivalent shares for all
periods presented that would affect the computation of diluted loss per
share.  NOTE 8  COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES  Former Officer During 1980, a
former president of Parent entered into an agreement with Parent whereby he
settled a note due from Parent and relinquished his direct control of Parent.
 Among other consideration, Parent conveyed to the former president a 3%
net smelter return on any ores sold from its historical patented mining claims
held, plus surface rights.  Parent retained rights to enter and exit the
property for exploration and mining activity.  In March 2004, the Company
issued 1,009,643 shares of common stock for the mining claims of Parent [See
Note 2].        44    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS   NOTE 8  COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES  CONTINUED Environmental  In 2002 the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality conducted soil sampling in the town of Mammoth, Utah, in
an area adjacent to the Companys mining claims.  Those samples indicate
elevated contaminated metals levels.  The nearby Mammoth mine had
significant workings and production in the past, while the Companys properties
have only had a small amount of ore produced.  The source of the elevated
contaminants is unclear.  No claims have been made against the Company nor
has anyone asserted that the Company is a responsible party. The Environmental
Protection Agency has listed Eureka, Utah, as a superfund clean-up site.
 While the Companys properties are in the same overall mining district as
Eureka, Utah, the Company does not expect the Eureka, Utah, superfund cleanup
project will expand to include either the Mammoth area or the Companys
properties.  The Company is not aware of any state or federal agencys plan
or intention to do any environmental cleanup or other work to or with any
property located in or near Mammoth or the Companys properties.  NOTE 9  SUBSEQUENT EVENT  On January 31, 2008, officers,
directors and shareholders of the Company agreed to advance to the Company
$15,000 to pay for ongoing obligations.  The advance bears no interest and
is due on demand.    45    ITEM 8.  CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON
ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.  None.    ITEM 8A.
 CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.  Management's Annual Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.  Management of the Company is
responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting.  Our internal control system was designed to provide
reasonable assurance to our management and Board of Directors regarding the
preparation and fair presentation of financial statements.  All internal controls over financial
reporting, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations, including the
possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls.
 Therefore, even effective internal control over financial reporting can
provide only reasonable, and not absolute, assurance with respect to financial
statement preparation and presentation.  Further, because of changes in
conditions, the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting may
vary over time. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may also fail to prevent or detect misstatements.
 Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only
reasonable assurance of achieving their control objectives.  Our management, including our chief
executive officer and chief financial officer, assessed the effectiveness of our
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007.  In
making its assessment of internal control over financial reporting, management
used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework.
 Based on this evaluation, our management concluded that, as of December
31, 2007, our internal control over financial reporting was effective based on
those criteria.  This annual report does not include
an attestation report of the Companys independent registered public accounting
firm regarding internal control over financial reporting.  Managements
report was not subject to attestation by the Companys registered public
accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange
Commission that permit the Company to provide only managements report in this
annual report.  Changes in Internal Control
Over Financial Reporting.  There have been no changes in
internal control over financial reporting.     ITEM 8B.
 OTHER INFORMATION.  None.    PART III    ITEM 9.  DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND CONTROL PERSONS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE;
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT.  DIRECTORS. Under our
Articles and Bylaws, our directors are elected to serve until the next annual
shareholders' meeting or until their respective successors are elected and
qualify. Currently, we have three directors.  Interim replacements for
vacancies on the Board of Directors are appointed by the remaining, incumbent
directors. No director that was appointed or elected since our inception in
March 2004 has declined to serve, and none has been found unable or unfit to
serve.  EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.
Our officers hold office until the meeting of the Board of Directors immediately
following the next annual shareholders' meeting or until removal by the Board of
Directors. Our Bylaws specify that of our officers, there shall be a president,
one or more vice presidents, a secretary and a treasurer. Interim replacements
for officers that have resigned or been terminated are appointed by the Board of
Directors.  The following sets forth pertinent
information about each of our directors and executive officers:    Name
Age
Position  46     George
Christopulos
58
President,
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Director (Chairman of
the Board)Hugh
Coltharp
56
Secretary/Treasurer
and DirectorJack
Coombs
81
Director
and Vice President  Mr. CHRISTOPULOS is
currently employed by the Salt Lake County Assessor's office as a commercial
real estate appraiser. He received a B.S. degree in Accounting from the
University of Utah in 1974, graduating cum laude. He has been the chairman of
the board and the president of the Company since 1982. He is NOT currently an
officer, director or "control person" of any other "reporting company."  Mr. COLTHARP is a
retired stockbroker, formerly of Potter Investment Company, a local stock
brokerage firm, who currently buys, sells and restores antique cars. He was a
director of our predecessor or parent company longer than any other director,
having first become a director of that company in 1980. He is NOT currently an
officer, director or "control person" of any other "reporting company."  Mr. COOMBS is a
retired Salt Lake City businessman and private investor. Mr. Coombs graduated
from the University of Utah in 1950 with a B.S. degree in business
administration. He has been involved with other exploratory mining companies in
the past. Mr. Coombs served as an officer and director of a company known as Vis
Viva Corporation, now known as WideBand Corporation, and which currently trades
on the Pink Sheets under the symbol ZWBC.PK. He is NOT currently an officer,
director or "control person" of any other "reporting company."  We do not believe that
any of our officers or directors come within the definition of a "promoter" as
defined in Rule 405 of the General Rules and Regulations of the Commission, 17
CFR Section 230.405.  No officer or
director, or greater than 5% shareholder, has been involved, directly or
indirectly, in any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding of any kind. None is
currently involved in any litigation nor has any been involved in any litigation
that would have a bearing on any such person's fitness or other ability to act
and serve as a director or officer of us.  No arrangement or
understanding exists between or among any of the directors or executive officers
and any other person pursuant to which any director was elected, or any
executive officer was appointed. None of our directors or officers are currently
directors or officers of any other company registered under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  Each director and
executive officer intends to devote such amount of time as that person's
responsibilities require, but none of them work full time for us. Also, no
family relationship exists among any of the named directors and executive
officers. None of the directors or officers has ever been employed by a mining
company and none has any college or university degree involving or relating to
mining.  BOARD MEETINGS.
Pursuant to Nevada law, the Board of Directors conducted all of its business and
approved all corporate action during fiscal 2007 by the consent of all its
members, in the absence of formal Board meetings and as applicable to the
business at hand.  STANDING AUDIT AND
COMPENSATION COMMITTEES; NO OTHER COMMITTEES. The Board of Directors has not
established Compensation or Audit Committees. At present, the Board does not
have a nominating committee, or any other board committees.  We do not
believe our current Plan of Operation requires such, however, if required by
Sarbanes-Oxley, we will form any necessary committee.    47    COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934. Section 16(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 requires
officers, directors, and persons who own more than ten percent (10%) of an
issuer's common stock to file initial reports of beneficial ownership and to
report changes in such ownership with the Commission and the NASD. These persons
are also required to furnish the Company with copies of all Section 16(a) forms
they file. These requirements commenced upon the effective date of the Company's
SB-2/A-7 registration statement. Therefore, as of the date of this Annual Report
on Form 10-KSB, these persons have been subject to the requirements of Section
16(a). We have informed these persons of their obligations under Section 16(a).
Further, we have set up a procedure whereby periodically we will (i) notify
these persons of their Section 16(a) obligations; (ii) review the copies of
Forms 3, 4, and 5 that these persons furnish to the Company; (iii) request
written representations from them that no other transactions were required; and
(iv) make a determination that the pertinent officers, directors and principal
shareholders have complied with all applicable Section 16(a) requirements during
the fiscal year.  We are not aware of
any reporting persons who filed late reports or failed to file appropriate
reports.  DIRECTOR AND OFFICER
LIABILITY LIMITATION. Our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, limit the
personal liability of directors, officers and the shareholders to the full
extent allowed by Nevada law. This is a risk factor that an investor or
potential investor should consider because it means that a disgruntled or
injured investor's remedies may not be as significant or meaningful as might
otherwise be the case in the absence of these statutory and common law
protections.  CODE OF ETHICS  We have adopted a Code
of Ethics which is attached to this report as Exhibit 14.  See Item 13
below.     ITEM 10.
 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION  Compensation of Directors and
Executive Officers  Because our officers
and directors are the same persons, we are discussing both categories of persons
together under this disclosure item. This includes those persons referred to
under Item 402 of Regulation S-B as "Named Executive Officers." We have paid no
remuneration to our directors or officers, other than the fact that each bought
restricted shares of our stock in August 2004 and in December 2006 at $0.05
per share in order to provide us with sufficient operating or working capital to
file and complete the Spin-Off transaction and otherwise carry out the terms and
conditions of the Distribution Agreement with Tintic-Utah. We do NOT have any
contracts with or contractual arrangements for compensation of directors or
officers. We also do NOT pay any monetary fees or other form of cash
compensation for their services. Directors and officers are entitled to receive
reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses incurred by them on behalf of us.
Because none of our officers or directors has received individual total annual
salary and bonus in excess of $100,000 for any fiscal year, we have NOT included
a table under this item describing such compensation as would otherwise be
required. Such compensation, if it had occurred, would include the dollar value
of base salaries and bonus awards, the number and value of stock options
granted, and any other compensation, if any, none of which occurred.  No Retirement,
Pension or Profit Sharing Plans  At present, our
directors and officers do NOT receive any award of options, warrants, or stock
appreciation rights (SAR's) for their services. There are no retirement,
pension, or profit sharing plans for the benefit of officers, directors or key
employees as of the date of this filing.   No Stock Incentive Plan  We have NOT adopted a
stock incentive plan to provide deferred stock incentives to key employees, if
any, and directors, who contribute significantly to our long- term performance
and growth. This does not mean that we may not do so in the future. If one is
established, the board will be authorized to amend and rescind any rules and
regulations relating to any stock incentive plan as may be necessary for
efficient administration of any such stock incentive plan. Any board action will
require a majority vote of the members of the board.  Three types of awards
would likely be available under any stock incentive plan, if adopted:  * nonqualified stock
options or incentive stock,  * stock appreciation
rights and  * restricted stock.   48    No shares of our common stock have yet been reserved to be issued
under any stock incentive plan.  Restricted
Stock  The board may in its
discretion award common stock.  If so, it would have restrictions on its
transferability. Restricted stock issued as part of any stock incentive plan may
not be sold, assigned, transferred, pledged, hypothecated or otherwise disposed
of, except by the laws of descent and distribution, for a period of time as
determined by the board, from the date on which the award is granted.
Certificates for restricted stock will bear an appropriate legend referring to
the restrictions. A holder of restricted stock may exercise all rights of
ownership incident to his ownership including the right to vote and receive
dividends, unless the board has imposed limitations.    ITEM 11.
 SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT.  The following table
sets forth the beneficial ownership of our common stock with respect each person
known to be the owner of 5% or more of our common capital stock, each director,
each officer, and all executive officers, directors and 5% or greater
shareholders of the Company as a group. As of December 31, 2007, there were
2,109,643 common capital shares issued and outstanding.   Name of
Beneficial Owner
Number of
Shares of Common Stock Beneficially* Owned
Percent of
Ownership of Common Stock outstandingGeorge
Christopulos
3131 Teton
Drive
Salt Lake
City, Utah 84109
660,739(2)
31.3%Hugh
Coltharp(3)
1478
Roosevelt Avenue
Salt Lake
City, Utah 84105
155,361(4)
7.4%Jack Coombs
(5)
2581 East
1300 South
Salt Lake
City, Utah 84108
359,272(6)
17.0%John
Michael Coombs (7)
3098 South
Highland Drive, Suite #323
Salt Lake
City, Utah 84106
495,212(8)
23.5%All 5% or
more owners, all directors and all officers as a group (4 persons)
1,670,584
79.2%   * Beneficial ownership
is determined in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Commission and
generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. Shares
of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options or warrants currently
exercisable, or exercisable or convertible within 60 days of our year end, are
also deemed outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of the person
holding such options or warrants but are not deemed outstanding for computing
the percentage ownership of any other person.  (1) Mr. Christopulos
is the president of the Company and the chairman of the board. He has been
president of the Company since its inception in March 2004.  Mr.
Christopulos served as president and chairman of the board of the Companys
predecessor previously known as Tintic-Utah from approximately 1981 until March
2004.  (2) Of these 660,739
shares, 168,079 were received in November 2006 by Mr. Christopulos as a stock
dividend and, being registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these
shares bear a control person legend.  The certificates representing the
remaining 492,660 shares bear a standard restrictive legend.  (3) Mr. Coltharp is
the secretary/treasurer of the Company and a director.  He has been
secretary/treasurer and a director of the Company since its inception in March
2004.  Mr. Coltharp served as secretary/treasurer of the Companys
predecessor  49    previously known as Tintic-Utah from approximately 1981 until
March 2004.  (4) Of these 155,361
shares, 17,429 were received by Mr. Coltharp as a stock dividend and, being
registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these shares bear a control
person legend.  The certificates representing the remaining 137,932 shares
bear a standard restrictive legend.  (5) Mr. Jack Coombs is
the vice president and a director of the Company.  He has been vice
president and a director of the Company since its inception in March 2004.
 Mr. Coombs served as vice president and a director of the Companys
predecessor previously known as Tintic-Utah from approximately 1981 until March
2004.  (6) Of these 359,272
shares, 104,627 were received in November 2006 by Mr. Coombs as a stock dividend
and, being registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these shares bear
a control person legend.  The certificates representing the remaining
254,645 shares bear a standard restrictive legend.  This figure of
359,272 shares also represents or includes 13,329 shares that were held in a
securities brokerage account on the record date of the spin-off, namely, March
 5, 2004, and which were subject to the November 2006 stock dividend.
 These 13,329 dividend shares, however, have not as yet been placed in Mr.
Jack Coombss brokerage account because they cannot, at present, be located.
 When they are, they will be placed in such brokerage account and treated
as control shares.  (7) Mr. J. Michael
Coombs is an attorney and has acted as our legal counsel since our inception.
 He also acted as legal counsel to our predecessor, Tintic-Utah, from
approximately 1994 until March 2004 when its name was changed and it engaged in
a change of control transaction with Kiwa.  He is not and never has served
as an officer or director of us or our predecessor, Tintic-Utah.  Mr. J.
Michael Coombs is the son of director and officer, Jack Coombs.  (8) Of these 495,212
shares, 280,449 were received in November 2006 by Mr. J.M. Coombs as a stock
dividend and, being registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these
shares bear a control person legend.  The certificates representing the
remaining 214,763 shares bear a standard restrictive legend.  This figure of 495,212
shares also represents or includes 1,950 shares that were held in a securities
brokerage account on the record date of the spin-off, namely, March  5,
2004, and which were subject to the November 2006 stock dividend.  These
1,950 dividend shares, however, have not as yet been placed in Mr. J.M. Coombss
brokerage account because they cannot, at present, be located.  When they
are, they will be placed in such brokerage account and treated as control
shares.    ITEM 12. CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.  Related
Transactions.  We have not been a
party to any transaction, or proposed transaction, in which any director,
executive officer, or principal shareholder had or will have a direct or
indirect material interest, where:  (1) the amount
involved in the transaction or series of similar transactions exceeds $60,000;
or (2) the person's interest arises solely from the
ownership of our securities, and the person receives no extra or special benefit
not shared equally (pro rata) by all holders of the same class of
securities.  Our Board of Directors
has not adopted or approved any policy regarding future transactions with
related third parties.  This is because the Revised Nevada Statutes
governing corporations contains provisions which address and govern these types
of issues.  No Parent or
Subsidiary.  We have no parent or
subsidiary corporations at the present time which might create related
transactions.  Transactions with
Promoters and Control Persons.  During our fiscal year
ended December 31, 2007, there were no related transactions between such persons
and the Company.  However, our three officers
and directors, and one shareholder, did, however, loan or advance us a total of
$15,000 in 2008 to meet our current obligations.  This amount is or will be
carried on our books as a payable.  While our insiders have in the past
contributed money as an equity investment, we decided that this time the money
needed would be loaned or advanced by such persons and we would not issue
additional shares as an equity investment in us.    ITEM 13. EXHIBITS
AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.   Reports on
Form 8-K.   50    None.  Exhibits.  14
         Code of Ethics  31.1
      302 Certification of George Christopulos  31.2
      302 Certification of Hugh Coltharp  32
         906 Certification of both
George Christopulos and Hugh Coltharp  99.1
      Index Map*  99.2
      Property Location Map*  * Exhibits identified with this mark
are attached to and made a part of this document in the form of pdf files.  The following
Exhibits are incorporated by reference as a part of this Annual Report on Form
10-KSB:  3.1
        Articles of Incorporation, which
were filed as an exhibit to our Form SB-2/A registration statement  3.2
        Bylaws, which were filed as an
exhibit to our Form SB-2/A registration statement    ITEM 14.
 PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES  AUDIT AND
NON-AUDIT FEES   Aggregate fees for professional services rendered for us by
Pritchett Siler & Hardy are set forth below.  The aggregate fees
included in the Audit category are fees billed for the fiscal years for the
audit of our annual financial statements and review of financial statements and
statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.  The aggregate fees
included in each of the other categories are fees billed in the fiscal years.
 (All reference to $ in this Annual Report are to United States
dollars.)  FISCAL YEAR
2007
FISCAL YEAR
2006AUDIT
FEES
$
                   9,200
$
                 6,499AUDIT-RELATED
FEES
$
                          -
$
                         -TAX
FEES
$
                          -
$
                         -ALL OTHER
FEES
$
                          -
$
                         -TOTAL
$
                   9,200
$
                  6,499  Audit fees for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006,
were for professional services rendered for the audits of the consolidated
financial statements of the Company, quarterly review of the financial
statements included in Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, consents, and other
assistance required to complete the year end audit of the consolidated financial
statements.  Audit-Related Fees as of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2007
and 2006 were for assurance and related services reasonably related to the
performance of the audit or review of financial statements and not reported
under the caption Audit Fees.  Tax
Fees as of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 were for
professional services related to tax compliance, tax authority audit support and
tax planning.  There were no fees that were classified as All Other Fees as of
the fiscal years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006.  As
we do not have a formal audit committee (see end of Item 9 above), the services
described above were not approved by the audit committee under the de minimus
exception provided by Rule 2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) under Regulation S-X.  Further,
as we do not have a formal audit committee, we do not have audit committee
pre-approval policies and procedures.    51    SIGNATURES  In accordance with the
provisions of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules and
regulations promulgated thereunder, Tintic Gold Mining Company has duly caused
this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2007,
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  TINTIC GOLD MINING
COMPANY, Issuer  /s/
George P. Christopulos George
P. Christopulos Chairman
of the Board, President, CEO And
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Dated:
March 21, 2008  /s/Hugh
N. Coltharp Hugh
N. Coltharp Secretary/Treasurer
and director Dated:
 March 21, 2008               52