What with the cost of damage from the riots and their histories of not living within their means, blue states and cities are finding themselves drowning in red ink.
The solution is predictable: just squeeze taxpayers more.
Squeezing the taxpayer may be the obvious part, but a draconian measure on a proposal for a California wealth tax is nothing short of astonishing.
You probably already have heard of the California proposal. It would be a 4 percent tax on the net worth of those with more than $30 million and would hit about 34,000 people.
Whew! That won’t hit me, you’re saying.
But one feature of the bill is outlandish and, if it set a precedent for other taxes, it could impair the freedom and mobility of citizens. You see heretofore we have a choice on where to live and pay our taxes. But the California proposal is special: moving a way won’t help. California would tax you even if fled for fairer taxes elsewhere.
Bonta added that his proposal would apply a “phased-in approach” to make sure Sacramento recoups its share of the income of a California resident who leaves the state.
‘If you move in Year One, 90% of the tax bill applies…’ he said, adding that the following year it drops to 80% and so on until it is phased out to zero.
Bonta argued that the state deserves part of the wealth accumulated in the state:
‘For ten years, the wealth was accumulated during their time in California … and that is what we’re proposing in our bill. We believe we can do that, certainly we’re open to dialogue and discussion as we move the bill forward, but we think it’s a sound approach and has a strong legal foundation,’ said Bonta.
But, hey, if you earned your wealth elsewhere . . .
Meanwhile, if someone moves to California and is worth more than $30 million, the tax “phases in” in reverse, beginning at 10 percent in the first year.
‘It recognizes that wealth may have been accumulated outside of California,’ the lawmaker said.
‘Our [population of] millionaires and billionaires has grown, our economy has grown. I don’t think the image of folks fleeing has panned out, I don’t think it’s historically true.’
Bonta must have missed the California exodus that has both rich and middle-income residents seeking lower taxes. Cavuto pointed out that the rich who flee would become “prisoners of California.” Cavuto also questioned the legality of such a law.
Meanwhile, Minneapolis, ground zero for the George Floyd protest and riots, also has a novel scheme to stick it to the very people whose property was destroyed in the riots.
The city of Minneapolis is requiring businesses destroyed by the recent riots to pre-pay their 2020 property taxes before they can even officially demolish and rebuild their businesses.
The city allowed these businesses to be destroyed, and now wants a ransom from the very people they victimized. When do the business owners start rioting, or at the very least, packing up and leaving?
This is so outrageous.
Quoting from published reports, Legal Insurrection explains that we are talking about significant amounts of money:
Most property owners must pay $35,000 to $100,000 to clear their sites of debris, with larger tracts — such as strip shopping centers — costing as much as $400,000, according to property owners. That doesn’t include the money those owners must pay to get their permits.
On average, the owners of properties destroyed or significantly damaged owe $25,000 in taxes for the second half of 2020, which come due in October, according to a Star Tribune review of county property records.
Minneapolis elected officials stood by and allowed their city being destroyed—and now they want somebody else to pay the (exorbitant) price of their folly.