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.
It would impose the tax for ten years after the former resident sets up in another state. Assemblyman Rob Bonta, a sponsor of the tax, explained to Neil Cavuto:
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.’
…
…
h/t SG