California Wealth Tax

[DrHenley]

I'm speechless...

Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) made an appearance on “Cavuto: Coast to Coast” Friday to discuss his Wealth Tax proposal. Bonta told Cavuto the tax “affects about 0.15% of the California population — not the top 10%, not the top 1%, the top .15%, about 30,000 people.”
“The California Wealth Tax (AB 2088 as amended) would apply a 0.4% tax on the portion of a taxpayer’s net worth that exceeds $30 million. (approximately 30,400 people),” Bonta’s website says.
Bonta blames coronavirus for creating “inequality” in California, and not previous legislation and policies.
Knowing about the huge outbound migration from California, Cavuto asked what would happen to wealthy people who move out of state. Bonta said tax “avoidance” would not be allowed as California would tax them for the next ten years, despite what state they live in. Bonta said that because they accrued the wealth in California, the state can continue to legally tax it.

California Dems' Wealth Tax Follows People Who Move Out of the State - California Globe

 

[Oddcaliber]

Doesn't this qualify as extortion?

 

[DrHenley]

The way he described it, it is an ex post facto law:

An ex post facto law (corrupted from Latin: ex postfacto, lit. 'out of the aftermath') is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.​

Check Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution...

 

[GeorgiaPeachie]

The way he described it, it is an ex post facto law:

An ex post facto law (corrupted from Latin: ex postfacto, lit. 'out of the aftermath') is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.​

Check Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution...

Of everything I’ve ever witnessed in Cali, this is the worst! There will be legal challenges to this. Count on it.

 

[Morgan101]

I'm not an attorney or a tax accountant, but that sure sounds unconstitutional to me. I wonder how much revenue he expects this law to generate? It is just so wrong on so many levels.

You expect 30,000 people to foot the bill for 40,000,000? Who wants to live in a state where you get punished for being successful? I would be willing to bet the people with that kind of money have teams of lawyers and accountants protecting it, and guarding against this type of legislation. If they can't find a way around it they will move. Good luck trying to collect. Just ask France how it worked for them?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...x-forces-12-000-millionaires-YEAR-France.html

 

[Maverick]

I like california to try it, but I always thought ex post facto pertained to criminal liability not taxes, I've seen taxes collected under retroactive changes, I like to see if the courts will apply ex post facto to the Federal and State tax law.

 

[DrHenley]

A wealth tax in of itself is not ex post facto. But this is:

Bonta said that because they accrued the wealth in California, the state can continue to legally tax it.​

An ex post facto law (corrupted from Latin: ex postfacto, lit. 'out of the aftermath') is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.

If you live in California, and are taxed on wealth you possess while living in California at the time, that is not ex post facto. But if you live elsewhere, and are taxed on wealth that you earned in California before that wealth was taxable, that is ex post facto, and is unconstitutional.

Besides, they are shooting themselves in the foot with that. By making what is taxable depend on where it was earned, a millionaire who earns his wealth elsewhere and then moves to California with it could say that by that stipulation, his wealth is not taxable since it wasn't earned in California.

 

[Maverick]

A wealth tax in of itself is not ex post facto. But this is:

Bonta said that because they accrued the wealth in California, the state can continue to legally tax it.​

An ex post facto law (corrupted from Latin: ex postfacto, lit. 'out of the aftermath') is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.

If you live in California, and are taxed on wealth you possess while living in California at the time, that is not ex post facto. But if you live elsewhere, and are taxed on wealth that you earned in California before that wealth was taxable, that is ex post facto, and is unconstitutional.

Besides, they are shooting themselves in the foot with that. By making what is taxable depend on where it was earned, a millionaire who earns his wealth elsewhere and then moves to California with it could say that by that stipulation, his wealth is not taxable since it wasn't earned in California.

That's why I want california to be challenged on it in court because it is a gray murky area, in the same breath the courts haven't been kind to the tax payer by giving the Feds and States wide latitude on tax collections.

 

[Brittany]

i just heard this yesterday. Can they really do that??? or can citizens fight them to court? so stupid! another way to push more people out of Cali.

 

[Jayson]

Since it only applies to the rich folks then that leaves me out.

 

[Maverick]

Since it only applies to the rich folks then that leaves me out.

Don't count on it, at some point it will trickle down to non-wealthy tax payers.. it's the dems way of doing business!

 

[DrHenley]

Don't count on it, at some point it will trickle down to non-wealthy tax payers.. it's the dems way of doing business!

"The Arab and the Camel" - it is exactly how they operate.

 

[jontte]

shit tends to rain downwards in this world.

 

[DrHenley]

Another way of looking at it, is that Bonta is describing it as a retroactive income tax.

 

[GeorgiaPeachie]

Don't count on it, at some point it will trickle down to non-wealthy tax payers.. it's the dems way of doing business!

They have to get more money from someone to keep up with their FREE stuff to illegals. Free education. Free healthcare. Free food. You get the picture.

 

[grayghost668]

maybe we should just nuke the state and be done with them

 

[Arcticdude]

It sounds fair to me. Only the tax should apply to all Californians. After all they created this mess. I would add one other thing to this law; they can never leave the state. All Californians should be forced to live in the commie state that they made.

 

[Joe SA]

They have to get more money from someone to keep up with their FREE stuff to illegals. Free education. Free healthcare. Free food. You get the picture.

The terms used here is "Leveling The Playing Field", BEE "Black Economic Empowerment", "Affirmative Action", "Confiscation without Compensation". In the USA you are called "White Privilege" here it is "Colonialists". I've heard the terms used like "reparations" over there and some group said "They want Texas." The term used by the commies here for themselves is "Previously Disadvantaged" which will perfectly fit into their narrative over there because their great, great, great grand daddy's where slaves.

 

[Petoski]

The fairest system is to get rid of income tax altogether. I would get rid of corporation tax too and just tax VAT at 1000 percent for all non essentials items. Only basic food ingredients and water are not taxed. Sure it won't be popular but it would sort out a load of problems.

 

[Arcticdude]

"1000%"?!? Are you crazy? How about a flat 10% with no exemptions. If course we all know that any new tax scheme would just be added to what we have now or it would creep up forever.