Wealthy Install Location-Tracking Apps to Establish Proof-of-Residency for Tax Purposes (nytimes.com) 193
The New York Times shares the dilemma of Jeff Sheu, managing director of a private equity firm, who is "exactly the type of high earner California does not want to lose. When people in his tax bracket leave, the state is likely to audit them to make sure they really have left."
But fortunately, there's an app for that: With the May 17 tax filing deadline approaching, people who have moved to another state or are working more remotely need to be extra vigilant with their tax documents. For Mr. Sheu, that involves an app on his smartphone that uses location services to track him all the time. What he is sacrificing in privacy, he is gaining in peace of mind, knowing he will be able to show exactly when and where he was in a particular state, should California's tax authority come after him... "I'm never apart from my phone," Mr. Sheu said... "It feels to me like a pretty undebatable way to track where I am...."
Tax apps like TaxBird — which Mr. Sheu uses — and TaxDay and Monaeo were created years ago... "We've seen a fourfold increase in our app without any advertising in the past year," said Jonathan Mariner, founder and president of TaxDay, who was himself audited when he worked for Major League Baseball in New York but lived in Florida. "When people are concerned about privacy, I say you probably have a dozen apps on your phone that are tracking you, and you don't even know it...." Monaeo makes a point of describing how the data is cataloged — city, state and country, but without specific locations. It also says upfront that it does not share any data. (All three of the apps are vigilant about that.) While each tax app has different levels of precision and features to upload supporting documents, they all fulfill the basic need to prove your location to a tax authority. When it comes time to file taxes, users download reports detailing where they worked with varying degrees of specificity, from a simple day count to more detailed location information...
With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, states in need of revenue are not going to let the money go without a fight. "This has the potential to become as messy as you can envision it," said Dustin Grizzle, a tax partner at MGO, an accounting firm. "States are going to say, 'Hey you're just using Covid to give you the ability to work remotely.'"
But fortunately, there's an app for that: With the May 17 tax filing deadline approaching, people who have moved to another state or are working more remotely need to be extra vigilant with their tax documents. For Mr. Sheu, that involves an app on his smartphone that uses location services to track him all the time. What he is sacrificing in privacy, he is gaining in peace of mind, knowing he will be able to show exactly when and where he was in a particular state, should California's tax authority come after him... "I'm never apart from my phone," Mr. Sheu said... "It feels to me like a pretty undebatable way to track where I am...."
Tax apps like TaxBird — which Mr. Sheu uses — and TaxDay and Monaeo were created years ago... "We've seen a fourfold increase in our app without any advertising in the past year," said Jonathan Mariner, founder and president of TaxDay, who was himself audited when he worked for Major League Baseball in New York but lived in Florida. "When people are concerned about privacy, I say you probably have a dozen apps on your phone that are tracking you, and you don't even know it...." Monaeo makes a point of describing how the data is cataloged — city, state and country, but without specific locations. It also says upfront that it does not share any data. (All three of the apps are vigilant about that.) While each tax app has different levels of precision and features to upload supporting documents, they all fulfill the basic need to prove your location to a tax authority. When it comes time to file taxes, users download reports detailing where they worked with varying degrees of specificity, from a simple day count to more detailed location information...
With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, states in need of revenue are not going to let the money go without a fight. "This has the potential to become as messy as you can envision it," said Dustin Grizzle, a tax partner at MGO, an accounting firm. "States are going to say, 'Hey you're just using Covid to give you the ability to work remotely.'"
Meh. (Score:4, Informative)
That *someone* who *says* they are this rich dude trying to evade taxes are actually this rich dude trying to evade taxes is or is not proven by some random app on a phone that may or nay not actually be in this shiftless rich dudeâ(TM)s possession.
Re:Meh. (Score:5, Informative)
Working in one place rather than another, and paying the taxes due because of that, is not tax evasion. It's called following the tax laws. Working from one place specifically to reduce how much tax one owes is a form of tax avoidance, not tax evasion.
Owning property (Score:2)
Owning property and deriving income from a rental unit or a factory can be a test of deriving income from a state.
I am pretty sure that if you get rental income from another state, you have the hassle of filing income tax in two states and jumping through the hoops on claiming the tax paid on all of your income as a credit against the tax paid in the other state.
Re:Owning property (Score:4, Interesting)
I have an office building in California. One of my tenants has their HQ in Colorado and I get paid rent from HQ. Of course I pay tax in California on my rental income. However, Colorado came after me for tax and it took about a year to convince them that I didn't owe CO tax.
Re: (Score:2)
Owning property and deriving income from a rental unit or a factory can be a test of deriving income from a state.
Which is why you assign ownership of those properties to a property maintenance business, use that to offset a lot of the tax burden and pay yourself in dividends at a lower tax rate.
Re: Meh. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
There's still a substantial amount of evidence needed to show "credible evidence" that you've left the state, and that can be complicated for the random rich guy who just wants to switch their residence for tax purposes, but doesn't actually disrupt their lives a lot by selling their residence, re-titling their car, changing addresses on forms/records/paperwork, etc.
Auditors will examine your property ownership, bank records, property ownership (cars, boats, etc), and so on. Unless you actually leave, say,
Re: Meh. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's usually easier than all that to change your domicile [investopedia.com] for tax purposes. A home purchase (or rental agreement) and moving van is one good indicator. For people who are moving between homes that they already own: Have account statements and bills sent only to your new domicile, get a driver's license and register to vote there, have a spending record that shows you are buying stuff at your new domicile rather than your old one. It also helps to avoid owning any residence in repressive states like New York and California.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but the high net worth people who want to do this often have substantial interests in their "old" home state that they don't want to give up -- business interests, homes, and actually will still end up spending a lot of time in their former home state.
Their income combined with their persistent ties makes it harder for them to just do it all on paper. Their state of origin will audit them and subpoena records to challenge a paper move as a sham arrangement.
You and I can change domiciles easy because
Re: (Score:2)
IANAL, but to my knowledge, there is no "dual residency" You're legally a resident of only one state at a time. You can have property in multiple states, but you're still only a resident of one, though you may have to pay property, or rental income taxes to others.
TV and Naivety != Reality (Score:2)
In real life, you get one chance to defend yourself. You know what evidence the other side may bring up, but you'll be looking at mountains of it. And, if your lawyer is any good, you will present mountains to them. All before the actual trial.
Re: TV and Naivety != Reality (Score:2)
Re: Meh. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At the federal level, per 26 U.S. Code  7491 - [cornell.edu], the burden of proof is on the government if the taxpayer presented credible evidence disputing the IRS's determination.
The problem is that the standard is still "preponderance of evidence". So it's entirely possible for you and the IRS both present evidence and the for the court to take the IRS's side.
I know several rich people who have leased apartments in SF but who moved to Nevada. One of them had to jump through quite a few hoops to prove the residency, she had to show utility bills demonstrating that her apartment in SF was unoccupied and to show multiple tickets with Las Vegas listed as the departure point.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Rich dude gives phone with tracking app installed to his gardener in lowest taxed state where he has a holiday home....profit!
Re: (Score:2)
Tax office: "Ring ring motherfucker! Facetime NOW!"
Re: Meh. (Score:2)
One word: VPN
Or three letters: V P N
Or three words: Vee Pee Enn
Whatever. You get the point.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're rich enough, it could be well worth an in-person visit.
Re: (Score:2)
VPN + Fake Traveler app or similar. If this works on governments I expect there will be an Ugland House for people soon, where all the rich supposedly live according to their app data.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Rich dude pays somebody to carry around "his" phone.
E-Z tax fraud - what could possibly go wrong?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The state is welcome to provide evidence that he was in fact working in the state.
Re: (Score:2)
Old information. They use small diameter bombs to get rid of anonymous cowards nowadays. Cheaper, less collateral damage and can be wielded from a number of manned or unmanned hunter-killer platforms.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
I don't need to. Israel is one of the biggest users of said weapon.
And for the latest, it's pretty clear at this point that Al Jazeera and AP offices sitting in the building were used as a human shield for HAMAS operations. Which is why Israel gave prior notice ensuring that all journalists could evaculate the building before hitting it.
As for war crimes, are you sure you want to go down that path my dear Chinese propaganda troll? You are literally the only people currently engaging in a "never again" style
Re: (Score:2)
Are you telling us that anonymous cowards on slashdot are actually buildings?
Holy shit, that's new information. Tell me more!
Re: (Score:2)
From the linked post:
>They use small diameter bombs to get rid of anonymous cowards nowadays. (as a reply to an AC post).
We're now talking about a destroyed building with zero killed, as everyone evacuated it due to Israel giving prior warning. So by your logic, Anonymous Coward posters are buildings.
So tell me more!
Re: (Score:2)
SDBs are not special you dumbass. They're very common today, in part specifically because Israel showed just how effective they are at killing specific targets with far less collateral damage.
And oh noes, they destroyed some journalist's equipment. CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. Unlike Xinjinang where there is totally no genocide. It's all about teaching poor, dumb Turkics how to work like a proper communist.
Relevant:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1... [twimg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
But I like expending the time of the professional propaganda troll. It's kind of like laughing at the feeder on the opposing side in a MOBA. He's an idiot, he tanked his team, and he doesn't even know it.
And he's bitching at you because you just fed off him like you're a God.
Regardless, I already linked you that twitter meme on topic twice. It's still relevant.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad you now admit that HAMAS was in the building, but I'm interested in your sources that it was HAMAS leadership rather than just another launch point/logistics/materiel base.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine ignoring all that nice footage of rockets fired from Gaza all across all those same news sources like BBC....
To bitch about a single twitter post having a wrong image attached to it.
Quality content there.
Re: (Score:2)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1... [twimg.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Would Amnesty International be acceptable as a source?
https://www.amnesty.org/downlo... [amnesty.org]
>The Israeli authorities’ denial of access to the Gaza Strip for international human rights researchers has made documenting and verifying specific violations by Palestinian armedgroups during the conflict more difficult. Nevertheless, there is substantial evidence that some of the military operations and conduct of Palestinian armed groups during the July/August 2014 conflict endangered civilians in the Gaza Str
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, so standard for evidence is now "it must be gathered, collated and presented from current conflict, while it's ongoing or it doesn't count"?
Your desperate screeching, and inability to even decide if they're targeting "journalists" or "gear of journalists" is about as hilarious as this new and interesting standard for evidence.
States... (Score:4)
Yeah, so what? The rules are based on time spent and for what purpose. "Why" has nothing to do with it.
Why does this smell like... (Score:2)
...an app that Greed pays developers handsomely for...to meet the omni-present need of avoiding taxes.
(Greed) "Hey, look over here, an app that says we're being honest...pinky swear!"
Yup. No fucking chance tax dodging is damn near a full-time hobby during a global pandemic when billionaires become richer...after all, no one has spare time on their hands..
Re: (Score:2)
Do you pay more taxes than you are required to pay? Is that tax avoidance or trying to follow the law?
I could agree that our tax laws are a dumpster fire and mainly setup to help rich people fuck over everyone at all times. But following those laws is the right thing to do. And if you can't prove the things you claim then you are completely fucked at audit time. And if you move around between states then all of those states claim you owe them and not all the other states - so you have to have evidence to p
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I would posit the "GREED" is that of states that try to charge too much taxes on their citizens, so much so that they want to move out.
And there should be no such need for things like this, as that 100% of the preponderance of proof that a person
Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or CA (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine living in a state so petty, so controlling, like NY or CA.. who actively punish - or at least try to - people who leave those states forever.
It's almost like stories of the Iron Curtain, where you weren't allowed to leave Communist countries, except in a pine box.
Almost.
Re: (Score:2)
Look, giving away our shrinking supply of Soylent is a crime against humanity.
Re:Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It appears that no one defending California's tax policies here is aware of A.B. 2088, which would establish a global wealth tax on anyone who ever spent at least 60 consecutive days in the state, regardless of their state (or country) of residence. Go to school in California and move home to Montana or Japan after graduation? Come to California for medical treatment and stay for a long recovery? Spend a couple of months touring the state and visiting relatives? You'd owe tax to California for the next ten
Re: Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:2)
Where do they get off trying to impose a wealth tax on visitors?
That it only applies to people with $30m in assets doesn't make it alright.
That it only applies to anyone that stays two months in CA doesn't make it right.
And that it is only 0.4% doesn't make it right.
The principle is pernicious - A wealth tax, on world-wide holdings, no matter where in The world you reside?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, they can then pursue people for tax evasion, hold them in prison on remand for a couple of years waiting for the court case, then they owe the full amount for two years.
At this point it doesn't even matter whether the trial finds guilt or not.
Re:Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:5, Informative)
Except they aren't punishing people who leave the state. They're punishing people who lie about leaving the state, when they haven't left the state at all, in order to evade taxes.
Read up on Gilbert P. Hyatt. He sold his house in California and moved to Nevada after he started making a lot of money off of semiconductor patents. California decided he didn't *really* move to Nevada (he did, they couldn't provide any evidence that he didn't) and tried to bill him for hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. It took him 25 years to win his appeals, and ended up getting $400 million in damages.
It's getting so bad that states are suing each other over the right to tax people.
Re:Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine living in a state so petty...
There is nothing petty about stopping tax evaders, also known as criminals. The only people that are crying about this seem to be the egocentric wealthy class because there is nothing new about this.
It's almost like stories of the Iron Curtain, where you weren't allowed to leave Communist countries, except in a pine box.
Not even close. They are free to leave any time they want and nobody is detaining them. However, they have fiscal responsibilities just like anyone else.
Paying taxes is not a punishment, it is the duty of every citizen to ensure that state (of which they belong and benefit from) continues to function. You are free to go live alone in the woods (plenty of people do) if you feel taxes are a too much of a burden.
Re: Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:2)
Germany for example taxes everyone for income in Germany only, and wants to know about international income to calculate the correct tax rate.
One criteria for good laws is: If everyone else had the same law then everyone would be fine. That would work with the German system, but not the us one.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget that the USA also taxes (and very heavily) non-citizens that are also non-residents, even if they never set foot in the USA.
If you invest in the USA from abroad, you pay 35% tax on your earnings.
Have a corporation in the USA? It pays 35% (or 21%?) corporate tax. Want to transfer that money to yourself? Tax.
Now: you are a citizen of the USA and want to do these two things? Your tax rate is lower AND you can deduce other things and pay much less.
Re: (Score:2)
If you invest in the USA from abroad, you pay 35% tax on your earnings.
Nah. In the UK you fill in a form, pay no US tax and inform HMRC of your US based income. They charge you UK tax on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Duty is only feels as real as you believe it to be.
Which is exactly why we have codified duties like paying taxes into law. It turns out there are people with antisocial behaviors that would rather see the world burn than to part with a single cent.
Re: (Score:2)
Duty is only feels as real as you believe it to be.
Which is exactly why we have codified duties like paying taxes into law. It turns out there are people with antisocial behaviors that would rather see the world burn than to part with a single cent.
It turns out that authoritative assholes who want to control the way everyone lives, think we should all be beholden to whatever social experiment they're running this month, and we should be made to pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
It turns out that authoritative assholes who want to control the way everyone lives, think we should all be beholden to whatever social experiment they're running this month, and we should be made to pay for it.
You are free to move to another state, country, or just go live in the woods. Nobody is forcing you to stay.
Re: (Score:2)
I've lived in several and two other countries, all while paying taxes here. I have no intention of leaving just because some utopian idiots want to turn the US in to a socialist paradise. By the way, I'm also free to fight against such idiocy. I fully intend to be here until my last breath annoying them in any way that I can.
Re: (Score:2)
You are free to fight and whine but you are not free to defraud the government. Good luck.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is the definition of "continues to function" has gotten pretty wide in many states. I would argue half of the state expenses go way beyond "functioning".
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is the definition of "continues to function" has gotten pretty wide in many states.
It's not a problem since you can always move to another state, country or into the woods. If you do not like the society you are in then you are free to leave it. You may not have all the same nice things in your new location but that's part of the bargain.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is the definition of "continues to function" has gotten pretty wide in many states.
It's not a problem since you can always move to another state, country or into the woods. If you do not like the society you are in then you are free to leave it. You may not have all the same nice things in your new location but that's part of the bargain.
Now that states like Massachusetts have passed a policy that remote workers are still taxed as if they live and work in the state, it makes it harder to live in the woods of another state. This is my experience and until the Supreme Court rules on the case I have no recourse to get tax relief. Unless I quit my job.
Re: (Score:2)
Now that states like Massachusetts have passed a policy that remote workers are still taxed as if they live and work in the state, it makes it harder to live in the woods of another state
Living in the woods was meant to imply that you are apart from society. You would have to do everything yourself, include find water, find/build shelter, and gather/hunt food. When interfacing with any society, you have to abide by the rules of said society or risk drawing their wrath. Nothing has changed about that since the dawn of man.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A pack of cigarettes in NYC costs three times what it would in Georgia because the city wants to punish people for smoking, not because it needs that extra $10 per pack in order to function. Any tax directed at discouraging behavior is punitive, right?
Specific taxes like that could be construed as punitive but they were created with the intent of modifying behavior, not to punish. The cigarette tax has been shown to be effective in stopping the poor from smoking which improves their health.
Even if you think that's all bullshit, in general taxes are not punitive.
Re:Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:5, Insightful)
This has nothing to do with people who legitimately leave the state. The issue is many rich people in California are claiming to move out of state while maintaining a residence in the state. They want to avoid the taxes so they buy a house in another state and claim that is their primary residence while still spending most of their time in California. These people are committing fraud to avoid taxes, which is illegal. If people move out of state and legitimately live out of state, that is fine, that is not what is being targeted. These are the exact people they should be going after, people with money who are illegally avoiding taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
And clearly there is a problem where people who have left the State are being targeted, that's why the app in question and this discussion exist.
Re: (Score:3)
You think it's an accident that states which are home to some of the most well-known financially sleazy industries might be extra vigilant about people pulling sneaky accounting tricks?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine living in a state so petty, so controlling
like every state in the world. This isn't even uniquely American. Don't for a moment pretend that the government isn't out to collect your taxes, especially if it thinks you're just going to hand them over to someone else. I had to prove to the tax authorities that I worked in different country last year. The answer there was to hand over my license plate details so they could check the border records and sure enough my exit and entry times (Monday and Friday) magically matched the diary I submitted.
But hec
Imagine being so petty (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are states being petty if they really don't move.
Are they still seeing doctors and dentists in their old state? Does their family celebrate holidays there? Where do they keep their most treasured items — their photo albums, family heirlooms, pets? Where’s their safe-deposit box?
When the answer to most of those questions is the old state, then it seems like a good case for tax fraud to me.
Re:Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:5, Interesting)
Yep, this is what I was going to say. The feds set the standard here. You leave the country and they still claim the right to tax your income, proving that the government sees us as possessions, not as people. Then people want to complain that some states do the same? This is literally the standard.
With that said, fuck CA's greedy overreach just as much as the federal overreach. They fucked me over hard on money I made after moving to TX. They went so far as to garnish my wages. I filed, proving that they owed me, not the other way around, and of course they kept the money they took from me. Fucking thieves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Imagine living in a state so petty, like NY or (Score:4, Insightful)
Coming soon to an interrogation room near you: (Score:3)
"Well maybe if you really wanted us to believe you were nowhere near the scene of the crime you would have installed PoliceBird on your phone. Book him."
Or how about the shitlord school superintendent remix? "Our shitty facial recognition tech didn't see your face in school during midterms week. The tests you completed that week may have been taken by one of your friends, and the attendance sheets may have been faked. Since you didn't install TruantBird on your phone we have no choice but to issue you a failing grade for the semester and recommend placement in one of our "alternative" schools for flunkies and degenerates like yourself."
Google Maps (Score:2)
why buy an app when Google maps does the same thing for free,
Still salty about SALT (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No thanks, I'd rather live in a first-world country. That means, north of the Mason-Dixon line, and probably closer to the coasts.
Those cheaper states have:
shutdown major roads due to bridge cracking
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/i... [cbsnews.com]
Lost their power grid in a cold snap. Can't remember the last time my area of NY NY lost more than 10 minutes...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Sewage issues,
https://www.ajc.com/news/local... [ajc.com]
along with shithouse education standards compared to the northeast.
And by the way, Flori
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Still salty about SALT (Score:5, Informative)
Those deep blue states got away with decades of not paying their fair share until Trump capped SALT Federal income tax deductions at a reasonable level.
No, the deep blue states paid way MORE than their fair share. The federal government doesn't exist to serve itself. It exists to serve the people. Therefore, you would expect that, on average, each state should get comparable benefits from the money that it sends to the federal government. But in practice, those deep blue states get back much less in benefits than they pay in taxes, and the deep red states get back much more. As a result, the deep blue states have to make up for that deficit by charging more in state taxes, because the federal government is screwing them and the red states are leeching off of them.
The blue states aren't having tax problems because of bad policies in their states (ignoring Prop 13). They're charging higher taxes because they have to make up for all the federal funding that they don't get so that the federal government can bail out all the red states that can't afford to pay their bills. The Republicans couldn't figure out how to run their states well enough for them to be successful, so they capped the SALT tax exemption so that they could further leech off of the states that could.
The only thing the blue states ask in return for their benevolence is that residents not be taxed on money that was never theirs (because it was paid to the state). There's no rational reason to cap that limit. It's all about spite and jealousy.
Re: (Score:2)
THIS a thousand times THIS....
NY only gets back 2/3 of the money it gives to the Feds.... which makes me wonder what they hell am I paying for some hick states that can't support themselves but they go all flag-waving "Hurr Durr "Murrica Freedumbs..."
I thing Texas leaving the Union would be a good start, but let's not forget Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia
Re: (Score:3)
By contrast, I don't have a problem with it. Those states are poor because their primary business is growing our food, which has limited potential for creating a a $3.2 Trillion Gross State Product like California does, and if they were taxed more, they'd indirectly be taxing us anyway in the price of food, which basically means taxing the poor disproportionately. I'd much rather have a progressive income tax, where the wealthy pay disproportionately, than a massively regressive tax on food.
What I do min
Re: (Score:2)
Also, no Red States are being bailed out by the Federal government. Several Blue States, like NY and California, are. Georgia has a balanced budget and a rainy-day fund. When was the last time NY wasn't running a deficit?
Re: (Score:3)
The only thing the blue states ask in return for their benevolence is that residents not be taxed on money that was never theirs (because it was paid to the state). There's no rational reason to cap that limit. It's all about spite and jealousy.
LOL! Fuck your "benevolence" and smug arrogance.
You want to talk about smug arrogance? It's the height of arrogance to tell people who are already paying half their income in taxes that that they aren't paying enough in taxes, all while their red state suckles from the federal government's teat to the tune of up to $8k per person more than they pay in federal taxes so that they don't have to tax their own citizens enough to keep the state afloat. It's not our fault that your incompetently run state government doesn't tax its citizens enough to pay its
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cry your tears as lose your tax base and your seats in Congress.
Hah. Keep believing your right-wing fantasy that California will somehow lose enough taxes to matter. In 2020, California lost only 0.46% of its population in a year when probably a quarter of the state was able to work from wherever they wanted, including from other states. The mass migration that the right wingers keep fantasizing will happen is just that — a pure fantasy that could only even be conceived of by someone who has either never lived here or never lived anywhere else but here.
If you'v
Re:Still salty about SALT (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know where you're getting your facts, but you actually have that backwards. The blue states tend to pay more into the feds and get less back. It's the red states that are leeches.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2020-05-15/some-states-like-new-york-send-billions-more-to-federal-government-than-they-get-back
Here's a list.
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700
Here's a top 10. https://www.moneyrates.com/research-center/federal-income-taxes-by-state.htm
Wikipedia shows the actual revenue collected from each state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
Here's a list of the return per dollar paid.
https://smartasset.com/taxes/states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2020
If the deep blue states actually got back what they put in, then they wouldn't be trying to make up for it so much at the state level. The people of red states that rail against the subsidies sure love getting their own subsidies, but complain when other people try to get back their own fair share.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But that's irrelevant because I know you don't believe what you're saying. If you did, you'd be demanding lower Federal taxes and less spending. Are you? You'd be demand
See, smart phone tracking is good for you :P (Score:2)
Spoken as if everyone should happily agree with owning a smart phone and allowing tracking. Obviously the point of this story is to convince people they should.
It seems quite debatable to me. How would one normally adequately prove their location without a smart phone? Exactly why should cell-phone collected data be considered so much more authoritative? Just because smart phones have what
Tax authorities be crazy (Score:2)
I happened to work from home all of last year not for COVID reasons.
One of the taxing jurisdictions with an interest in the company that I work for had procedures and forms in place which assumed that COVID was the only reason you might be working form home. That was fun.
No possibility of fraud here! (Score:2)
Yeah, like rich tech CEOs only have one cell phone, and no way to screw with their supposed location at any given time.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
It's not like people haven't figured out how to hang cloned phones in trees [bloomberg.com] to fool location based services.
Long tradition of chasing high-earners (Score:2)
States are so loathe to lose taxpaying residents that some even charge exit taxes (sell a house in CT and unless you close on another house in CT the same day, you owe an exit tax on the sale of the house). When a wealthy New Yorker moves out of state, the NY tax authorities count the number of days you return to NY state and will try and tax your income if you stay too long.
Sadly, it seems the tax man puts the burden on the filer to prove they were not in a particular state earning wages/working, rather th
High Tax States Should... (Score:2)
...simply build a wall on their borders to keep the citizens from escaping.
Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (Score:3)
It beats being dead for a year for tax purposes.
Re: "The Beating of a Liberal" (Score:2)
He did say jarhead... I think if we had to pick a corp, that's the right one for such behavior? But then again, I don't have any friends in the Marines, so probably just my bias?
Re: (Score:2)
You're off a bit. If you want us to believe some numbers, back them up.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/fe... [fivethirtyeight.com]
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1... [gallup.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like this guy [cnn.com]?
There's on old saying: "One robin does not make a spring." It's a way of saying that your anecdote about a statistical outlier doesn't carry much weight.
And yet, the story proves the point that members of the military would be willing to beat people for political purposes.
You are extrapolating the actions of a few to all members of the military.
So no - it does not prove that people in the military are willing to beat other citizens of their country for their for their political views.
Members of the military are just like all other groupings of people. That means there are all different types.
That does not mean that blanket statements like what you made are any more true than blanket statements against blacks or Mexicans, or any other group that someone is prejudic