Taxing the Rich at Your Peril...the states.

[Jiro]

But they are moving. And this is worrying NY where the greater percentage of their tax revenue base comes from rich people who live there. We're talking differences of in the millions, not a few thousand bucks.

Obama Opposite Speak and NY's 'Millionaires' Tax'

ah..... typical of you.... showing me an article from right-wing source.... I looked at its Board of Advisers and it's comical. Anyway, you just further proved my points in my post #5 and #7. That's why Donald Trump, Paris Hilton, and majority of top 1%-er are still residing right here in NY-NJ-CT.

Yeah, they're gonna stay right there and take it. You're playing them to be patsies.

As for favorable tax states:

1. Wyoming
2. South Dakota
3. Nevada
4. Alaska
5. Florida
6. Montana
7. Texas
8. New Hampshire
9. Oregon
10. Delaware
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/bp58.pdf

Guess which top three states are the worse unfavorable tax states and are experiencing budget problems?

Yup. NJ, NY, and CA. Followed by Ohio, RI, Iowa, Vt, Neb, and Minnesota.

Read some more on this:
6 States Hitting Residents With Big Tax Hikes - WSJ.com

I am very aware of this situation. In fact - it's old news. Majority of people who moved to those states are NOT THE DEEP-POCKETED PEOPLE as you claimed because they can easily afford the tax hike but the middle-class people can't. For past few years, there were "exodus" of people moving from NY-NJ to PA and South Carolina. In case you didn't know - NOWHERE in your articles you provided say anything about millionaires packing up and leaving for states with favorable tax laws. calm down - this is only a temporary bump in income tax. they have enjoyed their tax break during GWB Era. Now it's time to pay up!

a homework for you to read - The New Jersey Exodus That Wasn’t

 

[shel90]

Risky business: NY taxes the rich at some peril - Forbes.com

Indeed. A different world.

The rich should be taxed BIG time.

 

[kokonut]

it does not matter. wherever you work, you must pay its income tax - regardless of the location of your residence. NJ-NY income tax is pretty hefty.....

Er, it's not about working. It's your place of domicile that's being taxed. Why do you think Buffalo Sabres owner Tom Golisano moved to Florida and named Florida as his domicile state? NY was taxing him for living in NY....not where you work. A wee bit different here. And with Golisano move to Florida saved him over $5 million a year.

Also, raising taxes in NY is causing businesses to rethink and moving their businesses elsewhere. And causing other companies who were thinking of moving their business to NY not to move there, too.

According to the Manhattan Institute, the wealthiest 1 percent of New Yorkers paid 41 percent of all state income taxes before the new tax rates were approved.

"It's not just who leaves," said the institute's E.J. McMahon. "It's who doesn't come here? Who doesn't start a company here? Who graduates from Columbia and decides to start up a business in Philadelphia so they don't have to share their money with Albany?"

It's people like Nancy Bell.

Bell is moving her Science First manufacturer of scientific products from the Buffalo site her father founded in 1960 to Florida, which aggressively courted her and her two business-partner sons. They are building a new facility there and, with the state's help, had 1,000 applications for 20 jobs.

"It was the higher tax brackets, the so-called millionaire's tax" that forced the move, she said. "We feel we have to look to the future ... I'm leaving wonderful, wonderful friends. It's not our first choice. It's our 100th."

Risky business: NY taxes the rich at some peril - Forbes.com

 

[Jiro]

Here's a blog by a rich guy explaining why he's leaving NY to Florida.


Why I’m Leaving New York (but still trying to change it)

Let's see. $13,800/day * 365 days = 5,037,000. That's certainly more than just a few thousand bucks. Heck, would you move if you could save yourself $5 million dollars a year?

as compared to $100,000,000 they have in their bank account and some extra $10,000,000+ in off-shore accounts?

again - you just further proved my point in my post #5 - "let them bitch all they want. they still ain't going anywhere "

 

[Jiro]

Risky business: NY taxes the rich at some peril - Forbes.com

from the link you provided -

This year, New York's deep-pocketed rich were required to dig even deeper to help shore up state finances.

They now pay higher taxes on their income and on limousines and yachts, more to enter a horse in a race and more to dabble in real estate. Meanwhile, many are losing millions from the closing of business tax loopholes and those making over $1 million are losing tax deductions others get.

do you condone them taking advantage of tax loopholes?

The concern about millionaire flight has prompted some states, including New York, New Jersey and California, to increase the highest tax rates only temporarily. For New York, it's the second temporary increase for high earners since 2001.

calm down. it's only temporary


and again - nothing in this article stated anything definitive like your claim. It's down due to economic recession, filers' extensions, and (ssshhh tax evasion). people move. no big deal.

 

[kokonut]

Considering the fact that the wealthiest 1 percent of New Yorkers paid 41 percent of all NY state income taxes. Remember, 1 percent that paid a very big chunk of NY tax revenues. It wouldn't take much for NY to take a hit from these top 1% wealthiest people who decide to move their place of domicile or even move their businesses elsewhere.

Oh, yeah. They can and have moved their place of domicile. And they have.

 

[kokonut]

from the link you provided -

do you condone them taking advantage of tax loopholes?

and again - nothing in this article stated anything definitive like your claim. It's down due to economic recession, filers' extensions, and (ssshhh tax evasion). people move. no big deal.

Sure. If I can find a way to save money, I'd do it if there is a *LEGAL* loophole. It's quite common. We're taxed enough as it is. It's the govt that need to be held accountable for maintaining their budget instead of continously expand their govt program all the time. This has happened before and people have moved elsewhere to save money.

 

[shel90]

Ok, what's the point of this thread? To bash Obama or the rich?

 

[Jiro]

Considering the fact that the wealthiest 1 percent of New Yorkers paid 41 percent of all NY state income taxes. Remember, 1 percent that paid a very big chunk of NY tax revenues. It wouldn't take much for NY to take a hit from these top 1% wealthiest people who decide to move their place of domicile or even move their businesses elsewhere.

Oh, yeah. They can and have moved their place of domicile. And they have.

yea so? nothing to cry about. It's cyclic nature. Majority of them can afford to sit it out, not middle class people. You haven't shown me anything conclusive or concrete that handful of top 1%'er packed up and moved. You know why? see post #2, 3, 5, 7, 21, and whatever

 

[Jiro]

Sure. If I can find a way to save money, I'd do it if there is a *LEGAL* loophole. It's quite common. We're taxed enough as it is. It's the govt that need to be held accountable for maintaining their budget instead of continously expand their govt program all the time. This has happened before and people have moved elsewhere to save money.

oh yes. I agree.... it was pretty rampant during GWB era. what do you have to say about that?

 

[jillio]

for a very wealthy people.... there are very very very few states to pick.... like Florida, California, New Jersey, and New York. Because of those states, that's why they are very wealthy. It's close to their businesses. Again - they ain't going anywhere. let's see..... losing millions of bucks of revenue or.... few thousand bucks for tax.....

let them bitch all they want. they still ain't going anywhere

Exactly. The states will not be loosing revenue because the people being taxed will not be leaving. I'm sure the individual states took the time to research the effects, both positive and negative, before taking action. I doubt seriously some analyst just got up one morning and decided, "Hey, you know what? Let's raise state taxes and see what happens! That would be fun!":roll: They have already predicted how it will affect the state prior to making the decision.

 

[jillio]

But they are moving. And this is worrying NY where the greater percentage of their tax revenue base comes from rich people who live there. We're talking differences of in the millions, not a few thousand bucks.




Obama Opposite Speak and NY's 'Millionaires' Tax'

Yeah, they're gonna stay right there and take it. You're playing them to be patsies.

As for favorable tax states:

1. Wyoming
2. South Dakota
3. Nevada
4. Alaska
5. Florida
6. Montana
7. Texas
8. New Hampshire
9. Oregon
10. Delaware
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/bp58.pdf

Guess which top three states are the worse unfavorable tax states and are experiencing budget problems?


Yup. NJ, NY, and CA. Followed by Ohio, RI, Iowa, Vt, Neb, and Minnesota.

Read some more on this:
6 States Hitting Residents With Big Tax Hikes - WSJ.com

Everything you posted says "will be", "not have already left". And leaving the state is but one small consequence in amongst many. Most will simply find a way to hide the taxable income.

 

[BradB08]

If you rake in several million a year, several thousand a year in taxes will NOT impact you.

Stop crying and pay your share.

 

[jillio]

Considering the fact that the wealthiest 1 percent of New Yorkers paid 41 percent of all NY state income taxes. Remember, 1 percent that paid a very big chunk of NY tax revenues. It wouldn't take much for NY to take a hit from these top 1% wealthiest people who decide to move their place of domicile or even move their businesses elsewhere.

Oh, yeah. They can and have moved their place of domicile. And they have.

Uh, duh! Of course the wealthiest paid the highest percentage of income taxes. They had more income, and therefore, owed more in taxes. And where ever they go, they will still be paying the highest percentage.:roll:

Moving their place of domicile does not mean that they are moving their businesses out, or that they are no longer spending at least 6 months a year in New York doing business. As long as they are doing business in New York, they are not only paying business and income taxes to the state, they are also generating revenue from others.

 

[kokonut]

yea so? nothing to cry about. It's cyclic nature. Majority of them can afford to sit it out, not middle class people. You haven't shown me anything conclusive or concrete that handful of top 1%'er packed up and moved. You know why? see post #2, 3, 5, 7, 21, and whatever

A survey was done that asked that very question (i linked it back there) and showed that 10% of the top 1% would want to move. That's a dent, not big but certainly a dent in a time of recession if they ultimately decide to do so. Then you have companies who probably just changed their minds on not moving their business into NY seeing that NY taxes to go up. And then you have those who decided to move their business OUT of NY because of that. All this compounds NY problem on getting the necessary revenue thinking that taxing the rich is the answer. It hasn't so far. Even California is seeing that. Now, this is all very recent and the effects will be known later. Increasing more and more taxes against the rich isn't the answer. The problem lies with the govt that handles the money which they do a poor history of handling it in the first place.

 

[BradB08]

Who cares, kookoo bananas?

Let them move. Someone will fill the void they leave.

 

[jillio]

10% of the top 1%....we're talking what, 5 or 6 people?

And 90% of that 1% would not move.

There is not a mass exodus about to occur in New York. Overwhelming majority of the wealthiest are not even considering moving down the street, much less out of the state.

 

[Jiro]

A survey was done that asked that very question (i linked it back there) and showed that 10% of the top 1% would want to move.

ah-ha! keyword - a survey. an opinionated survey full of wishy-washy people. Nothing concrete. Once you have the actual number of 1%-er leaving the state, come back and talk to me.

That's a dent, not big but certainly a dent in a time of recession if they ultimately decide to do so.

again - come back and talk to me once you have the actual # of 1%-er leaving the state and graph of before-and-after. Again - not a problem. When the people leave, the service provided for original number is reduced - hence a cut back but will continue to provide service for remaining people. Basic economic 101

Then you have companies who probably just changed their minds on not moving their business into NY seeing that NY taxes to go up. And then you have those who decided to move their business OUT of NY because of that. All this compounds NY problem on getting the necessary revenue thinking that taxing the rich is the answer. It hasn't so far. Even California is seeing that. Now, this is all very recent and the effects will be known later. Increasing more and more taxes against the rich isn't the answer. The problem lies with the govt that handles the money which they do a poor history of handling it in the first place.

and the problem also lies with the rich people and corporations hiding the tax money. ever heard of offshore accounts, tax evasions, and tax loopholes? notice that in your article - the tax loophole was closed and the revenue got decreased. aaaawww

*it's a pix of my avatar - a drill sergeant wearing hat that has siren on it but I'm dubbing him as Domestic Dissent Hunter

 

[deafskeptic]

and the problem also lies with the rich people and corporations hiding the tax money. ever heard of offshore accounts, tax evasions, and tax loopholes? notice that in your article - the tax loophole was closed and the revenue got decreased. aaaawww

Exactly.

 

[BradB08]

Nice avatar, Jiro! I like it!