Reframing state tax obligations as charitable contributions seems like a bad cultural precedent with lots of unforeseen consequences.https://twitter.com/dillonliam/status/958437132544098304 …
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Also can’t possibly believe that it will be legal. Will be overturned by Congress, courts, or IRS fiat regulatory ruling.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @schrockn
I'm curious why they didn't go the payroll tax route and instead chose the charitable donation route, which is so indefensible from a progressive perspective.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
That’s the part that is particularly funny about all this. All the histrionics from Blue state progressives are about what nets out to 2 point income tax hike on rich people.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @schrockn
they would prefer that the wealth that we generate locally remains local. We are already a net donor state. And this increases the subsidy that California already provides to Red States with policies (low investments in higher ed/R&D) that inhibit economic growth....
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @schrockn
California has a very highly volatile financial structure because it is so progressive and tied to capital gains tax revenues, which in turn are tied to the performance of global equities markets. When those turn, there will be a catastrophic deficit and so the state needs to
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
maintain good will with the 1%, which effectively floats half of the $90 billion or so in personal income tax revenues it collects annually. (It's a bizarre system.) http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2018-19/pdf/BudgetSummary/RevenueEstimates.pdf …pic.twitter.com/b2O6zqKysX
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.