Dec 282020
 

This seems Constitutionally dubious:

A California Plan to Chase Away the Rich, Then Keep Stalking Them

California’s Legislature is considering a wealth tax on residents, part-year residents, and any person who spends more than 60 days inside the state’s borders in a single year. Even those who move out of state would continue to be subject to the tax for a decade … Assembly Bill 2088 proposes calculating the wealth tax based on current world-wide net worth each Dec. 31. For part-year and temporary residents, the tax would be proportionate based on their number of days in California. The annual tax would be on current net worth and therefore would include wealth earned, inherited or obtained through gifts or estates long before and long after leaving the state.

“Non-residents” who spend more than 60 days in California could be residents of Montana… or of France. Good luck taxing *them.* People who attend college in California would be on the hook annually for ten years after the graduate and flee the state. Someone who spends more than two  months in a California hospital would have that benighted state pursuing them for years after.

According to the text of the bill, this would be a 0.4% tax on wealth (*ALL* wealth, not just wealth held in California) over $30,000,000. This would seem to be the sort of thing that would automatically make it so far beyond most folks as to be considered safely inoffensive,. But the fact is, once a government finds a new way to tax the really, really rich, it will then tax the regularly rich. The the almost-rich. Then the non-rich. Wherever there’s a nickle to grasp, a government – especially one as venal as the California government – will find a way to grasp at it.

What I look forward to: some scion of a Russian oligarch comes to America and spends three months sleazing around LA. Papa moneybags keels over two years later, leaving a hundred million to the kid who now lives full time in Moscow. The state of California then sends a bill for $400,000 to the guy every year for the next eight years. How do you think that would work out?

 

 Posted by at 1:02 am