Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 146 posts

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#81

Post by skh »

ohithereyou wrote: post #75
skh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does a 13% tax to California bother you if a 13 percentage point increase in tax to some other entity doesn’t? Is it dislike of California? Dislike of state taxes? This reminds me of an experiment I read in - I think - Nudge . A random group of people were given the scenario of being at a store and about to buy a box of chocolate for $10. Just before they purchase it they find out they can buy it at a store a few…

Not the grandparent poster, but a 13% increase in Federal income tax would apply to everyone in the country, regardless of where they live, and therefore would be fair. Punishing people who don't live in your state (only commute there for work and have an actual, bona fide residence elsewhere) is not fair.

Income gets taxed on where you earn it. It’s been that way for a very long time. This applies to everyone. Don’t see how it’s unfair. I’m certain OP knew this when taking the contract to work in California.

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#82

Post by ryandrake »

IvyMike wrote: post #70
panzagl wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn't live in California so would see no benefit from the CA tax, while he theoretically would from a Fed increase.

> would see no benefit from the CA tax Well, no benefit except for the 70% of his time he spends there.

But, what benefit is he getting during his temporary stays there that is worth anything close to the 13% they're taking?

California's budget is about 35% health care (his doctor is probably back in Texas), 20% education (his kids if he has any go to school in Texas), and about 20% to pensions for state workers, which he obviously derives no benefit from. So how do you justify taxing someone who doesn't live here based on the "benefits" they receive?

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#83

Post by kristianc »

skh wrote: post #64
kristianc wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite - Leftists reframe the question "Why do you need that money?" when the one we should be asking is "Why is the state entitled to it?"

Your question is just as bad. Here’s the framing I prefer. 1. Government is necessary since some things are best run by public services and without a for-profit motive. 2. What are these things? 3. How much money should be raised to properly run these things? 4. What is the optimum tax rate/policy to achieve this goal?

You'll never get to that framing while taxation is presented in and of itself as an unalloyed good, and the Left is asking "What's the maximum we can tax people before they stop working?" or the new favorite from Saez et al "Okay, the rich might stop working a little, but how much are we prepared for them to stop working before we have to lower taxes?"

My framing allows people to say 1. in response, if it is able to specify 2., and if it can then determine 3 and 4.

What it doesn't allow people to do is say "the state is entitled to as much in taxation as it can get away with, because the state also builds roads and hospitals" ('You didn't build that'), or "the state is entitled to use taxation as a proxy for creating equality of outcome" ('This is Class Warfare').

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#84

Post by sundaeofshock »

crisdux wrote: post #5
outside1234 wrote: post #2

Good luck with that - if you have a California license plates, drivers license, or they can prove you show up pretty frequently to a California located job - you are going to get caught doing this and fined extensively. Also, WTF: You took advantage of all of the infrastructure of a state to get rich and now you don't want to contribute back? Shame on you and may karma come around for you.

Let's be a bit honest here. California public infrastructure has hardly contributed to the windfall people are getting due to their work in the tech industry.

Are saying tech workers don’t use public roads or mass transit to leave their homes?

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#85

Post by pjc50 »

pliny wrote: post #16

>On the other hand, Silicon Valley money is made in California and draws on California services. Employees commute to work on taxpayer-funded roads and many studied at taxpayer-funded schools. And one extreme example: When a gunman shot four people on the campus of YouTube last spring, it was San Bruno police that responded to the scene. This argument is scale invariant, you could say that any level of taxation justi…

> much lower rates of income and sales tax and a much less smaller tax base.

What about property tax?

Some of California's higher budget may be explained by higher property prices - employees need to be paid more for the same standard of living, government property purchases cost more, etc.

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#86

Post by mleo »

panzagl wrote: post #53
skh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does a 13% tax to California bother you if a 13 percentage point increase in tax to some other entity doesn’t? Is it dislike of California? Dislike of state taxes? This reminds me of an experiment I read in - I think - Nudge . A random group of people were given the scenario of being at a store and about to buy a box of chocolate for $10. Just before they purchase it they find out they can buy it at a store a few…

He doesn't live in California so would see no benefit from the CA tax, while he theoretically would from a Fed increase.

Other than flying into a California airport, traveling on public streets, having suppport of local police, fire and other services while in California. That said, there are some services taxes go to that he would not receive benefit from. So paying the same tax rates as a resident does not make as much sense.

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#87

Post by logfromblammo »

panzagl wrote: post #56
addicted wrote: post #24

A major issue is that California pays for its own stuff, but it also has to pay for most other states’ stuff as well. A lot of other states get by with lower state tax simply because they are net receivers of federal taxes which supplements stuff Californians pay for themselves.

It pays for stuff Californians rely on but can't stand the sight of.

Like the air and missile defense installations in Alaska that happen to be near all the great circle routes between Pyongyang, Beijing, or Kamchatka; and Seattle, Portland, or San Francisco.

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#88

Post by skh »

kristianc wrote: post #83
skh wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your question is just as bad. Here’s the framing I prefer. 1. Government is necessary since some things are best run by public services and without a for-profit motive. 2. What are these things? 3. How much money should be raised to properly run these things? 4. What is the optimum tax rate/policy to achieve this goal?

You'll never get to that framing while taxation is presented in and of itself as an unalloyed good, and the Left is asking "What's the maximum we can tax people before they stop working?" or the new favorite from Saez et al "Okay, the rich might stop working a little, but how much are we prepared for them to stop working before we have to lower taxes?" My framing allows people to say 1. in response, if it is able to…

Your question used the word “entitled”. It is reminiscent of those who say that taxation is theft. Your framing does none of 1, 2, 3, and 4.

I don’t understand the point of your first paragraph. It’s a caricature of people you call the Left. I have never seen anyone anywhere paint taxation as an unalloyed good in and of itself. Can I suggest that instead of talking in terms of Left/Right that some other dialog be used? This is why I framed things the way I did. There’s not mention of Left or Right. It’s just questions that get at the heart of what being a society means.

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#89

Post by vidarh »

tenpies wrote: post #4
AlexandrB wrote: post #3

> The state of California treats capital gains just like any other income, levying a 13.3 percent state tax on sales of stock. For someone sitting on tens of millions of dollars in private stock — life-changing money for some — it’s not a small concern. Yes, it literally is! It's 13% - that's about the same as sales tax in many places and nowhere near AOC's 70% tax. This is greed, plain and simple. 99% of the world w…

And 99% of the world would act in the same way if they had the luxury of that problem. I understand why Leftist populists love attributing some sort of exceptional immorality to the wealthy, but people act on incentives. Give them an incentive to leave and they will leave.

Belgium has the highest tax burden of any OECD country. According to OECDs annual Taxing Wages report for 2017, Belgiums total tax wedge for an average earner (the total tax wedge includes employers payroll taxes) was 54%, compared to an OECD average of 36% (US is at 31.7%). The direct "employee visible" part of that is 40.7% vs an OECD average of 25.5% (US 26%).

Based on your line of thinking, people should be fleeing Belgium in huge numbers. Belgium is in the EU and has land borders with Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and France. Germany is not far off in taxes, but France is at 29.1%, Luxembourg at 31%, the Netherlands at 30.4%. Anyone with Belgian citizenship can work and live in any of these countries without having to apply for any visa or work permit. (so far that also applies to the UK, over the channel, but given Brexit I ignored it)

Most Belgians speak French or Dutch, so language should not stop them.

Yet, despite these rather significant monetary incentives to even move across the border, within a short driving distance from their current location, to countries with the same language, there is somehow not a massive amount of Belgians fleeing the country.

Note that this is tax burden for an average tax payer. Not marginal rates paid by the very few.

In other words: Sure, people act on incentives, but unsurprisingly peoples decisions about where to live are not only down to a few percentage points of taxation. Some will move, many won't, and yes, that is something to take into account when setting tax policies.

Re: “I’m moving out of state”: employees are trying to avoid California income tax

#90

Post by anonuser123456 »

cpursley wrote: post #62
pliny wrote: post #16

>On the other hand, Silicon Valley money is made in California and draws on California services. Employees commute to work on taxpayer-funded roads and many studied at taxpayer-funded schools. And one extreme example: When a gunman shot four people on the campus of YouTube last spring, it was San Bruno police that responded to the scene. This argument is scale invariant, you could say that any level of taxation justi…

> how effective the state is at spending the money Exactly! I'm okay with higher taxes as long as the jurisdictions who collect them are good stewards of the money. First, governments must prove to me that they can efficiency provide promised services before convincing me to hand over more. How is it that other nations/jurisdictions can have lower taxes than the USA, but still manage to provide for universal healthca…

>I just don't understand where the tax money is going in the USA at both federal and state levels.

You can find it online with a simple Google search. Pensions, medicare and social security are the bulk of the spending.

Post reply on HN