Posted on 02/16/2011 6:08:49 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
They are the poster family of Connecticut's Gold Coast.
Diane Lembo is a highly recommended, highly compensated cardiac surgeon in Manhattan. Each winter, she and her husband, Tony, an accounting professor, indulge in a monthlong jaunt to tropical climes. They spend summers boating with their two teenage children and Cavalier King Charles Spaniel on Long Island Sound.The Lembos reside in a $1.6 million home in Fairfield's historic Greenfield Hill neighborhood and have three cars.
Their lifestyle, however, is about to get a little more expensive.
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy this week proposed a package of new taxes on luxury services like boat docking, pet grooming and airport valet services.
If the taxes get the green light, the Lembos, a fictitious upper-class family from Fairfield, would pay $8,528 more in taxes.
A closer look at the Lembo family finances reveals how the proposed taxes could affect their budget.
Tony earns $120,000 teaching classes at a local university. Diane makes $589,097. Under Malloy's proposal, the couple's marginal rate would fall into a higher tax bracket of 6.25 percent. This means they'd pay $42,218 in state income tax, an increase of about $7,168.
There are numerous other items the family would now have to pay taxes on, including services for their pets and travel.
Rex, the Lembo family pooch, for example, racks up $66 in annual grooming services for his ruffled coat. The proposed tax would hike the price of his hair cuts and shampoos by $4.13.
It will also cost the Lembos more to visit their own salons.
The men of the Lembo family pay $55 per visit to the hair salon. The women pay $90. Altogether, the family spends $2,490.08 annually on haircuts. Add to that total about $160 in proposed state taxes.
Travel will also get costlier.
When the family jets to St. Croix for three weeks next winter, they will pay an additional $9.53 in valet services at Bradley International Airport.
Each summer, the Lembos like to take their children sailing in Long Island Sound. They dock and store their boat at the South Benson Marina for a cost of $2,096.06. Now they would have to pay an additional $133.10 each year.
Each year, they like to take a family trip to Manhattan in a stretch limousine to see a Broadway show. That would carry an additional $34.93 in taxes.
To protect his Mercedes convertible from the winter elements, Tony stores his car from December to April at a cost of $300 a month. That would climb by $95.75. When he takes his second car, a Lexus, the one he relies on each day, to the car wash, it would cost him more, too. Tony's penchant for twice-monthly car washes at $19.99 a pop means he would have to shell out an additional $30.46 in taxes next year.
Each year the family spends about $25,000 on special occasion gifts and jewelry. There would be a $750 tax on that expenditure.
Diane would have to pay an additional $67.50 over the course of the year for the manicures and pedicures she treats herself to twice a month at $45 a pop. She would also pay $75 in annual taxes for the $400 Botox treatments she gets three times a year.
Mass exodus of wealth from the state of Connecticut coming soon.
The middle class don’t get their hair cut and don’t have pets? What is this tax only for them?
You nailed it.
During the Clinton Administration, there was a federal “luxury tax,” on, amongst other things, new yachts and large sailboats. It was proposed by former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, (liberal democrat), Maine.
The rich started buying USED yachts and large sailboats, and low and behold, the boatyards here in Maine started laying off the guys who built new boats and yachts.....young middle class guys with young families.
Unintended consequences? The “luxury tax” was a disaster.
I can remember when Connecticut didn’t have a state income tax at all....that changed, thanks to RINO Lowell Ricker when he became governor.
At this point, since when has any govenrment official understood the concept of ‘process?’ There are so many ways of making money off of the rich, without taxing them. Of course, that would involve creating a business that the rich can use as opposed to simply taking it. Pity we dont’ tax criminals for hte crimes they commit. Eah crime means a slice off of their welfare.
And into Russia and China where they don’t hate the rich.
After they destroy the rich, the middle class is next.
She only pays $66 a year for grooming the pet?? That is usually what it costs for just a couple of washings at a groomer.
I pay $10.00 every two weeks to have my greyhound’s nails trimmed at a groomer! I really would not like to be taxed for this service.
ONce the US completely collapses, we have only ourselves ot blame for it.
For the most part, I think the middle class is already destroyed.
When you think about it, you’re quite right. The middle class as defined has been gone for some time, mainly through people living upper class lives on credit and calling themselves upper class.
Connecticut’s Gold Coast basically came into existence when New York State started to tax the rich who lived in Westchester suburbs. So people moved out further, and many went to Fairfield County.
Now evidently Connecticut wants to drive them out, too. All those business HQs that moved out of Manhattan into Stamford, following their officers into Connecticut, will no doubt be heading down to the Carolinas, or someplace else where the economy is not taxed into extinction.
I know. My daughter takes her little dog for a haircut many times throughout the year. I have no idea what she pays though.
Dallas/Fort Worth already has a ton of Fortune 1000 headquarters. Looks like they’ll be getting more soon.
silly.
Most rich people don't earn nearly that much, they just have tons in assets and know how to save, the few who do live their that this would affect will just move a few hours in any direction.
Yes they put a “luxury tax” on yachts, private planes and high priced autos. I can speak to the “tax” on yachts. It was a 10% tax added to the price of all yachts over $200,000. It was a perfect tax-Congress did the analysis and saw how many yachts sold for over $200,000 the previous year-determined the $ value and multiplied it by 10% and wow easy money-$40 to 50 million a year.
OH WAIT! The tax was placed only on brand new yachts built in the United States. Used yachts and yachts built in foreign countries were not covered by the tax. The revenue earned almost zero-foreign builders saw an increase in orders. By the time the increased unemployment compensation was paid to laid off workers, lost sales tax and state income tax was determined-the tax generated a negative amount of tax revenue.
100% tax, I only do what I feel like doing. 0% tax, I'm gung ho on making as much as I can. In between range is not linear, but is mono-directional. The more you tax me, the less I do, more-so after I've met expenses for my necessaries.
The luxury tax on yachts failed miserably. Many
yacht manufacturers closed up shop when sales
evaporated. Lots of employees were terminated.
Luxury taxes can be avoided by not using the
services. More unemployment ensues. Lower tax
revenues from the formerly employed. More
drain on unemployment insurance funds.
Oh, you mean like when they put boat manufacturers and the
accompanying service and add-on providers out of business?
That simply cut down on boating traffic so elites like the Kennedys
and Kerrys would have less things to drunkenly hit, as in the
case of the former, and less congestion in the case of the latter.
Mike Dukakis tried this as governor of MA, and over a weekend,
a big financial services company moved a big chunk of its data
center to another, less taxing, state. (made sense from a
geo-diversity of operations, too)
Everytime my daighter takes her 8 lb dog Charlie it costs her $50.00 this includes shampoo,hair cut, nail trim. Lucky woman only paying 60.00 for a whole year of grooming
if the article is right
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.