It might not be helpful, but it's realistic goal.
Posted on 02/23/2008 6:17:06 PM PST by coloradan
I have a mortgage on my Colorado primary residence with Bank of America, which is apparently a California company. The enforcement section of the CA FTB has sent me an enforcement letter,
We received information that you made martgage payments to B of A, N.A. during 2006. The mortagage interest you paid indicates that you may have sufficient income to have a filing requirement for the 2006 tax year.
We checked our records and are unable to locate your 2006 California income tax return. ...
FYI I am a COLORADO resident, (employed in Colorado, living in Colorado, paid in Colorado, etc.). My only mistake is apparently doing business with a California company.
The letter threatens me with e.g. garnished wages if they (CA) think I own taxes and don't pay. I'm not sure they have any jurisdiction over me.
Should I respond at all? The letter puts me in the position of having to prove no liability (i.e. innocence of tax law violations) rather than having them prove my guilt, turing normal American jurisprudence on its head.
I am inclined to either not respond at all, or to write a sarcastic letter, CC'd to the Governator and the CEO of B. of A., warning them that if they continue to harass people who live out of state who nevertheless do business with California companies, they could reduce said business markedly. (I have already fled CA more than a decade ago, exactly to get away from their high taxes.) It's nice that they have all sorts of socialist programs and a highly predictable, massive funding shortfall, but going after people who do business with them but no liability seems a bit counterproductive. (Shall I take greater effort to never, ever do business with CA companies?)
I would appreciate both specific advice about what I should do, and also nice things to say in my denial of liability, if I decide to go that route.
In case you haven't already surmised this, getting a letter from the enforcement arm of CA's FTB really ticks me off.
Maybe I should call a news agency, come to think of it. There are probably a lot of people living in 49 states that do business with Bank of America, who haven't filed a CA personal income tax return.
Wouldn’t the simple thing be to say that the reason they can’t find income is that you are not a resident of the state and haven’t been for 10 years? Then you could ask them what sort of “proof” they want — like a census from from your town.
(Perhaps you all can forgive me for not posting a vanity about McCain instead.)
I would suggest not responding, at least until they send another letter. Sounds like a bluff. Calif. is facing a big budget deficit and is probably looking at all possible ways of getting money
Just be a good citizen and do what they tell you to do.
I just went through with something very similar except I lived in FL and it was the state of Maryland that sent me the letter. I had to send those clowns my W-2 and 1099 to prove that I had not earned any money in MD in 2005 and that my residence for all of 2005 was not in MD.
I suspect that is what you are expected to do.
They are bloodsuckers.
Probably not the right thing to do but I'd send CA FTB a letter detailing exactly what they should do with the 2006 income tax in question. Consult a tax attorney, but I don't think they have any jurisdiction.
It might not be helpful, but it's realistic goal.
You're darn right. They are looking at getting rid of the mortgage interest deduction for the California state tax return. That is about $1-2K more in taxes per homeowner per year.
Not a good idea. The further along it gets, the more trouble it is to clear up. Being in the right is very little protection. See my post #6.
If it was me...I’d make a drive to the state line and take a photo of you and the “leaving California sign” with you on the Co side.....giving them the finger...
Every State Governmental Entity is going to be clamoring for every penny in revenue to keep the professional politician/officeholders entrenched in their positions. We have come to the end of the Government/economic rope. There are simply to few wage-earners to support the socialism created by our Republic form of professional giverment, (spelling of previous word intended.
Tell them you are no longer a resident of CA and thanks for reminding you why.
Various suggestions of what they can do with their “requirement” have crossed my mind. Most of which I can’t post here.
Seems fishy. B of A is HQ’d in Charlotte, NC.
BofA NA has a North Carolina address for the charter, not a California address. (The so-called merger of equals was really a NCNB/Nationsbank takeover). It appears that the California charter was a state one which is now inactive.
They may have some corporate subs that are California based. I haven’t used the Institutional Directory much since it moved from the FFEIC web site to the FDIC web site, so I can’t readily turn up the information on the subs. I think that info was moved over to the Fed.
Good ol’ California. I remember in the early ‘90s(?) they were insisting they had the right to tax military retired pay for the percentage of their career any member was assigned to CA regardless of the residency of the member. For example, I was stationed there 8 of my 24 years active duty so I would owe CA income tax on one third of my retired pay, despite the fact that I never claimed CA residency while I there and don’t live there now. Insane.
Dear CA Dept of Equalization/Revenue, eat sh@t and die. Sincerely, M Kehoe
Haven't heard from them since.
5.56mm
Ours local WRAL-TV5 has ‘5 on Your Side’ seems to be able to get answers when ‘common’ folk only get the runaround....
I didn’t know that. I used to have a mortgage with Countrywide and I ditched them when I refi’d. I don’t know how CA got the info on the one I do now hold.
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.