To: *calgov2002; snopercod; Grampa Dave; Carry_Okie; SierraWasp; Gophack; RonDog; ElkGroveDan; ...
To: All
"Please contribute to FreeRepublic and make these posts go away"
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
|
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar! Thanks Registered
|
3 posted on
01/18/2003 6:54:27 AM PST by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
It's too bad the california press didn't mention this little detail before the November elections. But then it probably wouldn't have mattered anyway. After all, only "the rich" own real estate...
4 posted on
01/18/2003 6:59:40 AM PST by
snopercod
(Repeal the 17th Amendment!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
It takes money out of the pocket of the investor that very possibly could have generated another transaction,'' Rose said. ``I think it will affect the economy".No $hit
5 posted on
01/18/2003 7:04:39 AM PST by
greydog
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This is like a check kiting scheme! Thank God we closed escrow on our Tahoe house on Dec. 31!! That's the day the money was funded, so I'm assuming they won't be able to nab us.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
As of Jan. 1, California residents must hand over 3.3 percent of the total sale price when they sell investment or vacation properties -- even if they made only $1 in profit on the sale. Vacation properties, Vacation Properties! Proletariats living in the peoples republic of California should not be owning vacation properties. 33% is nothing, they should be thankful that these outrageous luxuries are not confiscated and distributed to the poor. This ain't your forefathers America, besides we're fixin' here to fight a war!
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
It will be interesting to see if the legality is challenged in court. After all won't they at least being required to pay interest on the funds? I know I questioned the realtors about this last year and they all kind of muttered they didn't know the specifics. How convenient!
9 posted on
01/18/2003 7:11:46 AM PST by
kellynla
(once a Marine...)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
What a shameful grab by CA this is. Californians already are subject to quarterly estimated income tax wherein the income tax on capital gains would be remitted to the Franchise Tax Board by Jan 15. CA is so desparate, they've put their hands into the gross sale price of the transaction.
12 posted on
01/18/2003 7:22:52 AM PST by
Too_Bad
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; ElkGroveDan
I remember hearing about this last year. It's bad public policy and bad law -- another gimmick to get Gray Davis out of the mess he made of California's finances.
I wonder if there is anything that can be done to suspend the law, put it on hold temporarily until it can be rescinded? Maybe we should all be contacting our legislators to repeal this.
14 posted on
01/18/2003 7:30:46 AM PST by
Gophack
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This is incredibly bad public policy, and I think it's subject to legal attack on several grounds.
This is no different in theory than a law requiring 50% of your paycheck to be withheld for California income taxes, although the excess amounts would be refunded next year.
16 posted on
01/18/2003 7:40:34 AM PST by
Dog Gone
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Perhaps this will give you some added insight into why California is in the current state it finds itself in:
Southern California: record poverty and industrial decay.
"Many in these low-wage jobs are immigrants with low education levels, mostly from Mexico and Central America and especially to Los Angeles. These often highly exploited immigrants have contributed to the increased levels of poverty. The majority of people living in LA County now are either immigrants or second-generation Americans."
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The law was passed in the fall so quickly that real estate industry lobbyists said they had no time to fight it. California needs to limit the length of sessions of the legislature. I'm glad the Texas legislature meets only 140 days every two years for the regular session. This means the Texas legislature has been out of session for over a year when they stand for re-election. The members of the legislature don't get the opportunity to pass ill-considered legislation just prior to the elections.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Californians elected democrats so they pretty much can expect more of this kind of thing. The democrats owe their voters something for their votes and it will be more taxpayer money. Hopefully Perry will stand firm here in Texas about not raising taxes and our handout class will get wise and move to California instead.
26 posted on
01/18/2003 8:27:51 AM PST by
FITZ
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Commie liberals always get in deeper. Seems their budget crunch is about to implode the state.
37 posted on
01/18/2003 8:51:34 AM PST by
PatrioticAmerican
(Let's all pay our fair share...make the poor pay taxes! They pay nothing!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This is nothing new for CA. I am a registered civil engineer in CA, and done work there while being located in AZ. In 1990 or 91, I received a letter demanding a portion of my income from any projects in CA or with CA clients. I wrote back a nasty response telling them where to go and never heard from them again. I heard years ago about the taxing of CA source pension income to out-of-state residents, which was challenged in court. Does anyone know what the legal outcome was?
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Outrageous!
56 posted on
01/18/2003 3:59:06 PM PST by
RAT Patrol
(I would never move back to Kalifornia!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
What a mess.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson