Archive for the ‘California’ Category

Out of the Swamplands

Sunday, January 29th, 2012

Over the years, I’ve referred to New Jersey as the swamplands. Their politics, corruption, and tax policies left a lot to be desired. But something unusual happened in 2010: Chris Christie, a Republican, was elected governor in the historically Democratic state. This past week Governor Christie decided he’d like to improve on the Tax Foundation’s ranking of New Jersey as the worst state in the country for taxes; he proposed a 10% across-the-board cut to the state’s income tax.

I do need to point out that even with a 10% cut New Jersey’s top income tax rate would be 8%. That’s quite high, but in comparison to the nearly 13% a New York City resident would pay it’s not that bad.

I have no idea if Governor Christie will be successful or not but the Wall Street Journal noted that his proposal has caused Democrats to propose lowering other taxes. Meanwhile, Governor Jerry Brown of California proposes higher taxes. If both Governors are succesful I suspect that next year California and New Jersey will swap places on the Tax Foundation’s rankings so that the Bronze Golden State will truly be tarnished.

Tax Foundation Releases 2012 Business Tax Climate Index; California, New York and New Jersey at the Bottom

Wednesday, January 25th, 2012

The Tax Foundation released their 2012 State Business Tax Climate Index today. And it was no surprise to see the bottom three composed of California, New York and New Jersey. These states have high taxes overall (California adds high regulatory costs, too; however, the business climate index ignores this). Meanwhile, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Nevada are the top three states. No surprise: These states don’t have high taxes (they don’t have personal or corporate income taxes at all).

Here are the top ten:
1. Wyoming
2. South Dakota
3. Nevada
4. Alaska
5. Florida
6. New Hampshire
7. Washington
8. Montana
9. Texas
10. Utah

And the bottom 10:
41. Iowa
42. Maryland
43. Wisconsin
44. North Carolina
45. Minnesota
46. Rhode Island
47. Vermont
48. California
49. New York
50. New Jersey

For those who wonder if business pay attention to taxes, I can speak from experience: They do.

Illinois: Proving Laffer Correct

Sunday, January 22nd, 2012

Arthur Laffer popularized the Laffer curve. The father of Supply Side Economics noted that in many cases, increasing the tax rate decreases the amount of tax revenues. It appears that Illinois is proving Dr. Laffer correct.

Moody’s just downgraded Illinois’ bond rating to A2 from A1. Illinois now has the worst rating of all 50 states–even worse than California. But wait: Didn’t Illinois pass a massive tax increase a year ago? Wasn’t that supposed to help Illinois’ financial condition? Here’s how the Wall Street Journal put it:

So much for that. In its downgrade statement, Moody’s panned Illinois lawmakers for “a legislative session in which the state took no steps to implement lasting solutions to its severe pension underfunding or to its chronic bill payment delays.” An analysis by Bloomberg finds that the assets in the pension fund will only cover “45% of projected liabilities, the least of any state.” And—no surprise—in part because the tax increases have caused companies to leave Illinois, the state budget office confesses that as of this month the state still has $6.8 billion in unpaid bills and unaddressed obligations.

There is some good news for Illinois. Governor Jerry Brown and other California Democrats are proposing a variety of tax increases for the Bronze Golden State (to be voted on in this fall’s election). It may well be that California will pass Illinois to the #1 spot.

Hat Tip: HotAir

The Black Hole Continues: California Faces an $8 – $21 Billion Deficit

Sunday, January 15th, 2012

When I read one report stating that California is looking at an $8 billion deficit (that’s Governor Brown’s projection), I was quite happy I’m now a resident of Nevada. And then I read Chriss Street’s report that says the deficit is really $21 billion!

Whatever the true number is–it most likely lies somewhere between the two numbers–there isn’t any doubt that California continues to spend its way to oblivion. The problems, according to the Left, include low taxes, Proposition 13, issues with the tax system, etc.

There seems to be a pattern, eh?

Here is a helpful hint for California: You must lower your expenses. This means cutting the size of state government, cutting pension costs, and cutting salaries. Additionally, California must make itself more attractive to people like me who have fled the Bronze Golden State. Regulations must be cut.

I had a thought, but dismissed it as too obvious. For every new regulation put on the books in California, two should be removed. If that were done California would likely solve its problems within a few years. Of course, my idea here is just wishful thinking. The Democratic Legislature in California thinks that the Golden State is truly golden, and these issues are because the tax rates are just too low. Well, California only has the second worst business climate of the 50 states, so there is room for improvement!

California Has Lost Over 720,000 Taxpayers & $48 Billion of AGI From US Migration From 1993-2008

Tuesday, December 6th, 2011

My move to the Silver State has gotten some comments from two other tax bloggers, Joe Kristan (Roth Tax Updates) and Paul Caron (TaxProf Blog). In the TaxProf Blog post, there’s a link to statistics on migration from within the US to and from California. The numbers are quite revealing.

In the most recent year for which statistics are available (2008), California gained 3,667 tax returns from migration but lost $829 million of Adjusted Gross Income from migration. (Note that this is income, not tax dollars, and is based on federal AGI, not California AGI.) What this clearly shows is that high-earning taxpayers fled California for greener pastures: Texas, Oregon, and Nevada gained the most AGI from California. (The numbers come from the Tax Foundation, and are available here.)

Net Increase/ Net Increase/
(Decrease) of (Decrease) of
CA Returns CA AGI
[$ in 000s]
1993 (138,251) $          (7,398,356)
1994 (111,940) $          (6,320,105)
1995 (73,660) $          (4,295,887)
1996 (28,611) $          (1,611,444)
1997 (8,583) $             (524,257)
1998 (9,676) $             (735,147)
1999 (6,273) $             (458,276)
2000 7,591 $                467,012
2001 (29,959) $          (2,805,962)
2002 (27,379) $          (2,671,237)
2003 (42,672) $          (3,247,756)
2004 (71,963) $          (5,093,362)
2005 (79,589) $          (5,659,718)
2006 (68,454) $          (4,774,491)
2007 (34,379) $          (2,524,154)
2008 3,667 $             (828,842)
Total (720,131) $       (48,481,982)

 

You may ask, hasn’t California’s population increased from 32 million in 1994 to 37 million in 2010? That’s absolutely correct; the increase is from births and deaths and immigration to California from outside of the US. Unfortunately, a large number of Californian’s who were earning good incomes have decided to enjoy their gold in places other than the Golden State.

When Silver Is Better than Gold

Friday, December 2nd, 2011

Today’s closing price for silver is $32.72 an ounce. Meanwhile, Gold is $1,749.35 an ounce. So how can silver be better than gold?

If you’ve been a reader of this blog, you’ve seen me write numerous times about California’s tax and economic policies. Bluntly, if California were a corporation, it would be delisted from the Pink Sheets. (For those unfamiliar with the “Pink Sheets”, that’s the home for stocks that get delisted from the NYSE, American Stock Exchange, or NASDAQ.) Meanwhile, the only recipe that Democrats in Sacramento have is to increase taxes.

My tax bite is roughly 10% to California. For every dollar I make, ten cents goes to Sacramento. (Yes, I get a benefit from that in that state income tax is deductible on federal tax. However, because of the Alternative Minimum Tax even that benefit is capped.) For the past few years I’ve considered if I could move my business to a friendlier environment. Earlier this year, I decided to do so.

I’ve sold my house in Irvine, and am in the process of purchasing a home in the Las Vegas area. I will be in a much friendlier business environment, with a lower cost of living. The home I’m purchasing is nearly double the size of my current home and costs almost 50% less than what I sold my current home for.

There comes a point where decisions are forced on you. With the growth of my business, I looked at possibly hiring another tax accountant in 2010. When I ran the numbers, I found that I would lose money by hiring a productive tax accountant. That’s because of all the regulations and costs that I would immediately incur if I had an employee. I’m not stupid: If I lose money by hiring someone, I’m not going to do it.

Yet my business was (and is) growing, and I had to do something. As you may know, I’m adding a partner (Aaron Lion, E.A.). He’s based near D.C. rather than California. As of a week from now, I will have executed my own Escape from California.

Democrats in Sacramento constantly say that with all of California’s advantages (and the state does have a lot: great climate, a large diverse population, and diverse industries) that increasing taxes doesn’t impact employment. That’s hogwash. It’s driven large companies (e.g. Nissan) to Tennessee. It’s driven me to the Silver State, Nevada. Sure, I’m just one job but the money I earn goes to support others’ incomes. That will still be the case, but not in the Golden State, California.


With the movers coming tomorrow, and everything that’s been happening with the move and with what will happen over the next two weeks, it’s likely that posting will be minimal until mid to late December.

California Ranks High Again…And That’s Not a Good Thing

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

Another survey of business, and another set of results that’s anything but golden for California. Claremont McKenna College’s Rose Institute of State & Local Government today released the 17th annual Kosmont-Rose Institute Cost of Doing Business Survey. The Rose Institute, in partnership with Los Angeles-based Kosmont Companies, gathers business fees and a variety of tax rates from 421 selected cities across the United States.

Of the 20 most expensive cities in the country to do business, five are in California: Beverly Hills, Culver City, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, and San Francisco. None of the 20 least expensive cities are in California. Eight are in Washington state (Yakima, Kent, Everett, Vancouver, Federal Way, Olympia, Spokane, and Bellevue) and five are in Texas (Austin, Abilene, Fort Worth, Corpus Christi, and Houston).

While some of the most expensive cities are ones you’d think of (Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia), a few are a surprise: Akron, Ohio (a retail business license fee of $112,500), Naperville, Illinois (a retail business license fee of $100,000), and Mobile and Birmingham (both Alabama cities have high sales tax rates).

Businesses do locate because of taxes, a fact that is lost on Democrats in Sacramento. A press release on the survey is available here. The full survey is available from the Rose Institute.

South Dakota to Southern Californians: We’re Business Friendly

Monday, November 21st, 2011

An interesting story out of the San Jose Mercury-News: The governor of South Dakota, Dennis Daugaard, will make a recruiting trip to Southern California to recruit businesses to relocate. The article notes the advantages of South Dakota in taxes and business climate.

I can just see a response from one of California’s Democratic politicians. It would likely go something like, Yes, Governor Daugaard is correct that South Dakota doesn’t have an income tax, it’s government is business friendly, but boy is it chilly in the winter in Pierre.

But Governor Daugaard doesn’t consider the advantages California has. We have more bureaucrats than any state. We have more levels of permitting, so our projects take longer to get built. And…

Perhaps one day California will get back to being a business friendly state. But given that Governor Brown and Democrats in the state legislature are still talking about raising taxes it doesn’t appear today’s the day.

Greenspan Sues California

Tuesday, November 15th, 2011

Last month I wrote about the Kafka-esque saga of Aaron Greenspan and California. I received an update this evening that Mr. Greenspan has filed a civil case against the state alleging that California’s actions violate the federal constitution (the interstate commerce clause) and that the state’s actions have been capricious in their administrative functions. Mr. Greenspan is asking for an injunction against the state and for monetary damages.

I probably won’t be covering this in the future. I first wrote about Mr. Greenspan’s trouble with the bureaucracy as an illustration of how bad the bureaucracy is in California. I’m an Enrolled Agent, not someone in the money transmittal business. This is definitely beyond my area of expertise.

Mr. Greenspan has filed his suit pro se (he is representing himself). I wish him the best of luck in putting a dent in the bureaucracy. Given the glacial pace of federal litigation, it’s likely going to be years before this is resolved.

“California — Toxic for Business”

Tuesday, November 15th, 2011

Wendell Cox and Steve Malanga penned an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times that’s worth your perusal. They argue what I’ve been saying for some time: “Unless Sacramento moves to improve the business climate, California’s reputation as one of the country’s most toxic business environments will make it hard for the Golden State to regain its luster.”

There’s a lot more in the article, and it’s well worth your time.