POL Wealthy exodus to escape new tax rules worries California Democrats

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm.....I wonder if they're thinking the same in NY, NJ, MA, Conn. and Il?...

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article195405279.html

CAPITOL ALERT

Wealthy exodus to escape new tax rules worries California Democrats

BY ADAM ASHTON
aashton@sacbee.com
January 18, 2018 12:33 PM
Updated 8 hours 2 minutes ago

The Republican-backed federal tax bill flipped the tables on a never-ending question for California politicians: Will high taxes lead the state’s wealthiest residents to flee the Golden State for the comparable tax havens of Florida, Nevada and Texas?

Republicans reliably raise that alarm when Democrats advocate for tax increases, like the 2012 and 2016 ballot initiatives that levied a new income tax on very high-earning residents.

But now, with the federal tax bill cutting off deductions that benefited well-off Californians, the state’s Democrats suddenly are singing the GOP song about a potential millionaire exodus.

“People with higher incomes pay a lot more money, and some of them may be tempted to leave,” Gov. Jerry Brown said when he unveiled his 2018-19 budget proposal last week. “This was an assault by the Republicans in Congress against California.”

That fear animates Senate President pro tem Kevin de León’s bill that would allow California residents to write off their state taxes on their federal returns as a charitable deduction, as well as other proposals that Assembly leaders have hinted they’re preparing to offer. De Leon’s bill cleared a second committee this week and is on its way to a vote on the Senate floor. Trump administration officials say it won’t pass muster with the IRS.

Democratic state lawmakers are worried because California relies so heavily on the income taxes it collects from high earners to fund government services. The state’s wealthiest 1 percent, for instance, pay 48 percent of its income tax, and the departure of just a few families could lead to a noticeable hit to state general fund revenue.

“It is a genuine concern and that’s why the legislatures in high-tax states are swinging into action immediately,” said Katie Pratt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who specializes in taxes.

The new federal tax law poses problems for high earners in the Golden State because it caps two deductions that Californians used to limit their federal income tax liability, restricting their ability to write off mortgage interest and their state and local taxes.

Because real estate in coastal counties is so expensive with median home prices in the nine-county Bay Area topping $768,000, the cap on mortgage interest deductions probably will bite some middle class Californians, too.

In two reports last month, the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy found that 11 percent of Californians would wind up with a tax increase because of the federal changes.

Among high income brackets, about 38 percent of Californians who earn more than $877,560 – the top 1 percent – would see a tax hike. About 25 percent of Californians earning between $130,820 and $304,630, also would see a tax increase, according to the tax policy institute.

Will the numbers add up to encourage a high-earning family to leave California?

“The new tax law is kind of like icing on the cake for some who were thinking about moving out of the state,” said Fiona Ma, a Democrat on the tax-collecting Board of Equalization who is running for state treasurer. “If they don’t have to stay here because of work or family, it doesn’t give them a lot of incentive.”

So far, research on the migration of wealthy Californians suggests that most very well off people are tied to their communities or businesses and do not often migrate for tax reasons.

A 2012 study by Stanford researchers, for example, found that millionaires are mostly rooted to their locations for economic reasons. The work, “Millionaire Migration,” was based on data from the Franchise Tax Board and looked at Californians who earned more than $1 million in a year and paid a special tax for mental health services.

The authors expanded on their report for a 2016 study that incorporated more data from other states. It found, “elites are embedded in the regions where they achieve success, and they have limited interest in moving to procure tax advantages.”

Another 2016 study by Next 10 found that more people moved out of California to other states than immigrated to California from other parts of the country between 2007 and 2014, although the Golden State continued to attract high earners in that period.

“Despite the rhetoric regarding California’s oppressive tax regime and its overall hostility to business, individuals coming to California are primarily concentrated in high wage occupations, which enable them to absorb the state’s high housing costs and cost of living,” the report said.

But State Controller Betty Yee, a Democrat who was a member of the Board of Equalization when it commissioned the Stanford study, said the combination of the state’s high housing prices and the cap on mortgage interest deductions present a different problem than that report considered.

Previously, the state income taxes on high earners only affected residents when their incomes exceeded certain thresholds. If their income depended on stock market gains or bonuses, they didn’t pay the special taxes every year.

Now, they’ll have to budget for the changes in the federal tax law every year, and Yee said that may lead some people to make a different calculation when they decide where to live.

“The GOP tax plan I think has a much broader impact on a cross-section of California taxpayers,” she said. “It’s a much more volatile situation.”

Other members of the Board of Equalization, who have spent years weighing appeals from people fighting California tax bills, aren’t worried about the 1 percent leaving California because of the new tax law. They say they’re more concerned about middle and upper-middle class Californians deciding they’d be better off in another state.

Extremely wealthy people “are not leaving,” said George Runner, a Republican member of the board. “They don’t’ have to for the same reason they have $100,000 of wine in the basement. It doesn’t affect them.”

“What I’m concerned about is the people in the middle class, retired cops and teachers,” he said, arguing that those kinds of residents in the Central Valley and inland Southern California would benefit from the overall tax cuts in the GOP plan.

Joseph Vranich, who leads a Riverside County business that advises people on where to locate their businesses, called the tax law “one more nail in the coffin” that would cause small- and middle-size entrepreneurs to leave California.

Often, he said, high income taxes, high gas taxes and strict environmental regulations lead his clients to choose other states. “When you add it all together, I call it death by a thousand cuts, and this latest law is one more cut,” he said.

Brown and Yee so far are not endorsing de León’s bill to strike back at the federal tax law.

Both said that they need more time to` see how the changes will play out, and both have argued that the state should consider broader changes to its tax code so the general fund is less reliant on high earners having good years.

Neither could say for sure whether they believe well-off Californians would leave, and Brown at his press conference last week contrasted his worry about a migration of successful entrepreneurs with a reminder of what brought them here in the first place.

“California has a lot of opportunity. That’s why people are here,” he said.

Adam Ashton: 916-321-1063, @Adam_Ashton. Sign up for state worker news alerts at sacbee.com/newsletters.
 

West

Senior
Muse...

Funny, it was durring and after the 1930s that many migrated to the West. As did my ancestors. Now many are moving back. Perhaps after the new raging 20s we will see a depression in the 2030s, but this time the migration will be back to the midwest.
 

OldCraftsman

Membership Revoked
Muse...

Funny, it was durring and after the 1930s that many migrated to the West. As did my ancestors. Now many are moving back. Perhaps after the new raging 20s we will see a depression in the 2030s, but this time the migration will be back to the midwest.

NOOOOOOOOO! We don't want them back. They're infected with the liberal virus. :shkr:
 

Rayku

Sanity is not statistical
Trump should have built a wall around California rather than letting them out to infect the rest of the country.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
I think they are highly over-estimating the number of "elites" (which in California can just mean your grandparents owned a house in San Jose they bought for 10,000 dollars in the 1950's and it now works out to 5 million due to location) ARE likely to leave.

Community and family ties are great, but honestly, people like me (second generation Californians) are fairly rare, and it is one thing to live in an extremely over-priced house with a good salary (or invested money) and pay extremely high State Taxes when you can write them off your Federal Taxes.

Even 25 years ago I had friends that bit the bullet and bought houses (often with other people) in the Bay Area, just to get that mortgage write off; which made it much better than just renting.

Take away both Federal Exemptions and people just lost a good chunk of their income; especially those that are house rich but cash poor (which is very common).

I think a lot of people are going to be tempted to sell the now over-priced home (especially if they own it outright or owe very little on it) and move to a less tax-heavy state.

Heck, when we filed my US Residency we were advised to change my place of residence to Texas (husband's home) because Texas at the time had no State Income Tax (not sure now, family accountant handles that for the extended family) and Californias were already really high.

Another observation from having lived in actual functional socialist or partly socialist countries; taxing the rich in an extreme manner always backfires after a point and results in the really wealthy just leaving.

Many people will stay and pay "more" than their "share" if they enjoy where they live and feel that THEY ALSO get SOMETHING out of paying out-of-proportion amounts, some will even see it as "to he that is given much, much is expected," especially "old money."

But get crazy about it and decide you can fund your entire country by "taxing the rich" like the UK tried in the 1970's and Sweden tried slightly later just backfires; the UK is still trying to figure out how to offload the glut of "elegant" family "old piles" that "great" families turned over in droves when the taxes on them became so high that the "Ninth Earl of Nothingham" would say to his wife;

"Sod it, we can gift this old barn to the State and clear our tax debts and take the profits and buy nice penthouse apt in Monaco and pay no taxes at all"...

By the 1990's when I moved over here, the cost of maintaining all those "gifted" houses was breaking English Heritage and they started quietly selling the less popular ones back to "the private sector" which often meant wealthy foreigners with oil money or wealthy American's with pretensions to the aristocracy.

In Sweden it was worse, even more, people simply left, as one famous movie director is reported to have said: "I discovered that taxing 100 percent of my income meant taking 100 percent of my income."

By the time we lived there in the mid 1990's they had scaled that back, a lot; Sweden is still a really high tax place to live but until the more recent problems from taking in way-way too many people from the third world, it was a small country that kind of worked because even the rich felt they got something out of it - but they left when they felt like they were not getting nearly enough out of and were being over-charged to boot.

I see California as walking into this exact same trap; they didn't see it coming because it was hard to imagine Congress getting rid of both exemptions that so many people rely on; especially all at once.

But California will either have to figure out how to tax more evenly or end up like the UK government; maybe not owning a lot of expensive homes, but certainly finding not nearly as many people rushing to buy them, or if they do sell it will mean even more wealthy Asians and other non-citizens buying them as investments or "escape" properties.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Surprise - people who can afford to live wherever they want can GO wherever they want, to live.
Yep, and family connections, community and "quality of life" thing only go so far; for some, it does work for a huge number it does not.

An exception was "James Herriot" of "All Creatures Great and Small" he was interviewed in the 1970's and he said his friends all thought he was crazy because he literally gave up millions to stay in Yorkshire.

But he said that was where his heart was, and as long as he had enough for his family, his children's advanced education (one vet, one MD), his clinic and a comfortable retirement he was happy and simply wanted to stay there.

However, he as a much-noted exception; at the time.
 

Doc1

Has No Life - Lives on TB
As long as they stay out of Florida! We get enough transplanted New Yorkers here...

LOL! Very true. I used to think of Florida as my second home, though being from New Orleans I was hardly a Florida native. Nonetheless, I was constantly amazed at how few native Floridians one seemed to meet in the larger cities. Yes, I know that this is an exaggeration, but it often seemed as if there were no native Floridians and that everyone was from somewhere else. Between the retirees and the younger, transient workforce, I think Florida has the largest population of out-of-staters than any other state in the Deep South.

Best regards
Doc
 
Top