Posts tagged as:

Proposition 8

Welcome to my fifth in a series on state taxes! For information about what I’m trying to do, read my introductory bit. Next on the agenda, the state that we’ve all heard a lot about this year when it comes to taxes: California!

CALIFORNIA

Population: 36,756,666 (1st)

Capital: Sacramento

Largest City: Los Angeles

Gross Domestic Product: $1.812 trillion

GDP per capita: $38,956 (11th)

2008 election winner: Barack Obama

web site: http://www.ca.gov/

Income Tax

California does collect personal income tax. Taxes are fixed according to a series of six brackets (like Arkansas!), depending on net income. In 2008, the lowest tax rate was 1%, with increases to 2%, 4%, 6%, 8% and the highest rate at 9.3%. California also assesses a 1% surcharge on taxable incomes of $1 million or more, which effectively raises the top tax bracket to 10.3% – the surcharge is referred to as the Mental Health Services Tax.

California residents must file an income tax return if either their gross income or their adjusted gross income (AGI) is more than the amount defined by law. California residents must consider their total worldwide gross income to determine their filing requirement (yeah, you kind of get the feeling that bit is there to keep those Hollywood folks from stashing their cash elsewhere to avoid taxation).

California residents are generally taxed on the same income that they report for federal income tax purposes. In fact, California AGI is defined as federal adjusted gross income from all sources reduced or increased by all California income adjustments.

The failure of Proposition 8 during the last election appeared to complicate filing for gay and lesbian couples. Same sex marriages performed in California between June 16, 2008 and November 5, 2008 will be treated as valid marriages for California tax purposes. However, Proposition 8 passed on November 4, 2009, and provided that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Since California had enacted SB 1827 as law in prior years, couples who are considered registered domestic partners may use the RDP/married status; this does not affect filing status for federal purposes.

Just to make it even more complicated, California is one of nine community property states.

Social Security and Railroad Retirement benefits are exempt from taxation and a 2.5% tax applies to early distributions and qualified pensions. All pensions are fully taxed.

California does participate in the Treasury Set Off program. A California state tax refund will be taken to satisfy any outstanding liabilities owed to California or to the Internal Revenue Service; a federal refund will be taken for same.

Sales Tax.

California imposes a state tax of 7.25%. The total tax rate may be higher than 8.25% depending on the district and local taxes that apply.

Sales tax is imposed on most retail goods and some services. Some items are exempt from sales tax, including:

  • Sales of certain food products for human consumption (many groceries)
  • Sales to the U.S. Government
  • Sales of prescription medicine and certain medical devices
  • Sales of items paid for with food stamps

Tobacco Tax

California’s cigarette tax is 87 cents per pack pack, currently the 31st highest in the country. There is a proposal – being met with much resistance – to raise the tax on cigarettes by $1.50 in 2009, to $2.37 per pack. The national average now stands at $1.20.

Tobacco products, which include all forms of cigars, smoking tobacco, chewing tobacco, and snuff, as well as other products containing at least 50% tobacco, not including cigarettes, are subject only to the cigarette and tobacco products surtax. That rate is currently 45.13%.

In California, the cigarette excise tax revenue is used to fund tobacco control programs.

Gas Tax

The gas tax rate in California is $.455 per gallon. It is the highest rate in the country.

Property Taxes

California does impose taxes on real property based on the assessed value of the property. Property tax bills show land and improvement values. Improvements include all assessable buildings and structures on the land.

The maximum amount of tax on real estate is limited to 1% of the full cash value. Some exemptions apply.

Prior to 1912, California derived up to 70% of its revenue from property taxes. The state no longer relies on property taxes as its primary source of funds, though it collects $33 billion in property taxes per year.

Inheritance and Estate Tax

California does not impose an inheritance tax or a gift tax. Like most states, California no longer has an estate tax since it was tied to the federal estate tax state death tax credit.

Overall Tax Burden

The overall tax burden in California, taking into account taxes paid by individuals, results in a ranking as 6th most-tax burdened state in the country, according to Tax Foundation. This is a couple of steps down from its 4th place status in 2007.

taxgirl says

If the tax burden in California as a whole seems high, take a look at this statistic: in 2004, the richest 3% of state taxpayers paid approximately 60% of all state taxes. And while you’re probably thinking Hollywood dollars, you might be surprised to learn that a relatively high percentage of the tax revenue in years past has come from capital gains taxes. Capital gains taxes, you say? Don’t forget that a disproportionately high number of tech companies are located in California. And those tech companies tend to offer stock options as compensation, not only to execs but to regular employees. In 2005, for example, 14 of Google’s top executives and directors sold $4.4 billion worth of stock last year, according to Thomson Financial. Billions. From 14 people. Who cares about Steve Martin and Gwen Stefani when you have Sergey Brin and Larry Page?

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (Republican) has preached fiscal responsibility but is still planning to raise some taxes to fill a gaping hole in the state budget. Even with a high tax rate, California depends on the feds for extra funding – but not as much as other states. In 2005, California citizens received approximately $.78 of federal spending for every $1.00 paid to the Treasury, putting them near the bottom of the list (43rd).

But they’re getting more… So far, more American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) dollars have been awarded to California than any other state: nearly $13.5 billion. The second state in line received $4 billion less. With deficits looming, Schwarzenegger has made no secret of the fact that his state will take money that other governors may pass on.

The fact that California is struggling in a more visible way than many other states shows you how terribly reliant the state is on its own tax system. With a heavy emphasis on tech companies and the entertainment industry for a resident tax base, the state has been acutely affected by the slowdown in the economy. In particular, property tax revenues have taken a steep dive as foreclosures increased. In years past, housing prices had skyrocketed, temporarily boosting revenues (remember that assessments affect the tax due). However, the incredibly high cost of living took a toll: the ratio of housing costs to income was calculated at three times higher in California than in the rest of the country. When the “bubble” burst, it burst hard: in the first 3 months of 2009, California reported more foreclosures than any other state.

As revenues climbed, California’s expenses have increased. Many conservatives blame the increased expenses on the number of immigrants crossing into California: One in four Californians is an immigrant, a higher proportion than any other state (note the link is a pdf). Most California immigrants are from Mexico – Mexican immigrants to California outpace the next nearest country (Philippines) by a factor of 6. Note that these are all total immigration figures and not numbers of illegal immigrants.

Health care and education comprise the largest percentage of expenses in the 2008-2009 California state budget (note the link is a pdf). Next, with an increase of more than 50% from last year, are business, transportation and housing.

Critics of the Governor’s proposed budget note that the state is increasingly relying on the top taxpayers to pay for the lion’s share of expenses. When you include welfare spending and the like, California ranks 47th of 50 in economic freedom, according to a study by the Pacific Research Institute (PRI) – up a couple of ranks from the prior years.

With the changes in the budget, it’s back in line with the 2005-06 fiscal year, but that was at the height of the housing bubble. With the state’s dollars buying less than before, it will be interesting to see what’s in store for the Golden State. More budger cuts are certain… More taxes, too?

(Note: tax rates were current as of 04-20-2009 and were taken from the CA Board of Equalization)

{ 12 comments }

It’s time for our annual review! Here are my picks for the top stories on taxgirl.com for the year:

10, Dancing With The Stars champ and race car driver Helio Castroneves is indicted on federal tax evasion charges. In a related story, my mother is stricken with grief and may never samba again (okay, I’m not sure that she sambaed before but I’m pretty sure that this will end any chance).

9, Prop 8 in California passes and prompts the promise of tax boycotts by the gay and lesbian community.

8, taxgirl endorsed Obama for President. I was both roundly cheered and jeered for my picks but stand behind my choice. One of my most controversial and commented posts of the year.

7, Tax evaders hit the slopes. A massive tax fraud investigation in Germany, the UK, the US and other countries points the finger at the tiny Alpine principality of Liechtenstein. I am elated to finally have a reason to prove that I can spell Liechtenstein.

6, After Congress says no, President Bush says yes and earmarks taxpayer dollars to save the Big 3 automakers. As a result, Fiat misses its chance to hit it big in the US.

5, Wesley Snipes is acquitted of tax fraud. Remarkably, the world did not end, though we will now be subjected to more of his movies.

4, Congress commits US taxpayers to a remarkable bailout package. Treasury Secretary Paulson is now more powerful than Oprah.

3, The “biggest tax fraud ever” tax trial finally reaches an end. Out of the original 19 defendants involved in the spectacle that was the KPMG trial, only 3 were eventually convicted.

2, Rebates, rebates and rebates. I probably posted the most – and received the most comments – about this year’s rebate checks. Taxpayers were confused about the amount of the check, set-offs, when checks might arrive and more. An overwhelming majority of Americans admitting to being as cynical about the chances of the checks stimulating the economy as they are about Paula Abdul “just being tired.”

1, taxgirl gets a nod by the editors of the American Bar Association in the ABA Journal Blawg 100 for 2008. In case you missed it before, voting by readers for the best of the blawgs runs through January 2 – just click to vote. And no, this tidbit never gets old (not for me, anyway)!

So those are my picks for the year. What did you like? What did you hate? And what did I miss?

{ 0 comments }

It’s Fix the Tax Code Friday!

This week, I’m focusing on taxes, budgets and earmarks. There has been some good discussion about whether Melissa Etheridge’s plan to boycott paying taxes in California in response to Proposition 8 is appropriate. So, I’ll take it a step further. Today’s Fix the Tax Code Friday question is:

Should taxpayers be allowed to specific that their tax dollars cannot be used for specific purposes for which they object on moral, religious or ethical grounds? For example, should you be allowed to opt your tax dollars out of funding stem cell research, abortion, the war in Iraq – even the financial bailout? Do you think it would be practical or valuable to have “hot button issues” listed on your tax returns to make the opt out easy, similar to the “election campaign” checkbox on your tax return?

Would this be democracy at its finest – or a hot mess?

{ 8 comments }

Hard Rock Cafe Hollywood Hosts A Live Performance By Melissa Etheridge

Melissa Etheridge is angry.

In an article posted on The Daily Beast, Etheridge railed against the passing of Proposition 8 in California. Proposition 8 is, as you may know, a law which defines marriage in California as between a man and a woman. The law supersedes gay marriages in parts of the state, effectively making them null.

In response to the bill, Etheridge wrote of her relationship: “…she and I are not allowed the same right under the state constitution as any other citizen. Okay, so I am taking that to mean I do not have to pay my state taxes because I am not a full citizen. I mean that would just be wrong, to make someone pay taxes and not give them the same rights, sounds sort of like that taxation without representation thing from the history books.”

Etheridge went on to say that she could find another use for the approximate $500,000 that she now pays in taxes to the State of California and hints that perhaps a little civil disobedience is called for within the gay community. In a budget crisis such as California is currently experiencing, she notes that lost revenue would certainly be a hardship. So maybe, just maybe, the gay community in California should say no along with Etheridge to paying taxes…

Umm, no.

I do not understand Proposition 8. I love my husband and I don’t understand how the relationship of any other person (except for Luke Wilson, as mentioned before) threatens my marriage at all. I don’t feel the need to define, clarify or defend the sanctity of marriage. And I certainly don’t feel that it needs to be done through legislation. If you don’t believe in gay marriage, don’t get gay married. I dunno, it all feels so silly.

All of that said, the idea of refusing to pay taxes as a result of the passage of Proposition 8 is equally silly (sorry, Melissa, love your records, hate your tax theory).

First of all, you don’t have to be a “full citizen” in the US (or most states) to be responsible for a share of the tax burden. The criteria in most taxing jurisdiction in the US is residency or source of income, not citizenship. So, from a tax compliance perspective, even if one could establish lack of citizenship, it would not excuse the need to file and pay taxes.

Even from a tax policy perspective, it’s not a good argument. The government is not perfect. There will always be unpopular legislation, courses of action that we feel are unfair and expenditures that we don’t agree with – consider the war in Iraq, for example. That doesn’t excuse us from paying for the services that we use – roads, schools, courts, police, fire and other infrastructure. Do I like it? No. But consider the potential chaos that we would face if we selectively paid taxes based upon how fair we think something is…

Yes, I get that this is a really big deal. I do. It does have the effect of legislating away rights that had been previously granted. And that sucks. But the voters did it, not the Governor, not the legislature. And the voters made it law.

And Etheridge and other members of the gay community in California have every right to be angry, to hate that this happened and to work to fix what they perceive as an infringement on their rights. And I’m sure that they will. We’ll see it again in court in California (a legal challenge has already been mounted) – as well as in Tax Court, where Charles Merrill has filed a challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

But does that give the gay community a pass on paying their taxes in the meantime? No, it doesn’t.

Whereas civil disobedience has generally been regarded as an immediate method of attracting attention to a cause, Etheridge arguably has more wider and more efficient means of shining a light on her cause. Might I suggest she sing about it, talk about it, yell about it, write about it…? But not break the law for it. In this case, I can’t help but feel that two wrongs do not make a right.

{ 13 comments }

Prop 8 Passes in California

6 November 2008

After a contentious fight, as blogged previously, supporters of Prop 8 declared victory in California on yesterday. Proposition 8 defines marriage as between a man and a woman, effectively banning gay marriage in California.
Expect to see this one in court soon – likely on benefits and economic grounds. A federal challenge [...]

6 comments Read the full article →

Merrill Challenges Defense of Marriage Act on Tax Grounds

28 October 2008

Charles Merrill, cousin of the founder of Merrill Lynch, has filed a challenge in the US Tax Court against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Merrill is arguing that the Tax Code is discriminatory under the First Amendment Establishment Clause of the US Constitution since same sex couples are denied the same benefits as [...]

20 comments Read the full article →