Yeah, I know it would never happen in real life. This is all purely theoretical.
New York is currently experiencing a big budget crunch. The state is billions of dollars short for next year’s budget.
One solution often mentioned is to “tax the rich.” The counter to that is that if you tax the rich too much, they’ll simply leave.
As I said above, I know it will never happen in real life - but I was wondering. What if New York passed a law stating that it’s residents are not allowed to move permanently out of the state – and that if they, in fact, do leave, New York would still be considered their state of residence (and possibly subject to arrest upon returning to the state).
Of course the idea is idiotic – I grant you that. But then again, with the New York legislature you never know… But in any event, is there any federal law or anything in the Constitution that would prohibit such a law from being passed (and not struck down by the courts)?
Wasn’t there some crazy stuff going on a few years ago, though, where something like investigators from a New York State or NYC tax bureau were going to New Jersey and writing down NY license plate numbers for cars parked at malls there, presumably to penalize people who weren’t contributing sales taxes in their home state? Or something like that.
It’s a bit odd to think of going to another state to do your shopping. Back home I’d have to drive 5+ hours to do that.
IIRC, Ohio once set up a spy operation on a high volume liquor emporium in Indiana; Ohio officers could see the parking lot of the Indiana shop and could photograph Ohio license plates on cars presumably buying lower taxed Indiana liquor for import into Ohio. IIRC, there was actually some very old and rarely enforced law that permitted the state of Ohio to impose an import tariff on such liquor. Cars whose license plates were photographed in the Indiana parking lot were stopped and inspected; tariffs or duties were imposed as well as fines; again, IIRC. I don’t recall what the upshot was but there was talk of rebellion, etc, etc.
Under current law and socioeconomic circumstances, absolutely not. In some grave future national crisis, where there really was no other alternative, I could mayyyyyyyyyyyyybe see it happen, but it seems extremely unlikely.
Incidentally, I once read a historian suggest that gasoline rationing had that effect in WW2, and that Uncle Sam was not entirely displeased with the result.
Also isn’t there something about importing contraband cigararettes that lack a given state’s duty stamps? I think I saw that on the Dukes of Hazzard once.
Well, but those examples are not about restricting **your **movement, they’re about enforcing the law that says that if you acquire certain goods for use in your home state, you owe a tax to that state. If you actually MOVE from Ohio to Indiana or Maryland to Delaware, you’re in the clear.
The federal polity, a.k.a. the USA, though, DOES make so that as long as you’ve not relinquished US citizenship, you are liable for US income taxes, even if you live and earn your money abroad, and takes a very, very close look at any emigré with a net worth greater than $500K.
Make me wonder - isn’t there a year’s residency requirement on Alaska Permanent Fund payouts? Could these decisions be cited as preceent to overturn that and force Alaska to pay people who just moved in?
It’s ludicrous to think that a state will not pass the most restrictive of laws, and get it approved by the Supreme Court at some time or another. Twenty years ago, who would have thought that there would be so many laws limiting the expression of free speech, in the name of ‘hate speech’ that there are today? Sixty years ago, who would have thought that we would have had the freedom of speech that we had twenty years ago? People will sit still for anything if it’s wrapped nicely.
There will probably be some kind of inter-state travel restrictions, requiring the use of passports of some type, citing loss of tax revenues/tax fraud, and ‘contraband trafficking’ as the stimulus for the bill, in the near future. ( Probably because ‘the children are losing educational revenue. And the streets, roads, etc…’) This was required in the Soviet Union, IIRC, in the 1920s. Nobody really kicked about it. Or, if they did, nobody paid attention.
The township where my parents live in Pennsylvania has a $10 Residency Tax to be paid when someone moves in. It also has a $10 Exit Tax to be paid when moving out. Landlords are required to report the comings and goings of renters.
I have no idea how (or whether) they intend to enforce the Exit Tax.
For half a year I worked in Germany 4 days/week, in Switzerland the 5th, lived in Switzerland and shopped in France. Then for 5 months I worked in Switzerland, lived and shopped in France and went to Germany for meetings about twice a month.
The area near Basel is called “the Three Borders” and I wasn’t unusual at all.
There has been talk of adding a good sized tax on home sales in New Jersey if the homeowner is moving out of state. There is also talk about adding a tax the retirement checks of goverment employees who move out of state. New Jersey has been losing people every year, especially the middle class. Those measures are easier than trying to make the most expensive state to live in more affordable.
As far as this goes, are there any states NOT facing a big budget crunch this year?
I thought every state was hurting right now?
Exceptions of maybe Montana, Dakotas, Nebraska, etc.