For Guam, the Northern Marianas and the USVI the US Internal Revenue Code (IRC) is the territorial tax code, per the IRC itself. Called a “mirror tax” jurisdiction it means the residents and businesses file the same federal IRS firms and pay the federal tax amount, but the revenues are covered back to the territorial treasury.
Puerto Rico and American Samoa are “non mirror” tax jurisdictions which means they write their own tax code to apply to income and transactions domestic to the territory. Samoa basically adopts most of the “mirror” provisions by reference but collects directly, and Puerto Rico had set up with its own tax system pre-16th Amendment and had it grandfathered in the subsequent Organic and Federal Relations Acts and IRCs, with an income tax system based upon but different from the federal. Tax load ends up being similar to Federal+State in a high-state-tax state.
As mentioned, this applies to internal income and transactions. If you are paid from the US or do business stateside, then Federal tax kicks in and there is a whole particular SALT/exemptions/cover over structure to deal with (for instance, for the Resident Commissioner’s own district employees).
More details from the Congressional Research Service:
None other than a 4- rather than 2-year term. The “colonial office”-sounding title and the different term were invented in the early1900s for the delegates of PR and the Phillippines to distinguish them from the delegates of Incorporated Territories, places expected to become states. It was only after AK and HI were admitted that DC and the smaller islands got their own elected delegates and by then the mood was “oh, whatever”. Puerto Rico kept the old title by inertia.
And in being that they’re represented by all members of Congress.
Imagine that the Constitution were set up differently, such that the people of each state elected their legislators, but the voters of all states were only allowed to choose residents of Virginia. Would this give Virginia a disproportionate amount of power and representation? How, then, does DC not have any representation, given that all of the legislators are residents there?
This is incorrect. Federal statutes enacted by Congress may give the President some flexibility in how he enforces tariffs (e.g. imposing additional tariffs on countries found to be “dumping” their exports into the United States). But the authority and conditions for the tariff are enacted by Congress and can be rescinded by Congress.
Each member of congress is (presumably) beholden to the constituents who elected them in their home state (or, really, everyone in their district or the whole state and not just those who voted for them). They have no obligation to anyone living in Washington DC.
It is ridiculous to claim that the residents of the District of Columbia are represented by all members of Congress. They’re governed by Congress, but they have absolutely no voice in the selection of any of the members who do that governing. If they did, do you really think they’d choose James Comer as the chair of the House committee that oversees DC?
This is an incredibly dumb argument. The US is the only democratic country in the world whose citizens of its capital city don’t get to elect representation in their legislature (by my googling, anyway). In practice, DC residents have literally zero influence on members of congress, many of whom don’t actually reside in DC (so you’re wrong on the facts too in your hypothetical). Your hypothetical is completely nonsensical and irrelevant to the real world circumstances of DC.
Sorry, my mistake. I was referring to the 6 locations without voting reps and when talking about paying Federal income tax I glossed right over DC paying taxes being such a sticking point.
No worries. One of the things that’s so frustrating for Washingtonians is how many misconceptions people have about our status and we get prickly (at least I do).
Sure. Yep. I accept. Every state gets to pick their legislator, provided that legislator is from Virginia. Except South Dakota. Every state gets to pick a Virginian to represent them except South Dakota, who gets no vote. In fact, South Dakota doesn’t even get a Virginian chosen for them. They just literally get no legislator at all.
But not to worry. South Dakota will just be represented by all the legislators.
I don’t think it does much good to engage with the analogy, because @Chronos’ analogy fails on the face of it. Voters do not choose residents of DC to represent them in Congress. They choose residents of their districts/states, who then spend an average of 150 days a year working in the DC area. Generally, members of Congress take the last flight that will get them into DC before votes that week and leave on the first flight after the last vote. They have no exposure to DC outside of the Capitol, K Street and an occasional Kennedy Center event. They have likely never met a resident of DC who isn’t either a cab driver or a lobbyist. They do not care in the least about the needs, interests or priorities of the people who reside in the district. When they do pay attention to the District, it’s almost always to use it as a punching bag to put on a show for their voters back home, like when they overrode the DC crime bill.
All of this is why I and others find @chronos’ analogy nonsensical. It’s based on a very alien (to me) definition of what it means to “represent” the people of a community.
It’s utter nonsense, made even more nonsensical when you consider that some members actually live in Virginia or Maryland, so I guess the people in those state have extra representation.
As you say, the analogy is so poorly conceived there really is nothing to engage.
I dunno; I think that this is one point where the Founding Fathers got it right. Even if they don’t live in DC full time, they do spend enough time in DC that issues of concern to DC residents will be of concern to them, and if the capital district got the same representation as a state in addition to that, that’d be too big of a power imbalance towards the capital district.
I have no idea why you believe this to be the case. How would they even know what is of concern to DC residents? When do they hear from them – not the Georgetown lobbyist, but the poor people of color who make up the majority of the District’s residents?
Oops! I accidentally deleted my earlier posting. Basically I put some details in about how residents of ACT were actually represented in the federal parliament; however, the way their representation for the senat was not on an equal basis as that for the states.
Another group of people in America who are taxed without representation are aliens residing in the country.
Now, yes.
The Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act was passed in 1988. Prior to that (since 1911) the Australian Federal government administered the territory analogous to DC.
A congressperson is beholden to their voters full stop. Where they live is imaterial. They may know all about the issues of DC, but they weren’t elected to care.
It’s like the old saw in business and finance: “If you aren’t paying them, they aren’t working for you.”
