It’s not just Iowa. If you sell land for a gain, the state where the land is will want to tax you. A Letter of Findings (Document 14201016) issued by the Iowa Department of Revenue this week gave the bad news to a Wisconsin man. From the letter:
Your income tax assessment for 2002 was based upon the fact that you sold property in Iowa for that year and the gain from the sale of that property was never reported as taxable income in Iowa. Your Protest seems largely based on the argument that you are not a citizen or resident of Iowa.
You don’t have to live in a state to be taxed there. States can tax income from non-residents if it has enough connection to the state. The letter explains:
Despite the fact that you are currently a nonresident, you still owe Iowa income tax on the capital gain related to the sale of property in Iowa.
This is important to a lot of non-Iowans who have inherited farmland here. Farmland values have spiked in recent years, making it tempting to cash out. The Department of Revenue will be looking for its cut.
Kyle Pomerleau asks How Much Will Corporate Tax Inversions Cost the U.S. Treasury? (Tax Policy Blog):
The Joint Committee on Taxation in May released their estimate of the revenue gained from passing the “Stop Corporate Inversions Act of 2014.” This law alters rules and makes it harder for corporations to invert and move overseas. The JCT estimates that this will raise approximately $19.5 billion over fiscal years 2015 and 2024.
Compare this to the Congressional Budget Office’s fiscal outlook that estimates that the corporate income tax is estimated to raise approximately $4.5 trillion over the same period.
That is a 0.4 percent loss to our corporate tax base due to corporate inversions. Hardly the doom and gloom many in the press and Congress make it out to be.
Or, in handy graphical form:
The whole contrived inversion panic is best understood as a diversion, an attempt to create a hate totem to divert attention from the disastrous effects of other policies.
Furchtgott-Roth asks, “What is more American than doing what is best for your company?” The answer is, doing what is best for America no matter what it does to the company. That is what America did during World War II. If today’s generation of “capitalists” were the folks around back in the 1940s, we’d be speaking German or Japanese.
The good Professor Maule makes some basic mistakes here. First, he assumes that people didn’t try to keep their taxes low back in the 1930s and 1940s. I have boxes of dusty old tax casebooks that say otherwise.
A more fundamental mistake is his assumption that paying more taxes than the tax law requires is “best for America no matter what it does to the company.” The President and our 535 Congressional supergeniuses have no magical insight on what’s “best for America.” Reasonable minds may differ on “what’s best” without being traitors.
Professor Maule seems to make the default assumption that whatever gives more revenue to the government is “best for America no matter what it does to the company.” By that logic, corporations should liquidate and turn their proceeds over to the IRS. Forget the products those corporations make, the needs they meet, the jobs they provide. Screw the pensioners with pension plans funded with corporation stock. Because America!
TIGTA reports Some Contractor Personnel Without Background Investigations Had Access to Taxpayer Data and Other Sensitive Information. Remember how everyone was all up in arms that a private company was hired to call on tax delinquents that the agency couldn’t be bothered with, on privacy and security grounds? Good thing confidential tax data is secure now.
William Perez, How to Make Sure Your Charity Donation Is Tax-Deductible.
Kay Bell, California tax deduction bill aimed at former NBA owner Donald Sterling advances. California forgets that not every problem is a tax problem, and being a jerk isn’t a taxable event.
Russ Fox, Lawsuits Against FATCA in Canada
It’s Friday, so Robert D Flach has fresh Buzz!
Employers in many countries are reluctant to hire on permanent contracts because of rigid labor rules and sky-high payroll taxes that go to funding the huge pension bill of their parents.
He adds: “Don’t think it couldn’t happen here.” It’s already starting to.
Because giving money to politicians is more important than your retirement. Amazing Waste: Tax Subsidies To Qualified Retirement Plans, (Calvin Johnson, at Tax Analysts, via the TaxProf):
Qualified plans are ineffective or counterproductive for their given rationales, which makes them a rich source of revenue when the United States needs money.
Mr. Johnson has a strange hobby of finding ways to give more of your money to the government by making tax rules even worse. Apparently he is convinced that politicians and bureaucrats have better things to do with your money than you do. (via the TaxProf)
TaxProf, The IRS Scandal, Day 463
Kelly Davis, Hey Missouri, You’re the Show Me State, But Don’t Follow Kansas’s Lead. (Tax Justice Bl0g). Shouldn’t that be “so,” no “but?”