But the tables are turned with the NRST. The states will be remitting grossly more than they will ever receive. It would then be the states with the power to withold money from the feds if the feds don't comply.
Massachussetts: " No money from us until you pass a gay marriage law."
California: "No money from us until you legalize marijuana."
New York: "No money from us until you ban all assault weapons"
Is THAT what the states do now with income/withholding taxes??
If so perhaps what you envision is reasonable; otherwise (and I've heard of no such instances of that happening) what you project is nonsense. Why would they suddenly start??
But the tables are turned with the NRST. The states will be remitting grossly more than they will ever receive.What's more likely to happen is some states will be more lax in collecting the NRST than others and will start a whisper campaign. "Move your business to our state. We don't do NRST audits very frequently." What does the state care if the NRST is collected? 0.25%?
Actually, I think that this is one of the great benefits and opportunities of the bill -- that some states will wise up and tell the feds to go to hell. Rather than sending the money to DC where they'll take their cut and redistribute it, they'll keep it in state.
It will be more of 'leave us alone' than it will be 'make everyone do what we want'.
Freedom is a good thing even it is messy. Now, please, you are really beginning to make your screen name an oxymoron.