Don’t think that is allowed under federal law. They will not get a cent.
Why did they decide to stop after 10 years?
We are going to see what is going to happen to Kalifornis
No way. They formerly did this with retirees who earned their pensions in CA and left the state. It was ruled in violation of the commerce clause iirc. Now, ex-resident retirees cannot have their pensions taxed by Kalifornia. By that precedent, ex-resident wealthy cannot be subject to a Kali wealth tax once out of the state. If they increase the tax rate, again, I’m leaving the state for a lower tax locale. It’s a damn shame, Kali has wonderful weather and vistas ; my friend and family live here too.
What the heck is “excessive wealth”
Try to enforce that, commies.
California’s attempt to curtail the spreading of cancer......given most of those morons bailing from California are wealthy Leftist DEMs who voted for decades for the cancer they are bailing from.......only to go to Nevada, Utah, Texas, etc. and continue to spread their cancer. Go figure. Have they learned anything? No. Doing the same thing over and over in the hopes of the results will be different = idiocy.
If this were true, then why do they feel the need to tax people who move out of state?
The courts will shut this down.
Imagine top notch pro sports athletes with contracts worth millions... They become free agents or get traded and go to teams outside CA. ...CA still wants to tax them for ten years on income they are making elsewhere.
Any judge that agrees with such illegal taxation should be hung!
New Hampshire wanted to tax meals served at commissary at Portsmouth Navy Base, even though it’s in Maine, on the other side of the river. But name is “Portsmouth” and that city is in New Hampshire. New York City, unsurprisingly, wanted to tax the gift shop on Liberty Island even though it’s in New Jersey. The rationale was that passengers took the ferry from New York City, so the gift shop was an “extension” of New York City.
I always worried that the employer that I spent most of my career with would want to tax my pension and 401k regardless of where I domicile because I earned them in Massachusetts.
The Harkles won’t care. But the Bank of Dad might.
Do you get what this is? The “wealth tax” is taking a percentage of accumulated assets. Get it? Your savings, your investments, your property, your IRA, your house. They add it all up, and take some of it. Get it now?
Know what they’re going to do with it? Give it to non-producers. Read the posting here about California and “reparations.”
Understand now what the democrats are all about?
Every wealthy person in California who does not change his legal residence to elsewhere, is a fool.
Unconstitutional.
Plain and simple.
Violates the interstate commerce act. Further it provides for taxation without representation. You can’t tax someone who isn’t a California citizen, and as soon as another state recognizes them, they have rights and protections in another state.
Further, this means you could be taxed in multiple states, while residing in one. That is like indentured servitude or tax slavery.
Only stupid Democrats in California would think this would be Constitutional.
Wait, they are essentially arguing that if you ever live and work 1 day in California the state has the right to confiscate your wealth for the rest of your life.
I have no problem with this, if these people voted Rat, why allow them to escape the consequences of their vote.
appears to violate any the commerce clause