To the editor: Having been a tax practitioner now for greater than 60 years — a lot of it involving the very rich — all the venture of the California wealth tax is ludicrous as a result of the premise for its one-time imposition is deceptive, if not dishonest (“Is California’s proposed billionaire tax sensible coverage? Historical past holds classes,” Jan. 26).
The proposed tax is being bought as a substitute for the upcoming lack of federal Medicaid. Any “tax professional” with frequent sense is effectively conscious that many — maybe a big majority — of the targets of the tax will contest it (and aggressively low cost their belongings in self-assessing their tax) on the administrative (appeals) degree and, if not happy, will proceed with litigation.
This course of takes years to play out. The state administrative behemoth will likely be spending huge quantities of (non-billionaire) taxpayer {dollars} to gather cash that can arrive far into the longer term and lengthy after the alleged want for imminent spending on any healthcare wants — if it arrives in any respect.
The proponents ought to know this fairly effectively, indicating that all the initiative is an asset seizure masquerading as ethical advantage.
Kip Dellinger, Santa Monica
This author is the previous tax coverage and apply columnist for Tax Notes journal.
..
To the editor: Reasonably than imposing a “wealth tax,” wouldn’t it make extra sense to only rewrite the tax code in order that the loopholes that basically give multimillionaires and billionaires a free experience had been sewn up in order that they needed to pay their justifiable share?
Susan Greenberg, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: The backers of the wealth tax invoice claimed that they realized from Europe’s expertise. However why did the European nations that repealed such wealth taxes repeal them outright as an alternative of studying from what occurred and bettering on how the taxes had been carried out?
Ming Lai, Frisco, Texas
