Affluent Californians Still Contemplate Relocating to Avoid Tax Increase

Posted May 15, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Site Selection

A quarter of the residents in California’s most affluent communities are considering relocating out of state in response to the increase in state income taxes, according to a report released today by the San Diego-based National University System Institute for Policy Research (NUSIPR).

A scientific poll (n=401) conducted by Competitive Edge Research for the National University System Institute for Policy Research from March 4-6, 2013 shows that 13% of the state’s residents are somewhat considering a move, 12% are very seriously considering vacating the state, and 1% are already moving out to minimize their personal income tax burden.

The survey finds that these sentiments, while more often held by Republicans, conservatives and higher income residents, are not limited to them. In fact, the biggest factor in explaining whether or not someone is contemplating leaving the Golden State is whether they said they knew a family member or friend who had made a similar move. This social exposure factor is a stronger predictor of move consideration than any other factor, including income, support for conservative candidates, or the level of familiarity with the tax increase. This suggests the potential for a “snowball” effect: the few residents who initially leave create exponentially more who contemplate moving until a sizeable exodus occurs. The finding that social influence plays a big role in tax avoidance behavior is also exciting and dovetails with recent research on social networks.

The survey also found that residents are contemplating other strategies, such as increasing their charitable contributions and investing in more tax-free bonds, to reduce the impact of the increase in state income taxes.

In November of 2012 California voters passed Proposition 30 which temporarily increased the state’s sales tax rate and raised income taxes on individual Californians with incomes greater than $250,000 and families earning more than $500,000 in taxable income. Anecdotes throughout the state indicated a level of dissatisfaction, most notably comments from California resident and pro golfer Phil Mickelson ‘s comments prior to the Farmers Insurance Open golf tournament in January. NUSIPR undertook the research to find out just how prevalent such views were.

To focus the survey, NUSIPR used IRS records to target specific zip-codes in the state known to contain a high percentage of affluent taxpayers. More than 400 Californians were surveyed and the survey has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.9%. NUSIPR’s full report and  survey results can be found here (PDF): http://www.nusinstitute.org/assets/resources/pageResources/NUSIPR_CA_Tax_Burden.pdf

Source for the above: Press release posted today on on PR Newswire here.

Joseph Vranich of Spectrum Location Solutions helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Joe also is a keynote speaker on the challenges and benefits of business owners relocating out of high-tax, high-cost, over-regulated states. His recent focus has been on why commercial enterprises leave California. More information is available at Biography and Speaking Availability.

California Again Named ‘Worst State for Business’

Posted May 11, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Best States, Best States for Business, Business Relocation, Businesses leave California, California Business Environment, California Regulations, California taxes, Site Selection, Worst States for Business

My friends tell me I should never say “I told you so” because it’s such an irritating statement. But in this case I don’t know how to resist. I’ve predicted that Chief Executive magazine’s 2013 survey of CEOs would find California to be the worst state for business for the ninth year in a row — and that’s exactly what has happened. Wrote one CEO: “California is getting worse, if that is even possible.” See “2013 Best & Worst States for Business.”

The magazine went on to observe: “Even more to the point: It doesn’t seem likely that the populace of California has developed the collective will to recover its appeal to business. There are too many opponents, too much legacy infrastructure and too much ennui in the way.” See “California Dreaming.”

Joseph Vranich of Spectrum Location Solutions helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Joe also is a keynote speaker on the challenges and benefits of business owners relocating out of high-tax, high-cost, over-regulated states. His recent focus has been on why commercial enterprises leave California. More information is available at Biography and Speaking Availability.

L.A. Radio Focus on Why Companies Leave California for Other States

Posted February 18, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Best States for Business, Business Relocation, Businesses leave California, California Business Environment, California Regulations, California taxes, Site Selection, Worst States for Business

Bill Handel, an outspoken and entertaining lawyer — and popular Los Angeles radio host — will air a 15-minute segment on businesses leaving California. I can’t speak for him, but he seems to have been inspired to address California’s difficult business environment, in part, by a friend of his who moved his company out of California to Nevada.

The segment is scheduled for tomorrow, Feb. 18, at 7:30 am California Time.

Yours truly is the interviewee. This will be on KFI-AM Radio, Los Angeles, a 50,000-Watt clear-channel station. To hear it online go here.

Joseph Vranich of Spectrum Location Solutions helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Joe also is a keynote speaker on the challenges and benefits of business owners relocating out of high-tax, high-cost, over-regulated states. His recent focus has been on why commercial enterprises leave California. More information is available at Biography and Speaking Availability.

California ‘Highest Risk State’ to Locate a Business

Posted February 6, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Best States for Business, Business Location, Business Relocation, Businesses leave California, California Business Environment, California Regulations, California taxes, Income Tax, Site Selection, Worst States for Business

Sacramento’s KCRA-TV News aired a focus on the California v. Texas business environment where I say California is the “highest risk state in the county in which to locate a business.”

“There’s no evidence that these business bashers in Sacramento are going to change their ways. So, California is probably the highest risk state in the country in which to locate a business.”

See: Texas governor airs radio ads to attract Calif. businesses

Joseph Vranich of Spectrum Location Solutions helps companies find great locations in which to grow. He also is a keynote speaker on business growth and public policies that help companies thrive. His recent emphasis is on why companies leave California.

Stunning: California Imposes 5-Year Retroactive Tax Bill on Startup Investors

Posted January 30, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Best States for Business, Business Location, Business Relocation, Businesses leave California, California Business Environment, California taxes, Income Tax, Retroactive Tax, Site Selection, Tax abuse, Worst States for Business

Tags: , , ,

Thanks to an entrepreneur, Brian Overstreet, we in California are just starting to learn that the state Franchise Tax Board has cancelled the Qualified Small Business (QSB) tax benefits and is retroactively denying the benefits for the past five years.

Overstreet explained in a column in Xconomy that the QSB was designed to incentivize people starting business to keep them in California. If so, founders and early investors could exclude 50 percent of the taxable gain on the sale of their stock—meaning about 4.5 percent instead of 9 percent (now nearly 13 percent due to Proposition 30).

“Without the QSB provision, we might have decamped to a more tax- and business-friendly state,” he wrote. “After we completed the sale, I paid both my federal and state estimated taxes computed with the QSB exclusion. I thought I was clear until April 2013.”

But, on December 21, the FTB retroactively disqualified all exclusions and deferrals going all the way back to 2008.

How this came about is due, in part, to the FTB overreacting to a court ruling.

“What does this mean for you?” asks Overstreet.

1. If you are a business founder or early investor who sold stock since 2008 and took the QSB exclusion: Surprise! You are going to get a bill from the FTB for the 50 percent of the taxes you excluded plus interest plus possible penalties.

2. If you are a business founder or early investor and have not yet sold stock: Rethink your business and tax planning strategies. Consider whether it’s fiscally prudent to stay in California.

3. If you a contemplating starting or investing in a California business: Think long and hard. Consider out-of-state alternatives.

He adds, “Just at the moment when California is retroactively taxing entrepreneurs, the federal government is extending the federal QSB benefit.”

Those affected will pay no federal capital gains tax, and in some states, no state taxes—but in California will pay up to 13 percent.

“Why in the world would any smart business person start or invest in a new California company facing that kind of penalty?”

“California changed the rules after the fact, and that’s just not right. More importantly, the FTB’s radical action is going to send a terrifying message that will have the unintended consequence of driving young, growing businesses to friendlier environments.”

Overstreet is correct—when it is right or moral to penalize  taxpayers who did nothing wrong? Nonetheless, my instinct tells me that entrepreneurs, inventors, investors and venture firms better pay those bills on time.

Congratulations to Xconomy for breaking this story, which still has gone under-reported.

See Brian Overstreet’s column at “California To Hit Startup Founders with Big Retroactive Tax Bills.”

An excellent story that explains the series of events written by Wade Roush, Xconomy’s chief correspondent and editor of Xconomy San Francisco, is “The Surreal, Ironic Story Behind California’s Retroactive Tax on Small Business Investors.”

The court decision is Cutler v. Franchise Tax Board.

Deloitte issued an alert entitled “California Franchise Tax Board Notice Implements Court of Appeal Decision Involving Qualified Small Business Stock Gain Exclusion/Deferral.”

California Politicians Owe Golfer Phil Mickelson an Apology

Posted January 25, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Best States, Businesses leave California, California taxes, Income Tax, Tax abuse

Political correctness in California has become so bizarre that a high-achieving citizen paying huge amounts in taxes is ostracized if he even mildly complains about those taxes.

Pro golfer Phil Mickelson has suggested “drastic changes” were in store for him – including possibly moving out of California – because of changes in federal and state taxes that puts him in an absurdly high tax category. The big tax bite was the reason behind his decision not to be part of the new ownership group of the San Diego Padres.

But the nation now has a class-warrior chorus that will defend reckless tax-and-spend policies in Sacramento and Washington while bullying people who dare speak the truth about their own tax quandaries.

An example can be seen in a Forbes online column that advises Mickelson: “Please stop whining and give thanks for being able to earn a fabulous living playing a game and selling golf clubs (even after tax). 99.999% of people would never have that option, no matter how hard they worked on their swing.” The writer should look up the definition of “whine” because that is not what the golfer was doing.

Apparently a backlash prompted Mickelson to apologize for airing his views, saying, “Finances and taxes are a personal matter and I should not have made my opinions on them public. I apologize to those I have upset or insulted and assure you I intend to not let it happen again.”

Hank Gola of the New York Daily News got it right in declaring that “Mickelson doesn’t have to apologize for anything. It’s almost more offensive that he feels compelled to apologize. He said nothing wrong. The worst thing he’s guilty of is a minor public relations gaffe …. Let’s look at Mickelson’s ‘controversial’ quotes from Sunday. He said he might have to make ‘drastic changes’ because he was in the ‘(income) zone’ being ‘targeted both federally and by the state’ and that it ‘doesn’t work’ for him right now.”

That is hardly polarizing, offensive or insulting. His comments were tame.

I think the apology should be the other way around with Gov. Jerry Brown, Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, and Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez apologizing to Mickelson and the rest of us for their irresponsible spending and tax-greedy ways.

I’ll be even more provocative and declare Brown, Steinberg and Pérez to be immoral for their support of Proposition 30, which passed in November. It increased income taxes and did so in an disgraceful manner – it raised taxes retroactively to January 1st of 2012.

Retroactively?

That’s OK with California’s politicians? Imagine if a home builder said, “We’re glad you bought that house from us in November, but we’re sending you a bill for the higher amount we wanted you to pay in January – and you have to pay it or you’ll be fined or go to jail.” Or imagine a car dealer billing you for the difference between a higher January price compared to your end-of-year purchase price. Or similar acts by your dry cleaner. Or your doctor. Can you imagine the public outrage?

If a retroactive tax doesn’t prove that Sacramento’s politicians are guilty of far more than a golfer making a few bland statements, what will? (Here’s an idea: How about some retroactive budget cuts?)

Phil Mickelson is hardly alone in his thinking. According to the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, in their report The Great California Exodus: A Closer Look, “For the past two decades, California has been sending more people to other American states than it receives from them. Since 1990, the state has lost nearly 3.4 million residents through this migration.”

Mickelson would also be in synch with his golfing colleagues Tiger Woods and Natalie Gulbis and also with equipment manufacturers Calloway Golf and Feel Golf. All have exited California for kinder, gentler, low-tax states.

It’s been said that Tiger Woods saved many millions in taxes when he moved from California to income-tax free Florida. In the aftermath of Mickelson’s comments he said, “I moved out of here back in ‘96 for that reason. I enjoy Florida but it was also…I understand what [Mickelson] was I think trying to say.”

Several years ago, Natalie Gulbis, a golfer in the LPGA, left Sacramento for an income-tax-free state, Nevada, before her biggest paydays as a professional athlete. Also, Scott McCarron on his PGA tour amassed considerable earnings and moved to Reno with taxes a consideration.

In 2011, Feel Golf Co., after acquiring Pro Line Sports, Inc. relocated its headquarters from Salinas in Monterey County to Sanford, Florida, with CEO Lee Miller stating, “We believe consolidating operations increases mutual synergies while significantly reduce operating costs. Florida also has tax advantages over California for the company and employees.”

A year earlier Callaway Golf Co. moved most manufacturing out of Carlsbad in San Diego County to Monterrey, Mexico. George Fellows, CEO, said, “This decision… supports the gross margin improvements necessary to secure our leadership position in a competitive market.” Moreover, the company outsourced distribution to Ryder Logistics and the bulk of that Carlsbad work moved to Dallas in income tax-free Texas.

I continually hear from business owners who tell me of their struggles with California’s tax maneuvering. Some worry about future abuses, with one client asking, “What’s to prevent Sacramento from passing a tax increase that’s retroactive back to five years?”

Another California relocation may occur even though it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with taxes: It looks like the Sacramento Kings will become the Seattle SuperSonics. If the NBA approves, the move will occur in time for the next season. Plans fell apart in 2011 for the Kings to move to Anaheim, which put Seattle in a better position to close the deal.

Kings players who relocate to Seattle will find that Washington is another state with no income tax. That fact may interest many Californians who are teed-off by the state’s outrageous retroactive tax hike.

Joseph Vranich of Spectrum Location Solutions helps companies find great locations in which to grow. He also is a keynote speaker on business growth and public policies that help companies thrive. His recent emphasis is on why companies leave California.

Golfers Get ‘Hole in One’ Leaving ‘In the Rough’ California for States with Greener Grass

Posted January 22, 2013 by bizlocate
Categories: Best States for Business, Business Location, Business Relocation, Businesses leave California, California taxes, Site Selection, Tax abuse, Worst States for Business

This post has been removed in light of new events and is replaced by California Politicians Owe Golfer Phil Mickelson an Apology, published Jan. 24, 2013.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 88 other followers