The New York Post reports that Music icon David Foster’s daughters declared their “hate” for Gov. Gavin Newsom this week, blaming the Democrat for the state’s deteriorating quality of life — and wondering whether his goal is to have California “be a socialist state.”
— New York Post (@nypost) September 22, 2023
They sound like bright women.
Foster’s daughters, Sara and Erin, are apparently jealous that their other sister moved to Tennessee:
“I’m jealous because — if anyone follows me, you know that I have a lot of complaints about the city we live in and the state we live in,” Sara Foster, 42, griped on their joint show, “The World’s First Podcast.”
“And people are always like, ‘Why don’t you just leave?’ Guys, it’s not that easy.”
Their beef is with the proposed 10-year tax from the California government if she relocates to another state.
Every recent legislative session in the California Legislature has one wealth tax exit proposal. In 2020, the Globe reported on a proposed wealth tax, AB 2088, which would follow any and all businesses that leave California for greener economic pastures. The bill’s author, then-Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Contra Costa) (now the state’s Attorney General), blames coronavirus for creating “inequality” in California, and not previous Democrat legislation and policies. This first-in-the-nation net worth tax is estimated to generate $7.5 billion per year in new “revenues” to the state coffers. AB 2088 died without passage.
In 2021, Assembly Members Alex Lee, Wendy Carrillo, Lorena Gonzalez, Miguel Santiago, Ash Kalra, Luz Rivas, and Mark Stone introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8 to propose a wealth tax to be placed before the voters. That proposed Constitutional Amendment also died without passage.
In January 2023, Assembly Constitutional Amendment 3 was introduced by Marxist Assemblyman Alex Lee (D-Palo Alto), along with Marxist co-authors Assembly Members Ash Kalra, Wendy Carrillo, Matt Haney, Corey Jackson, Liz Ortega, and Miguel Santiago, and Senators Maria Elena Durazo, Lena Gonzalez, and Lola Smallwood-Cuevas.
ACA 3 proposed two changes to the California Constitution:
The first change that ACA 3 would make is to amend Article XIII, Section 2 to provide that the Legislature may provide for the taxation of all forms of personal property or wealth, tangible or intangible and classify personal property or wealth for differential taxation or for exemption. In addition, any tax on personal property or wealth imposed would be administered and collected by the Franchise Tax Board and the Department of Justice, as determined by the Legislature in statute.
The second change that ACA 3 would make is to amend Article XIII B, Section 1 to modify the Gann Limit or the State Appropriations Limit (SAL). The SAL would not be exceeded unless two out of three conditions have been satisfied. The first would require expenditures per student to place California in the top 10 states. The second would determine that California is among the 10 states with the lowest fraction of population without health insurance. The third would determine that California is no longer among the top 10 states with the highest percentage of households whose costs are in excess of 50% of household income.
ACA 3 hasn’t moved since March 2023.
The New York Post reports on yet another wealth tax:
The proposed exit law — introduced at the beginning of the year — would apply to the Golden State’s uber-wealthy who might be looking to avoid state taxes on billionaires by moving to states that don’t have income or wealth taxes.
That bill, AB 259 also by Assemblyman Alex Lee, “would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, impose an annual tax at a rate of 1% of a resident’s worldwide net worth in excess of $50,000,000, or in excess of $25,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately.”
It’s a ridiculously unconstitutional bill, and also hasn’t made a move in the Legislature since March.
Assembly Bill 259, the Wealth Tax Act, which will impose an annual “worldwide net worth” tax of 1 percent on net worth above $50 million, rising to 1.5 percent on net worth over $1.0 billion. “Everything about this bill is goofy. It’s unconstitutional, it applies to intangible assets like goodwill or trademarks, it applies as well to assets that have subjective, wildly fluctuating values, such as fine art, and it even applies to equity owned in private companies that the holder may never convert into real money.”
“Although the bill is still being considered by the state Assembly committee on tax and revenue, the Foster sisters aimed their ire at Newsom,” the Post reports.
“I blame everything on Newsom. Newsom is, like, the worst,” Sara Foster said.
“Yeah, I hate him,” her 41-year-old sister agreed, adding that they once met the governor in the Bahamas.
Sara Foster said the proposed legislation is especially distasteful as California grapples with “crime through the roof.”
Foster doubled down on the leadership of Newsom, who has been governor since 2019.
“You are running the state and your policies are whack, therefore, I’m coming for you … it’s really f–ked up what’s happening here,” she said. “And I think that it’s like, is the goal to be Venezuela? Is the goal to be a socialist state? I don’t know.”
Beauty and brains – Good for the Foster sisters.
- Sacramento County to Oust Local Restaurant from Sac Executive Airport after 24 Years? - December 4, 2023
- Newsom v. DeSantis Debate: Identity Politics vs. Facts - November 30, 2023
- New Study Reveals BIG Divides Between Governors DeSantis & Newsom on Individual Liberties, etc. - November 30, 2023