logoalt Hacker News

blagie • yesterday at 6:15 PM • 6 replies • view on HN

> “The bill would hold any officer, manager, partner, beneficial owner, or member of a shell company personally liable for any unpaid taxes, and any interest and penalties on those taxes, the nonpayment of which may constitute a crime, due on the purchase of a vehicle, vessel, or aircraft.”

Is dumb.

You want comprehensive enforcement with reasonable penalities.

You don't want draconian laws randomly enforced.


Replies

bluGill • yesterday at 6:28 PM

I don't think it will hold up in federal courts. This seems to apply to cars that the company officer who lives and drives in Montana as well. If this only applies to cars used more than 50% in CA is would hold up. Of course truck drivers who mostly don't drive in CA but that is home may find an out with that plan.

Details are important and very hard to get right.

➕ show 3 replies
linksnapzz • yesterday at 6:30 PM

What, the government of CA is lobbing hastily-crafted, poorly considered legislation in the general direction of a problem that they think they have?

(surprised pikachu face)

grvdrm • yesterday at 6:17 PM

You are speaking deeply to me about leaf blower bans in my town. They are useless.

➕ show 2 replies
trelane • yesterday at 6:21 PM

> You want comprehensive enforcement with reasonable penalities.

> You don't want draconian laws randomly enforced.

This depends entirely on what the goal of the law is.

sandworm101 • yesterday at 6:51 PM

>>You want comprehensive enforcement with reasonable penalities. >>You don't want draconian laws randomly enforced.

Paying tax on a vehicle driven in a state is not unreasonable. And holding the executives of a shell/numbered/privately-held/tax-dodging organization liable for taxes owed is not draconian.

➕ show 1 reply
bradthebeaverfa • yesterday at 6:42 PM

[flagged]