3 ms·

At least one state wants their tax money from illegal income. North Carolina has an Unauthorized Substances Tax, where you buy a tax stamp covering your possess

by chiph 4y ago

At least one state wants their tax money from illegal income. North Carolina has an Unauthorized Substances Tax, where you buy a tax stamp covering your possession of the items (various drugs and/or moonshine). https://www.ncdor.gov/taxes-forms/other-taxes-and-fees/unauthorized-substances/about-unauthorized-substances-tax https://www.ncdor.gov/taxes-forms/other-taxes-and-fees/unaut... From talking to folks I used to know at the Department of Revenue, they have never sold any stamps to people in advance of the cops arriving on the scene. Only to stamp collectors. The tax rate for marijuana is $3.50 for each gram (or fraction thereof) above 42.5 grams. Bulk spirituous liquor is $12.80 per gallon.

R0b0t1 4y ago
Other states do this and even the federal government, I think. They're shooting themselves in the foot. If the path to legal possession is tortuous and likely to incriminate you then you're protected from divulging it and your nonpayment of taxes is wholly legal on the grounds attempting to collect makes the state violate the 5th. The widespread use of parallel construction -- and even merely its plausibility -- means that the IRS's current stance on reporting illegal income is likely suspect as well.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  There have been a number of cases where the legality of requiring tax payment on illicit income hinges on the state tax authorities providing a means of paying said taxes completely anonymously. Of course they do not expect anyone to pay - this is merely so they can Capone people. It's much easier to nail people for tax evasion than for the actual crimes they committed in a lot of cases.
- gnopgnip 4y ago
  The irs is prohibited from sharing taxpayer info without a warrant. There have been many cases in the past where your fifth amendment rights have not prevented tax liability or criminal charges for illegal income.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - R0b0t1 4y ago
    I know, but that doesn't mean it's right.
  - 6c737133 4y ago
    Ya and the NSA was prohibited from spying on American citizens without a warrant - hows that going?
  - geoduck14 4y ago
    >The irs is prohibited from sharing taxpayer info without a warrant. Ok, sure. And I'm supposed to do the dishes before my wife comes home, too.
gwbas1c 4y ago
> Only to stamp collectors. Or to stamp "collectors?"

by chiph 4y ago

R0b0t1 4y ago

Other states do this and even the federal government, I think. They're shooting themselves in the foot. If the path to legal possession is tortuous and likely to incriminate you then you're protected from divulging it and your nonpayment of taxes is wholly legal on the grounds attempting to collect makes the state violate the 5th. The widespread use of parallel construction -- and even merely its plausibility -- means that the IRS's current stance on reporting illegal income is likely suspect as well.

arcticbull 4y ago
There have been a number of cases where the legality of requiring tax payment on illicit income hinges on the state tax authorities providing a means of paying said taxes completely anonymously. Of course they do not expect anyone to pay - this is merely so they can Capone people. It's much easier to nail people for tax evasion than for the actual crimes they committed in a lot of cases.
gnopgnip 4y ago
The irs is prohibited from sharing taxpayer info without a warrant. There have been many cases in the past where your fifth amendment rights have not prevented tax liability or criminal charges for illegal income.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- R0b0t1 4y ago
  I know, but that doesn't mean it's right.
- 6c737133 4y ago
  Ya and the NSA was prohibited from spying on American citizens without a warrant - hows that going?
- geoduck14 4y ago
  >The irs is prohibited from sharing taxpayer info without a warrant. Ok, sure. And I'm supposed to do the dishes before my wife comes home, too.

gwbas1c 4y ago

> Only to stamp collectors. Or to stamp "collectors?"