Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  Top 10 Tax-Unfriendly States for Retirees

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Top 10 Tax-Unfriendly States for Retirees
jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 4095
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2011 11:07 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Top 10 Tax-Unfriendly States for Retirees
by Human Events
08/20/2011

If you are lucky enough to contemplate retirement in these tough economic times, keep in mind how much of your hard-earned money you will have to fork over to the government. With a nod to Kiplinger’s “Money Power,” which compiled the rankings, here are the Top 10 Tax-Unfriendly States for Retirees, which are ones, for the most part, predominated by liberalism.

1. Vermont: The state that elected an avowed socialist to the U.S. Senate deserves the No. 1 ranking on this list. Retirement income is not exempt at all from the state income tax, and out-of-state pensions are fully taxed. Plus, sky-high property taxes make it hard to buy a home, and the high restaurant tax makes dining out more expensive.

2. Minnesota: Maybe this is why Tim Pawlenty​ didn’t catch on as a Republican presidential candidate—the state he presided over is a tax magnet. Social Security income gets taxed at the same rate as it is taxed by the federal government. In some cities, the sales tax hits 9.53%, and Minnesota has a high state-income tax.

3. Nebraska: How did the Cornhusker state make this list anyway? Could it be the bicameral legislature? Nebraska fully taxes all pensions, including from the military, and real estate taxes are high. The state inheritance tax hits annuities and property.

4. Oregon: The state, which has voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in the last six elections, has the steepest tax rates for high-income earners, so stay away if you are successful. Oregon also has an inheritance tax that is levied on assets no matter where they are located.

5. California: No surprise here. The land of Hollywood, Nancy Pelosi and broken government, tax-and-spend California has some of the highest state-income tax rates in the nation, topping off at 9.55%. Add a 9.25% sales tax in some cities to high real-estate costs, and good luck stretching your dollars in the Golden State.

6. Maine: Just as they send liberal Republicans to Washington (see Senators Olympia Snowe and Sue Collins​ , so does the state of Maine attack taxes from a RINO point of view. All income over $20,150 is taxed at a rate of 8.5%, and there is a 5% state sales tax. And there is a personal property tax. Tea Party, anyone?

7. Iowa: Maybe the Hawkeye State residents should pay more attention to their own state’s politics and less to their quadrennial time-in-the-presidential-spotlight with their fun and games at the Ames Straw Poll. In Iowa, retirement-plan distributions are taxed at rates as high as 8.98%, and property is subject to taxation by multiple levels of local government.

8. Wisconsin: No wonder the state of Wisconsin offered such good retirement benefits to its public employees—it soaks its residents with taxes. Wisconsin taxes pensions and annuities, and has state income tax rates as high as 7.75% and a 5.5% state sales tax.

9. New Jersey: Despite conservative firebrand Gov. Chris Christie’s success in curtailing the power of the mighty teachers’ unions, New Jersey is still a mess. The state’s combined state and local rates of taxation are the highest in the nation. Don’t even think about buying a house: The property tax rates are off the charts.

10. Connecticut: Connecticut has a 7% luxury tax, a 6.7% state sales tax and a state income tax of up to 6.7%. High-income earners pay a state levy on their Social Security benefits, out-of-state pensions are fully taxed, and property taxes are high. Because the Nutmeg State went 61% for Obama in 2008, presumably they don’t mind having their wealth spread around.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45638

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6930
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2011 03:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
one is presuming that retirement will continue to mean old folk partying till they die...

and that vermont's singlepayer healthcare program won't make up for a huge amount of those expenses

that anyone would live in new jersey if they were given a choice

that people won't want to live in california no matter HOW much it costs (oh and those home prices have come down and the LOW property taxes make up for a lot of the damage done anyway)!

and that oregon gives a hang if a bunch of people want to come retire there! they have ACTIVELY discouraged immigration for decades. which is why oregon is still a beautiful place to live with fabulous natural resources and curmudgeonly natives.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 4095
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2011 08:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Don't worry, O'Bomber's Death Panels will make sure most senior citizens don't live long after they retire.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6930
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2011 09:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
since time recorded, with or without health insurance, modern medical interventions, pacemakers and multiple prescriptions, the average lifespan barring infant death, childhood disease, battle wounds and epidemics...has been between 70-100 years. some live longer, some shorter.

but the vast majority of centenarians didn't stay alive because they could go to the hospital any time they pleased. in fact most of them AVOID doctors as much as possible.

my main objection to the healthcare plan? i don't use doctors and don't plan to! yet the emphasis on prevention is a good thing, and i will stump up my $50/month to help people get it, screw the death panels.

do you know how many people i know who have been written off by the doctors only to recover fully on their own regimen? or how many are kept alive at the expense of the rest of us just to live in a wheelchair and stare at the wall?

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6930
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2011 10:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
the GI generation are about the ONLY one, with the next one running close behind (that would be your generation) who have EVER had the kind of retirement expectations they have.

as the old folk die off so too will the idea of retiring at 62 and living a life of quiet luxury.

before FDR the normal retirement age was more like 69, and many people worked until just before their deaths. even rich people.

though the "average life expectancy" MAY have been 61 as you have said, that is because so many died in infancy, childhood and the battlefield. those who did not have always (since biblical times at least!) had a life expectancy just like ours today.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a