re: #126 Lidane

Leaving aside the schadenfreude-enhancing griping from the wingnuts
over the Evenwel decision, this carp:

I’m a resident of Idaho. I had to work in San Diego for a while, but was not a “resident of California”. I was subjected to income taxation by California (and Idaho and Nebraska), yet my only valid call on an elected official was in Idaho where I own my home. It’s a travesty that I’m compelled to pay income tax to 3 states, yet only allowed representation where I’m a resident. How is that persons who are not legal residents get counted for purposes of determining proportional representation in the US House of Representatives or apportionment of state representatives? If you can’t vote, why is your presence a factor in determining representation? It should be apportioned based on the number of legal voters. The court screwed up this opinion.

seems to show that the commenter’s grasp of tax regulations is about as solid as his understanding of the Constitution. Unless I’m wrong (always possible) aren’t workers only taxed by one state at a time ? IOW, if this guy lives in Idaho, but pays tax to CA for work done there, aren’t employment taxes paid to one state deductible from the tax liability from another one? Maybe he should spend less time on FR, and more with an accountant…..