| Thursday, May 20, 2004 |
13:32 - First sings first, ve vill kill all ze lawyers
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/05/update_on_gov_s.html
|
(top)  |
Holy crap! Arnie is whipping out the big guns on punitive damages. He's proposing a 75% tax on them.
• Of the eight states (Alaska, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Oregon and Utah) that currently impose similar taxes, seven let the lawyers eat first (the state takes their share only after attorneys' fees are paid). California would join Indiana in taking its 75% share before the payment of attorneys' fees.
• The article predicts that Gov. Schwarzenegger's proposal may succeed if the tax is whittled down to 50% and the lawyers are allowed to eat first.
So frivolous lawsuits (currently bleeding us dry as a country, as well as building the ever-more-entrenched Zero-Fault Society, where every problem can be solved by suing somebody) are squarely in the Gov's cybernetic crosshairs; but not only that, he intends to use them as an engine, for as long as they last before the tax drives them away, for replenishing the state's bank account. If it works, brilliant.
Especially if he can push it through without allowing the lawyers to "eat first". Wouldn't that be catastrophic for the personal-injury-lawyer industry? Halle-frickin'-lujah.
Lance has often spoken of a solution whereby punitive damages are paid to a public charity, rather than awarded in the form of lottery winnings to the plaintiff. Real damages, yes, fine—medical bills, property damage, lost employment, all that stuff, that's as it should be. But punitive damages—the penalties imposed on the losing defendant purely as punishment? Why should those go to the plaintiff? Better they get reinvested back into the system, so the rest of us can benefit from the money, not just the lawyers and the people who see a door ding as the clarion call of Payday.
Sounds like this proposal is pretty damn close to just that. Now if only we can keep the lawyers out...
|
|
Brian Tiemann
