Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in favor of states

Taxes General Forum - Tax professionals meeting place and answers to queries. (Moderated) 

Yahoo!   Google   Windows Live   del.icio.us   digg   Netscape

Subject Author Date Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in favor of states Mark Bole 05-19-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Katie 05-19-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... KEBSCHULLW 05-20-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Stuart Bronstein 05-21-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Seth 05-21-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Katie 05-21-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Stuart Bronstein 05-21-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Rich Carreiro 05-21-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Katie 05-21-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Stuart Bronstein 05-22-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Kurt Ullman 05-22-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Elle 05-22-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Stuart Bronstein 05-22-2008  Re: Kentucky muni bond interest case decided in fa... Elle 05-22-2008  OT: this thread [Re: Kentucky muni bond interest c... Mark Bole 05-22-2008
Posted by Mark Bole on May 19, 2008, 1:36 pm Please log in for more thread options The Supreme Court has upheld the ability of states to exempt their own municipal bonds from taxation of interest while taxing those of other states. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/business/apee-bizcourt.html -Mark Bole -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by Katie on May 19, 2008, 3:21 pm Please log in for more thread options > The Supreme Court has upheld the ability of states to exempt their own > municipal bonds from taxation of interest while taxing those of other > states. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/business/apee-bizcourt.html > Thanks for posting that, Mark. Katie in San Diego -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by KEBSCHULLW on May 20, 2008, 12:28 am Please log in for more thread options > The Supreme Court has upheld the ability of states to exempt their own > municipal bonds from taxation of interest while taxing those of other > states. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/business/apee-bizcourt.html > > -Mark Bole > Based on the Case Number 06-666, the decision by the Supreme Court was predictable! >From the New York Times article, the Court seemed to be more concerned with a possibility of upsetting the muni-bond market rather than with the violation of the Constitution. That should come as no big surpise! Cheers, WDK -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by Stuart Bronstein on May 21, 2008, 12:37 pm Please log in for more thread options > The Supreme Court has upheld the ability of states to exempt their > own municipal bonds from taxation of interest while taxing those > of other states. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/business/apee-bizcourt.html I didn't find it surprising at all. When a state exempts its own bond interest from taxation, it benefits financially by encouraging more people to buy bonds at lower interest. If they were to exempt bond interest from other states, they would be losing financially. It's not considered discrimination if it's related to an actual cost/benefit to the state. Stu -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Posted by Seth on May 21, 2008, 1:59 pm Please log in for more thread options > >> The Supreme Court has upheld the ability of states to exempt their >> own municipal bonds from taxation of interest while taxing those >> of other states. >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/business/apee-bizcourt.html > >I didn't find it surprising at all. When a state exempts its own bond >interest from taxation, it benefits financially by encouraging more >people to buy bonds at lower interest. If they were to exempt bond >interest from other states, they would be losing financially. It's not >considered discrimination if it's related to an actual cost/benefit to >the state. But if a state taxed corn imported from other states, and not corn grown in itself, that would be unconstitutional discrimination, even though it provides an actual cost/benefit to farmers in that state (and thereby to the state itself by increasing collections of state income tax). Seth -- << ------------------------------------------------------- >> << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >> << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >> << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >> << >> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >> << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >> << are at www.asktax.org. >> << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >> << ------------------------------------------------------- >> Similar Threads Posted sale of defaulted muni bond January 17, 2008, 4:31 am Entering Capital Loss for Muni Bond Fund March 6, 2009, 12:09 pm accrued bond interest? April 7, 2008, 7:38 pm Taxes on Bond Interest March 7, 2009, 10:30 pm Bond Interest for deceased March 12, 2009, 11:42 am How is accrued interest on a bond handled? December 28, 2006, 12:07 am bond premium and accrued interest February 8, 2007, 7:58 am Savings Bond (EE & I) as taxable Interest? March 19, 2008, 9:48 pm How to deal with amortized bond interest? December 22, 2008, 2:05 pm Working in Kentucky and living in Texas January 28, 2007, 6:13 pm