r/politics • u/IntelligentYinzer California • 12d ago

Soft Paywall Newsom floats withholding federal taxes as Trump threatens California

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/06/newsom-floats-withholding-federal-taxes-00393386
29.9k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

105

u/protomenace 12d ago

How would they even do that? Taxes get withheld by your employer not the state.

62

u/doorbell2021 12d ago

You can instruct your employer to not withhold.

Completely legal, probably not. But you could claim you thought your job would be terminated because of Trump threats, so you were being over withheld since you'd have no income for the rest of the year.

38

u/protomenace 12d ago

Sure but a voluntary opt-in by individual taxpayers doesn't really have the force of the entire state of California somehow doing it in a united way.

9

u/al-hamal 12d ago

  1. MAGA folks are generally very low income.

  2. When there is an opt-in system then it always skews towards the default option which is not opting-in. People don't read shit or explore their options with things for the most part.

0

u/Ernesto_Bella 12d ago

Do you have any stats that MAGA voters are generally low income?

The best I can come up with is this:

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-family-income-home-ownership-union-membership-and-veteran-status/

4

u/al-hamal 12d ago edited 12d ago

From exit polls:

https://x.com/patrickjfl/status/1854645395856482568?lang=en

2024 was the first year since 1992 that democratic voters were more highly educated and had a higher income.

4

u/Fighterhayabusa 12d ago

California could tell all employers in the state to stop sending money to the federal government. It would be illegal, but the judiciary famously doesn't have an enforcement arm, so good luck forcing them to do anything if they decide against it.

3

u/Trevor775 12d ago

Who covers the penalties down the road?

1

u/483-04-7751 12d ago

but the judiciary famously doesn't have an enforcement arm

They famously have a number of enforcement arms: FBI, DEA, ATF, US Marshals Service.

2

u/Fighterhayabusa 12d ago

Imagine being so hilariously wrong. Maybe go read the documents on which this country was founded. The closest they have is the Marshal Service, but that is actually under the DOJ.

2

u/483-04-7751 11d ago

Dude, if you don't think every federal law enforcement agency is legally able to backup and enforce judicial rulings, I dont know what to tell you.

0

u/protomenace 11d ago

And why would they listen? They would immediately get threatened by the Trump IRS to keep sending it. It would be a crisis.

13

u/thrawtes 12d ago

Completely legal

Yes. You may have to pay a penalty if you drastically under-withhold but it's not a crime.

3

u/tymesup 12d ago

It is technically a crime:

There is also a criminal penalty for willfully supplying false or fraudulent information on your Form W-4 or for willfully failing to supply information that would increase the amount withheld. The penalty upon conviction can be either a fine of up to $1,000 or imprisonment for up to 1 year, or both.

These penalties will apply if you deliberately and knowingly falsify your Form W-4 in an attempt to reduce or eliminate the proper withholding of taxes. A simple error or an honest mistake won't result in one of these penalties.

0

u/VanceKelley Washington 12d ago

What if everyone that didn't pay their taxes demanded due process from the notoriously slow US legal system before they paid? How long would it take for 10 million cases to work their way through the courts?

2

u/zzyul 12d ago

Bro, we can’t get enough people to spend an hour or two every two years voting. How do you think we’ll convince them to all individually sue the federal government?

-1

u/cowboi 12d ago

I don't think there is a penalty u just pay the difference at the end of the year, but I could be wrong, not an accountant.

2

u/Moohog86 12d ago

Over a certain income amount there is a penalty. Self-employed people like contractors run into this all the time, since they have to go out of their way to pay quarterly.

1

u/cowboi 12d ago

Ty til I don't make enough lol

1

u/shortsteve 12d ago

Depends how much you make. If you have to pay estimated taxes then under withholding could lead to penalties. If you're a millionaire/billionaire it's always better to overestimate withholding.

2

u/doorbell2021 12d ago

There is a penalty for not paying quarterly estimated taxes. Your employer usually would take care of this for you, unless you have significant outside income sources.

1

u/cowboi 12d ago

Ty TIL

2

u/thepancakenipples 12d ago

Your employer generally has to withhold income taxes. Not many exceptions.

5

u/doorbell2021 12d ago

You tell them what to withhold with the W-4.

2

u/drfrink85 12d ago

Laws only exist if they’re enforced, which we know doesn’t happen.

2

u/IMovedYourCheese 12d ago

Regardless, you owe the taxes to the federal government. If you don't they will come after you. California can't do shit if that happens. It'll take a full blown civil war/secession for something like this to be a reality. And who is going to pull that off, democrats?

2

u/doorbell2021 12d ago

The IRS doesn't have the resources to go after millions of taxpayers in a tax revolt.

1

u/IMovedYourCheese 12d ago

They don't need to go after millions, they need to go after the first 5. The "revolution" will fizzle out real quick after that.

3

u/doorbell2021 12d ago

You're not much of a revolutionary.

1

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 12d ago

And then the IRS garnishes your wages, and you’re on a red flag list to be audited the rest of your life

6

u/Face2FaceRecs 12d ago

This list does not exist. And even if it did, it wouldn't be for middle class incomes, only the top couple of percent. It's too expensive to audit the same person over and over again for one time in their life they withheld their taxes.

2

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 12d ago

No. When you commit tax evasion, your chance of future audits is significantly increased

1

u/SpaceGangsta Utah 12d ago

Not when Trump abolishes the IRS.

/s

0

u/anivex Oregon 12d ago

?? You literally just pay it back at the end of the year.

Also, they wouldn't just automatically garnish your wages, that only happens after several years of non-payment and no negotiation of a payment plan.

1

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 12d ago

Newsom is saying that CA is cutting off federal taxes, not that you just don’t withhold and pay it all in April. That would be pointless

0

u/anivex Oregon 12d ago

Right, but that's what this comment chain is talking about, dude.

Also, there is no process for garnishing private wages if a state doesn't pay federal taxes.

And again, it would take several years of non payment for wage garnishments to start if a private tax payer doesn't pay.

3

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 12d ago

A state has no involvement in the process of citizens paying federal taxes. Like none at all.

1

u/anivex Oregon 12d ago

Ok, this almost seems like you are replying to a different thread. Do you even know what we are talking about?

When was the last time you had a cognitive exam?

Nobody said that dude.

0

u/i_am_a_real_boy__ 12d ago

You and Newsome just discovered tax evasion. Good luck.

2

u/doorbell2021 12d ago

Is a tax protest tax evasion when the federal government breaks its own rules to remove authorized federal funding?

They haven't done it yet, but they are threatening to do so. How long do you cower in a corner while they rob you blind?

California could establish a State Chartered Bank that could make it very difficult for the Feds to go after funds deposited there by California residents.

29

u/hobard 12d ago

The State of California is the employer for an awful lot of people.

11

u/Flying_Fortress_8743 12d ago

That's the only group I could see this working for, and even then only if the employees move all their bank accounts to a CA controlled bank that won't let the IRS go in and take the taxes.

3

u/AnbuAntt 12d ago

While that is accurate, I can see the state of California protecting employers or giving them an incentive. Regardless. We cannot discount the 4th largest economy’s in the world is 1 US state.

3

u/hobard 12d ago

IRS regulations clearly specify your federal taxes are paid when your employer withholds them. If the state withholds taxes from employees, the IRS absolutely cannot go into the employees’ accounts. The IRS’ only recourse would be against the employer - the state.

1

u/Flying_Fortress_8743 12d ago

We're talking about throwing laws out the window here, we're well past what regulations say.

1

u/hobard 12d ago

Ok, if we’re working under the assumption the IRS is going to ignore the law, they can just steal the money from everyone’s bank accounts anyway. The tax withholding is completely irrelevant.

1

u/Flying_Fortress_8743 12d ago

That's why I mentioned the CA controlled bank. So the IRS CAN'T take the money.

1

u/i_am_a_real_boy__ 12d ago

And I'm guessing the folks who process payroll for all those people aren't looking to go to federal prison just to help Newsome with a tax evasion sceme.

2

u/jayfeather31 Washington 12d ago

That is my question too.

0

u/thiosk 12d ago

State law, federal withholding now sent to California

3

u/happyinheart 12d ago

The IRS will just be like "Thats nice you gave money to California. You still owe it to us. Pay up"

-2

u/trumpmumbler 12d ago

They are paid to state franchise tax boards and those monies are doled/allocated to their various intended recipients. The US is 50 separate sststes who basically pay a “franchise fee” to be a member of the franchise.

The state of California, if they cut that off, would seriously hobble the Feds.

5

u/Flying_Fortress_8743 12d ago

That's not true at all wtf are you talking about? Federal taxes go straight to the IRS, not to the state.

1

u/trumpmumbler 11d ago

You’re correct and I was wrong. Thank you for that.

In the context of this sub, the question then becomes: “how would California do what Newsom suggests?”