Moultonborough Taxes

John Mercier · 11-27-2023, 11:59 PM

But the subject is a State tax for a State mandate.

Since the federal government isn't going to be involved, and the State can't require payment in bitcoin, there is no way for that to happen.

The questions are simply will the NHSC concur with the lower court? And will the Legislature act to uphold the State Constitution should that occur?

Since the State sets the adequacy rate... anything above the adequacy rate is simply extras or the State adequacy rate is not high enough to provide what is deemed adequate.

For example, should the State set the adequacy rate at $8000, then the voters should deem any sum above that to be extraneous. A want instead of need.

It is something they will need to think about at town meeting in the Spring... as we should have some idea by then at least whether the SWEPT non-donor town condition will be found unconstitutional. If it is, Moultonborough and others will return to donor town status and have to carry that cost.

That will be above whatever the local voters approve for their school budget.
It will probably have to be phased in again. And a low-income primary home carve out be supplied... though hopefully they don't do something foolish and have to end up in court again.

11-27-2023, 11:59 PM	#28
John Mercier Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2021 Posts: 3,991 Thanks: 3 Thanked 680 Times in 562 Posts	But the subject is a State tax for a State mandate. Since the federal government isn't going to be involved, and the State can't require payment in bitcoin, there is no way for that to happen. The questions are simply will the NHSC concur with the lower court? And will the Legislature act to uphold the State Constitution should that occur? Since the State sets the adequacy rate... anything above the adequacy rate is simply extras or the State adequacy rate is not high enough to provide what is deemed adequate. For example, should the State set the adequacy rate at $8000, then the voters should deem any sum above that to be extraneous. A want instead of need. It is something they will need to think about at town meeting in the Spring... as we should have some idea by then at least whether the SWEPT non-donor town condition will be found unconstitutional. If it is, Moultonborough and others will return to donor town status and have to carry that cost. That will be above whatever the local voters approve for their school budget. It will probably have to be phased in again. And a low-income primary home carve out be supplied... though hopefully they don't do something foolish and have to end up in court again.