I am BLOWN AWAY by this story. What the hell right does the State (capital "S" intentional) have to come into a retail store and tell them to hand over 60% of the cost of "dormant" gift cards?

Maine: Why let unused gift cards go to waste? - Retail - MSNBC.com

The most amazing part of the story is in the last paragraph: "The refusal of national firms to pay up has left a hole in the state budget."

IT WAS NEVER THEIR MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! And they put it in the budget, and now it's the retailer's fault?

We live in a scary, scary world.

I duno I think I would rather the state take it to use in some fashion instead of taxes. Thats better than the store making money on me.

I duno I think I would rather the state take it to use in some fashion instead of taxes. Thats better than the store making money on me.

Seriously? I knew when I bought the gift card for my brother for Christmas that he might not use it right away, might hold onto it for a year or two or even more. That's a risk I took, just like the risk I would have taken buying him a Christmas sweater that he'd never wear. It's not the State's money to take! They have no right to it -- just because they see it as "sitting there" they deserve a 60% cut? Suppose they start eyeballing your savings account next -- after all, it's just sitting there, right?

And you really believe if they take it they won't tax you as well? Taxes are going to go down because Uncle Fred didn't use his Target gift card? Not gonna happen. Gotta feed the beast. The more you feed him, the stronger he gets and the more he tries to take.

The point I am making is if they put the money to good use then good. Why should we lets some big corporation get rich on your money? I say if the state does take that money that was never used and uses it on schools or road projects or anything more important than lining someones pocket then so be it.

The point I am making is if they put the money to good use then good. Why should we lets some big corporation get rich on your money? I say if the state does take that money that was never used and uses it on schools or road projects or anything more important that lining someones pocket then so be it

Because IT'S NOT THEIR MONEY! The purchaser PAID it to the corporation, not to the State! No one forced them to do it; they did it voluntarily, knowing the risks. Just because the money is sitting there doesn't mean the government gets to claim 60% of it. :faint:

Why don't we just give the State ALL our money, since they're so good at "doing good things" with it? Yeah, right.

some advice the IRS once gave me, the trick is to stop thinking of it as your money.

some advice the IRS once gave me, the trick is to stop thinking of it as your money.

And therein lies the problem.

What part of 'the state is taking the money' makes it NOT taxes? And why should 'the state' interfere with the contract between the purchaser of the card and the business?

AMEN! :clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:

re: "I think I would rather the state take it to use in some fashion instead of taxes. Thats better than the store making money on me."

I am trying to discern whether this is said in jest or not.

What part of 'the state is taking the money' makes it NOT taxes? And why should 'the state' interfere with the contract between the purchaser of the card and the business?

...

I do not agree that the state has the right to tell business OR individuals what/how/when/where/why to use OUR money.

Yes! I agree completely

Check this out:

FOXNews.com - New York Town Lets Senior Pay Off Property Tax Bill With Cheap Labor - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

The line between excessive taxation and slavery is starting to be crossed in Greenburgh, where seniors who can't handle Westchester County's exorbitant property taxes may be granted the privilege of working off part of their tax bill in a desperate bid to hold onto the homes they supposedly own.

Apparently slave labor beats taking out a reverse mortgage that could result in foreclosure.

"allows seniors to be able to work and be involved in the community"

Note the doublespeak; forcing people to do something is "allowing" them to do it.

They always try to turn it around and make it something positive, don't they?

I think it's time for another tea party. After all, the ORIGINAL tea party we had was over the exorbitant tax rate of {gasp} 2% !!!! What we sit back (or maybe it's bend over) and take these days is ridiculous.

"'The state' here in sunny Orygun made the life of a neighbor miserable for years, when they were insisting he pay taxes YEARLY on the estimated market value of his 20 acres of timber..."

While I think this is absurd, this is no different than the IRS making the new owners of a special home-run baseball pay taxes on it, right? The guy that had Barry Bonds' record breaking ball sold it because he was facing a huge tax bill and could not afford it.

My accountant told me the story of two (grown) children who inherited their family's house on the beach in California. The house had been in the family since the 1940's. It was worth $30M, and it was all paid off. The kids had to sell the family house because they couldn't afford the $15M in death taxes. It's not like the taxes hadn't already been paid on the house.

"I'm from the IRS and I'm here to help you."

Disgusting.

amazing that one has to pay for the privlige of dying ain't it?

Current and Local and Breaking News for Denver, Colorado and the surrounding area : Rocky Mountain News

Check this one out. Here in Colorado people who bought a prime landlot in the '80's, paid taxes, kept the lot in good condition are rewarded with having to GIVE a large portion of their land to the people who live next door. All of this BECAUSE the landgrabbers (squatters) supposedly have been using this land as their own for years. They live in the house next to the land. Of course if the original owners chose to build a house there, it would block the landgrabbers beautiful view of the Boulder FlatIrons Mtn Range.