Anonymous
Post 03/05/2011 22:18     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:IF you send your kids to school in DC there is no reason not to live in the District. None.


This is so ridiculous, I don't even know where to start.

Signed,
Former District Resident Who Moved When They Just Couldn't Take It Any More
Anonymous
Post 03/05/2011 22:09     Subject: Re:DC privates educating suburban kids
PP you sound bitter and crazy!
Anonymous
Post 03/05/2011 20:35     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
They also shouldn't be allowed to get financial aid.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 17:51     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:IF you send your kids to school in DC there is no reason not to live in the District. None.


Housing prices are astronomical in DC.

I moved from a DC neighborhood to a very comparable neighborhood in MD. Same style housing, same kind of demographics, same distance to the metro, and just 2 more stops into DC.

My rent on a similar apartment dropped $500.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 17:23     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:From the Maryland State Comptroller Web site.

If you are a nonresident who works in Maryland and/or derives other income from a Maryland source, you are subject to Maryland's income tax rates as well as the special nonresident tax rate of 1.25 percent. For more information about the filing requirements for nonresidents, see the instructions in the Maryland nonresident tax booklet.


Our accountant has never had us do this despite living in DC and working in MD....for my angry DC neighbors...there are plenty of us who migrate in the other direction - for both work and school.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 17:08     Subject: Re:DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:Again - the question of confusion - does anyone know of any government that taxes educational institutions in the US? I thought this was a blanket practice nationwide? At the federal, state and local levels? Maybe I am wrong?


Some cities negotiate payments-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOTS) from universities, especially when they are large landowners and much of their property isn't subject to property taxes. Here's an example from Cambridge (where I first noticed the practice -- don't know how widespread it is): http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CDD/data/educ/towngown_2008.html
But I don't think they collect from private primary/secondary day schools.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 16:50     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
From the Maryland State Comptroller Web site.

If you are a nonresident who works in Maryland and/or derives other income from a Maryland source, you are subject to Maryland's income tax rates as well as the special nonresident tax rate of 1.25 percent. For more information about the filing requirements for nonresidents, see the instructions in the Maryland nonresident tax booklet.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 16:20     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:DC certainly is able to impose a commuter tax or something similar that would hit schools and other businesses; plenty of other cities do that, and I recall reading it has been proposed in DC many times.

Why, no, we can't. Our Congressional masters have explicitly forbidden it ....

Do you know that for fact -- i.e., that the Congressional Oversight committees explicitly forbid a commuter tax or anything similar? Or are you just saying we in DC would have to make sure it is not blocked by Congress? I don't know whether it's ever been proposed before, or what the outcome was. Can you educate me?


Yes, it's a fact. The Home Rule Act of 1973 forbids the DC Council from taxing any portion of a non-resident's personal income. http://www.abfa.com/ogc/tit6.htm (see Section 602(5)). That ban has been litigated in, and upheld by, lower federal courts, most recently in 2005. That case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear it. (Justice Roberts was one of the appeals court judges who upheld the ban below). DC Council will, no doubt, continue to fight the ban -- there's been talk about an amendment to the Charter (which, itself, would require Congressional approval and, if successful, would merely remove the categorical prohibition. Tax legislation, like any other DC legislation, would still be subject to Congressional override). The most recent proposal I heard in the Council (last Spring) was to tax the income of DC government employees who lived outside the jurisdiction. Don't know whether that went anywhere. Without a Charter Amendment, I can't see the federal courts upholding it.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 15:58     Subject: Re:DC privates educating suburban kids
Again - the question of confusion - does anyone know of any government that taxes educational institutions in the US? I thought this was a blanket practice nationwide? At the federal, state and local levels? Maybe I am wrong? But if I am not - it seems like a strange tactic to take.

Also relevant here is that in many states, schools are funded at the "town level" within a state. When I lived in Boston (where each town has its own school sytem), I never heard residents of Andover complaining that Phillips Academy should highly favor Andover residents over Salem residents just because they were driving from one town (and taxing district) to another. I don't think that PA was even pressured to have more Mass residents than out of state ones?

When I was in Baltimore, I never heard of people complaining that Gillman should be favoring Balt City residents over Balt County...
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 15:16     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
I don't think anyone said anything about barring them from attending. What I'm saying is that if the schools are educating more than 50% non-DC residents then we as DC residents should not be in the business of providing a subsidy to the education of suburban children. That is all.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 14:58     Subject: Re:DC privates educating suburban kids
Ugh - I love the smattering of useful posts on DCUM - but reading this site gives me a stomach ache sometimes. So much negativity, resentment and downright mean spirited people/posts. There must be a lot of unhappy people out there... sorry.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 14:52     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
`` IF you send your kids to school in DC there is no reason not to live in the District. None. ''

That's just stupid. And I was born and raised in the District. Barring people from MD & Va from going to school in DC isn't going to improve your kid's chances of getting in to STA, GDS or Sidwell, afterall, they have your genes.

Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 14:22     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:IF you send your kids to school in DC there is no reason not to live in the District. None.


I send my kids to a private school in DC and have many reasons for not living in the District. Many. Who are you to tell people where they should live?
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 14:17     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
IF you send your kids to school in DC there is no reason not to live in the District. None.
Anonymous
Post 02/02/2011 14:05     Subject: DC privates educating suburban kids
Anonymous wrote:Unlike other multi-jurisdictional locations (such as NY City/NJ/NY/CT) DC cannot levy a commuter tax. As a result, the city has hundreds of thousands of commuters who use the roads, policy/fire/ambulance and other city services which they do not pay for.

I would also submit that the presence of the Federal Government is the reason most of the city and suburbs exist. Think: NIH, EPA and NIST in Montgmery County, CIA, Pentagon and all of the "black" agencies in the Dulles corridor. None of these areas would be anything more than farmland if DC wasn't located where it is and agencies didn't locate to campus settings over the past 60 years.

And, FWIW, there are plenty of suburban families who use DC addresses and family members to send their kids to certain DCPS schools, given the PK and child care opportunities as well as select schools that people want to attend. We are also the dumping ground for a lot of the region's homeless, who are routinely dropped off, bussed in or otherwise left to the city because of the generous but over taxed social service programs.



Well, what is the cost that those folks actually impose on the District? And does that cost exceed what those people are already paying in other sorts of taxes? Unless there is some actual net impact, a commuter tax is a solution in search of a problem. I've seen no evidence that this is the case.