California is trying to invoke a special tax on billionaires. What do you think about that?

[msc545]

nytimes link

Updates

5 mo

If you came on here to trash California, then I am going to delete the vile things that you've said about my home. If you come on here to actually talk about the question, that's different.

Updates

4 mo

Congratulations! Your question has been selected as "Great" by the GAG Content Team. Great questions are featured on the Homepage ("Featured"), on the "Live Feed" and on recent "Questions" pages. You have also been awarded 4 xper points for your great question. Thanks so much for your contribution to the GirlsAskGuys community!

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

I think it's a terrific idea and every state should implement this rather than certain states housing millionaires and billionaires with tax shelters.

This whole idea that the economy would crash and the rich would just move is a story made up by the rich just to avoid paying taxes and to stay rich. I have zero problem with people trying to make money in this country, but I also believe in making it fair for all citizens to pay their equal percentage of taxes, even if that means that the rich will need to pay more money to make it equal.

They shouldn't be getting loopholes to get out of paying taxes. That money could help fund things like infrastructure, the military (going to the actual enlisted not more missiles), education, veterans and mental health programs.

[Amy10223]

I think that it's a great idea, and that they need to pay more because they pay more. That's the way it works most times, isn't it? You pay more taxes on a house that cost a million dollars, rather than on one that costs 350,000 (if you can find one for that price in the bigger cities in the US, that is). Let's start with the orange orangutan. Tax that money he has in secret bank accounts--and in the one he has in Quatar.

[msc545]

Orangutans everyone is outraged at the comparison.

[Amy10223]

Horrible, isn't it? How about Crybaby?

[msc545]

Orangatangs everywhere really kind of wish he didn't exist. I don't think he's ever paid any taxes.

[Amy10223]

He hasn't, for at LEAST 20 years, since he had become president the first time. That's one of the reasons that he was convicted, wasn't it? Telling the IRS that he only made such and such an amount per yr, in order to avoid paying what he should have. He lied to banks as well in order to get loans, saying he had more than he did in order to get them. A great conman he is, a savvy businessman he ain't.

[madhatters4]

i'm all for it. the supposed Big Beautiful Bill has created an even bigger deficit than we already had. billion dollar corporations saw their tax bills slashed by at much as 60% in some cases.

1. it's simply not fair that the average American pays nearly 30% their income in taxes while the wealthiest are taxed in the single digits

2. we have to, and if the federal government won't the states need to, find a way to close the budget gaps.

[Anonymous]

California should not be the only state, it should be the whole country.

The majority of Americans will struggle to even meet $1 million to retirement in the modern age of corporations squeezing us dry all the time.
Low wages, high housing costs, grocery prices spike, useless gasoline that is wasted having to return to the pump for more, high utilities costs, you will own nothing and be happy mentality, high subscription costs, high medical bills, insurance companies refusing to cover their customers, etc.

The people reporting that taxation for rich and less for the average American and a sustainable cost of living is “Communist” so, the mindless sheeple will vote against their best interests at heart and the two party system makes you conned into believing you have a choice when in reality it is SuperPACs and lobbyists working with corporations to achieve their agendas same with the corporations that own the free press pumping out stories to scare the public into Red Scares that are targeted against Progressives, Socialists, and Liberalism also limiting the freedoms we have as citizens under US Jurisdiction.

[MrOracle]

Wealth taxes like this one have been tried many times and they simply don't work. All the ultra rich people who would be subject to this tax have already left the state or are leaving now. Zuckerberg just announced his move to Florida. Dozens of other California billionaires and multi-millionaires have not only left but taken their businesses - with all the jobs and taxes - with them. And this law hasn't even been passed yet, but it was the straw that broke the camel's back, on top of the already super high taxes, epic levels of crime, and endless regulations.

California is absolutely fucked, and the middle class are going to be bearing the consequences of the insane policies that the majority have voted for.

Right now, U-Haul trucks going one way to Texas, Tennessee, or Florida are renting for 4-5 times the price of trucks coming the other way. And it's the most well-off people who are leaving. And Newsom just keeps making it worse. He's already passed new regulations that have caused the remaining 9 oil refineries to shut down and leave the region, which is going to mean gas at $8-10 per gallon.

It's not an accident or even stupidity, it's intentional destruction of the California economy. And these idiots keep voting for it. California has had a Democrat super majority for 40 years and the economy has been steadily declining since. And now the decline is accelerating.

[RandomGirl42]

What do -I- think? Like, on my own without asking AI? um... ok, I can do this... let's see, I'm on the total other side of the country and... um... we don't have any billionaires that I know of so... um... I guess I don't think about it at all.

[Hopeless30]

Haha you should write in one sentence that I dont think about it at all...
Funny 😂

[MisterWack]

Cute and funny answer 🤣 @RandomGirl42

[ohsheeT]

California needs money. They passed a law or bill. For black people for them to start receiving money.\nIf they were slaves

Will California didn't have any slaves? Because slavery ended before that state was even part of the union couldn't have been slaves because that was way back then, and this is today.\n It's crazy. California is crazy. I mean, if they can prove their grandfather was or whatever go for it. But just to give everybody money for that newsome really wants to get elected president

[Snowman84]

California is proposing a one-time 5% tax on residents with a net worth exceeding $1 billion, aimed at funding healthcare and education.
I do agree with equitable taxation, and I think it makes sense. However most billionaires hold vast overseas assets and could easily hide their net worth.

[msc545]

If they do, they do. We're not gonna run in fear of these people.

[Snowman84]

I think it should be done, it’s just a reality that should be taken into consideration if this bill gains traction

[msc545]

It may be a reality or it may not be. California has attractions that no other state in the country has. Don't think for one minute that billionaires are not aware of that and don't take advantage of that. I doubt that they are upset enough about this to go live in Mississippi or Missouri or some other shit hole flyover state where the tax rate is more favorable to them. When you have as much money as they do, saving a little bit of it is not that important.

[msc545]

I think they are already doing that.

[lightbulb27]

how are they getting away with that given AMT and such. That I don't get.

They should pay tax like everyone else. not so convinced the above is true. the other issue is accumulation... they get more and more... thus democrats death confiscation...

if we had let people fail in prior collapses wouldn't be so bad would it, so many be wiped out. but no, they get bailed out...

[Anonymous]

commiefornia is desperate for money. Brain dead comments here by the way. If a billionaire moves his business out of the state, how do liberals even pretend to argue that it doesn't affect the people there? If they take their business elsewhere, those jobs go with them, you unbelievable dumbasses. 🤣 That loses not only tax revenue for the state, but wage-paying jobs for the citizens. But of course... that's a good thing? I guess it's true. I remember y'all jizzing in your pants when AOC chased the Amazon jobs away from New York, because "we don't need no stinkin' jobs", am I right?

[Danzigdawson]

Great step forward, but as long as those parasitic fuckers have fiscal paradises or sympathetic countries where their money is safe, they'll keep hoarding the world's wealth.

Eliminating billionaires through heavy-handed taxation should be a worldwide, coordinated effort. After all, the whole world stands to benefit from it.

[Sevenpointfive]

that would be great. i think we need to do away with tax write-offs for businesses. but would that lower the rate for average americans? if we reversed the numbers, then we'd be a lot better off and they would still be rich.

[AviatorTom]

Another attempt by liberals to make up for their failed economics that will fail again. Major companies and individuals have already left the state, this will cause more to do so. Ultimately, this will end up putting more tax burden on the middle class in California.

[NathanDavis]

useless...

first of all, they can leave

second of all... they can have others pay the taxes for them, just as they always do

useless propaganda, as always

[palewhale]

billionaires are the oil in a machine, with their investment the machine would cease up. If you start trying to punish them they will leave for somewhere they are welcome.

[palewhale]

*without

[msc545]

That is a really poor analogy. They are more like grit in the gears of a good, well-oiled machine.

[palewhale]

i will agree to disagree

[msc545]

That's fine.

[Anonymous]

they should be paying more than us since they have more money but that would be too logical.

[CherryLove007]

Paris Millions Hilton should be breathing a sigh.

[Anonymous]

To those foreigners aka the Yanks, I say I hope California taxes them and taxes them good ⬆️

[Opinion Owner]

It all started with the fall of the traditional TV networks :( 📺 and the fracturing of audiences into streams. Potentially, all societies just need a resurgence of "traditional 3 or 4 TV networks" and we're all back on the wagon again, merrily 😆🫠😆

[Opinion Owner]

Sighs. California rules the world - who rules the world - California does 🫠📺🫠📺😅 come back to me traditional TV.
Come back to me TV 😪

[Opinion Owner]

@mroracle even for all my love of cheap overseas made good consumer goods from Thailand, China, Japan - shopping 🛒🛍️ lol - we all know California is what pop culture survives on, thrives on. We just must always worship California 🏔️🏔️🏔️

[msc545]

@MrOracle no, they are not leaving the state in droves. You don't live here, and I do. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[MrOracle]

As someone born and raised and currently residing in the Bay Area, that's certainly news to me.

[RavVid]

Billionaires are going to have to really really really like living in California to pay the tax I would think.

[msc545]

Billionaires really, really, really have a lot of money. They will figure out a way to pay the tax and still keep living here.

[msc545]

They have battalions of accountants that do nothing but figure out ways for them to pay less tax. Don't think for a moment that that won't happen in regard to this tax.

[RavVid]

:) They do have a lot of money. :) Possibly they are more attached to control of their company as it is their baby then they are to the share value/

I obviously can't - and don't pretend to - have any knowledge of the politics. However I do think the Law of Unintended Consequences has broad application.

Years ago now, our local branch of the Global Left wanted to tax BHP with a windfall profits tax (with highly dubious constitutionality). Turned out voters held the productive hand of BHP in higher regard than they held that gov't in. The unintended consequence was that gov't was voted out of office.

More recently, our branch is wanting to tax unrealized profits of wealthy people which scared the bejesus out of voters that had amibitions. So they scaled the scope back to taxing large superannuation balances.

It should not have been a surprise - but apparently was - that the large account holders simply shifted their accounts offshore. Who would have thought? Not only is the gov't not getting their wealth tax but now they are not even getting ordinary tax rates.

Unintended consequences.

[xcheerleader_jessx]

I think they're going to try to find an excuse to move out

[msc545]

Well first of all they don't need an excuse and second nobody really cares if they move out. They can't take their assets with them. For the most part. They still get taxed on them. I don't think they're going to move at all. I think they're going to do what the rich always do. they will hire extremely skilled accountants to avoid as much of the taxes as they can. That is quite a bit of avoidance as it turns out.

[DryGermanGuy]

That’s something that should better be imposed on a federal level, I’d say.

[msc545]

That would be preferable, but it's not politically doable at least at this point.

[CalmUntilAbused]

Well, it is the perfect way to ensure that no billionaires remain in California.

[msc545]

Yes, they will remain. They can't move their assets, at least not easily, and there is no other place except for Hawaii to live in the United States. Hawaii is very nice, but also very expensive. In fact, arguably more expensive than California. Quality of life is sometimes worth more than money.

[CalmUntilAbused]

@msc545 I heard Texas is nice enough. In fact, that's where a lot of former California companies have moved recently. Same with a lot of individuals who could afford it. Assets like offices and other real estate can be demolished if they really want to spite the Commiefornia government, everything else can be moved easily enough.

[msc545]

All of us here thought it was a good idea, and we've tried it.

[msc545]

You've obviously never been there; you just heard something. I've been there. I'll never go back. Neither will anybody else.

[Adam_INTJ]

Stupid.
The fact that they have lots of money shows that society owes them not thst they owe society.

They didn't steal their money. They offered a product or service that millions of people thought was worth paying a little extra for. (Amazon is a great example).

Penalizing them for being rich makes about as much sense as banning people from buying their products because it would make them richer.

[msc545]

They are not being penalized. They are being treated as equals. If I made as much money as they do, I would expect to be taxed at exactly the same rate. They do not get to pay a lower rate because they have more money than the rest of us.

[Adam_INTJ]

They actually are assigned a higher rate because of their tax bracket. However they rarely pay thst much bevause politicians know that such a steep progressive tax would alienate their billionare sugar daddies and break the economy. With write offs and different legal provisions for tax forgiveness, we have no idea what percentage they actually pay, but it could be much more or much less of a percentage income than people making the median income make. Most often more than the mean average because huge numbers of freeloading poor people collect welfare and don't pay tax.

We all should be paying a 15-20% flat tax regardless of how poor or wealthy you are. No deductions for poverty and children, no tax breaks for employing many people. Nothing. The government only collects about 17% of annual GDP anyway.

[msc545]

You are wrong about this. They are not assigned a higher rate because, with the amount of money they make, they can afford to hire very skilled, expensive accountants to reduce their rate to a single digit numbers.

[CalmUntilAbused]

@Adam_INTJ Okay, to be 100% fair, what You wrote is not 100% true either. Sure, they did not literally steal their money, but most if not all of them benefitted from their monopoly status - and if You have a monopoly status, You might have as well stolen the money, because Your products are pretty much never worth the money You charge for them. Like, for example, Microsoft products are literally garbage, but because most programs people actually need (or have been convinced they need) only work on Windows, Microsoft can charge people whatever money they want for this absolute piece of malware/bloatware/spyware. The company I work at uses damn Windows because so many people are reliant on it. An actual IT company uses Windows, can You imagine it?

Now, I will agree that taxing such companies is stupid anyway. They will always find ways to cut costs and avoid taxation. What should be done about them is they should be driven off the market with competition. And now, with Donald Trump, an actual honest capitalist, at the helm, it might be the time to do it!

[msc545]

@CalmUntilAbused he is not honest, and he is not a capitalist. This is a lying, dishonest piece of shit. A thief, a criminal, and a child abuser.

[CalmUntilAbused]

@msc545 The way I see it, He's most likely a confused person who believes what we have right now is capitalism. A confused person is fundamentally honest, just unaware of all the facts. If You have any proof for any of the other accusations You made here, You should probably contact the authorities. If You are wrong, though, I suppose You might might be at risk of a defamation lawsuit.

[msc545]

Wait, who exactly are we talking about? What I wrote may have been intended for a different question.

[Adam_INTJ]

You have something major wrong.

You can't pay lower taxes just because you can afford an expensive accountant or tax lawyer. Lawyers and accountants don't have the ability to void laws. They only take advantage of what's on the books. The laws on the books got there because of congress, your state legislature, and the relevant court rulings.

When accountants try to void laws, you get Enron and WorldCom executives in prison. So no, accountants don't just free you from taxation.

Some write offs are available to all of us if we know tax law well enough, or will pay for someone who does, but others are made out to reduce the tax of specific interest groups. I presume companies with a certain number of employees would be one.

So, the big question is: why do left wing politicians make the take rate for high I come brackets so high on paper while effectively undercutting it with write-offs and loopholes?

The answer is economic realities. If you tax the wealthy businesses and individuals so hard (without loopholes), they'll just underperform into a lower tax bracket or just end up there from having less money to hire people and invest in buying new technology. Why work 80 hour weeks just to have 50% taxed away?

As a result, the buyers (us) will end up with shortages that increase prices or end up with lower quality products.

[Adam_INTJ]

And no, Microsoft is not a monopoly. They are a monopolistic business. In true monopolies, competitors do not exist in the market. Microsoft contends with Google and Apple's suites of products. You could argue that they have an outsized market share compared to your opinion of their product quality, but it stands that competitors could take some of thst market share away if consumers shared your opinion.

Now I'd love to deregulate business so that upstart companies face few barriers to market entry and can take major market share from behemoth businesses that fail to serve customer needs, but it's usually you kefties that like regulation, so I'm not your obstacle to cutting big companies down to size.

[msc545]

No, I don't have anything major wrong. I think you are seriously naive. High-priced accountants have made a profession out of finding loopholes and strategies for people to avoid taxes, legally. These accounts are exceedingly high priced, so the people who can afford them on an ongoing basis (which is what it takes) are people who are wealthy enough to afford it. The money they spend on the accountants is exceeded by the money the accountants save them. If that were not the case, they would not hire these people. Microsoft is a monopoly in some areas of commerce. This is particularly true of browsers, although some people do use Brave and Firefox, the number of people that use Chrome, which is, of course, made by Microsoft, is far larger by at least one or two orders of magnitude. You don't have to completely control an area of commerce to be considered a monopoly.

[msc545]

I'll also say you may want to consider the fact that people who are very wealthy can afford to literally buy or bribe politicians to do what they want. If you don't think this is going on, then take what I said about your naivete and multiply it by ten.

[Adam_INTJ]

Let's take the issues one by one.

First. How did the loopholes get there?

[msc545]

Whoever has the ability to modify or amend the tax code, put the loopholes there. At least in the final step, I believe that's how they get there, eg, "Congress holds the exclusive constitutional authority to modify the U. S. tax code (Internal Revenue Code, Title 26), as Article 1, Section 8 authorizes it to lay and collect taxes. Changes require a bill to pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate, followed by the President’s signature."

[Adam_INTJ]

Why do you think Congress put such loopholes in the tax code?

[msc545]

They put those loopholes in there in order to pander to wealthy people. This is just more evidence of corruption.

[Adam_INTJ]

We've got some agreement there. Although I wouldn't quite call it corruption. It's just the common sense of how the law of diffuse cost and concentrated benefits pans out. Most people in the middle and low classes won't donate a dollar to political campaigns, so as a politician, you must do something to earn the good will of the wealthy, or you'll find no decent campaign funding. It perhaps smells of quid pro quo, but "I do X and you pay me for it." is just a job like most of us have, and there's no other legal funding option for political campaigns anyway.

I ask these questions to establish that it's not that the rich hire accountants to skirt tax law and pay zero tax, but rather that they hire expensive accountants and tax lawyers who can navigate the thousands of pages of tax code and take advantage of tax laws that congress wrote specifically to benefit their kind of business, industry, or financial situation.

[msc545]

I appreciate your continuing participation in this discussion. I think in the last paragraph of the last thing you wrote, I'm having difficulty differentiating those two causations you spoke about. You said:

1. I ask these questions to establish it's not to the rich hire accountants...
2. They hire expensive accountants and tax lawyers who can navigate... In reality, how are these two things different?

[Agape93]

Yet another bad idea. They'll just leave and pay nothing anyways.

[OneViewpoint]

They can leave. But they can't take their assets with them.

[Agape93]

Not physical ones like buildings but they can easily replace workers, shift to a new headquarters, ship their merchandise away and funnel their financial assets. So. Yeah they really can, and have. Shit tesla uprooted and built itself a town in Texas.

[OneViewpoint]

And that childish response from a billionaire withe the personality of a 3 year old brat didn't cost them anything did it? How's that brain dead Texas labor force working out for a tech company?

[Anonymous]

I’m just tired of politics at this point. I don’t care anymore. People vote for poison and then complain about dying by poison. Burn it all to the ground.

[blackeagle007]

Yes! Tax the hell out of the rich. I’m sick and tired of entitlement

[beefcakebradybatson]

LOVE IT !! Let 'em finally pay for their looting their compatriots and aid the needy.

[Telekinetic-Potato]

The only people I trust less with all that money is the government.

[qwerty2469]

Lol. They can't tax people with the means to leave unless they make it illegal to leave. That's not very Democratic though.

[msc545]

Sure they can. If these people leave, they're not going to be paying any taxes anyway. It also won't be using up any resources here.

[qwerty2469]

Lol. Exactly. Your tax base is leaving. The rich don't take up resources. They pay for them. Well now they are paying for them in Texas and Florida as California goes absolutely bankrupt

[msc545]

Yeah, it doesn't quite work that way, and it's certainly not going to bankrupt California if a few billionaires leave. Billionaires don't pay enough in taxes to actually matter.

[qwerty2469]

It works exactly that way. The billionaires pay ALL of the tax in California. If you weren't completely retarded you'd know the fiscal cliff they fell off 2 years ago and how much worse it's going to get in California before a Republican wins and fixes it

[msc545]

No actually the billionaires pay. Almost none of the tax in California. Stop making up lies. I live here in California and I know what goes on. You don't live here and you don't know what's going on.

[msc545]

The billionaire is simply higher higher. Really great accountants that are very expensive and Dodge as much tax as they can. That turns out to be a very high percentage of their tax and generally is in the single digits. That is less than the rest of us pay by a long shot.

[qwerty2469]

I'm a Tax accountant. With 21 years. You are an idiot that talks about what he doesn't know because he lives there. Do you know what an SEC form 10Q is? Do you know how to read one? All of the billionaires taxes are right there. Readily available. Do you know how to read the states budget? It's all there too. I can almost guarantee that you, and all of your friends pay hardly any state or federal tax if you pay any at all.

[Anonymous]

Generally I think it's okay, as long as it's based on real wealth, not paper wealth.

[Opinion Owner]

You have to distinguish income from wealth. Income is real money earned. Wealth is just theoretical, like stock. When they sell the stock they will pay tens of millions in taxes. I think the estate tax is like 25%. So when Musk sells a billion dollars of Tesla stock, he will pay 250,000,000 in taxes. In fact, Musk paid $455 million in income tax between 2014-2018.

[Jeff51]

I wish I had billions to tax. Better them than the middle class

[exitseven]

I suppose if you want to make all the billionaires move to Florida, this is the best way to do it.

[msc545]

That would actually be a pretty good outcome.

[exitseven]

yes until you try to balance the budget.

[msc545]

There is a lot of money here, and we don't need their money to balance our budget. Thank you.

[exitseven]

why does California have the largest deficit in the country at 2.9 billion dollars?

[msc545]

I have no idea. I'm not an economist, but it's probably because we spend too much. I don't think the millionaires are particularly important if we actually have that much of a devise, and I don't know where you're getting your data from.

[msc545]

We are not going to be blackmailed by the fact that they can move to Florida or somehow move their assets or anything like that. We're still going to tax them at the same rate that the rest of us get taxed. That is called fairness and democracy. I know that's a foreign concept for you, but it's actually one that we live by.

[exitseven]

having a billionaires tax is not taxing them at the same rate as everyone else.

[msc545]

Yeah, as a matter of fact, it is taxing at the same rate as everyone else. We have a progressive tax structure, and we're not going to change it to coddle some billionaire who's whining about not being able to buy another yacht.

[exitseven]

Look at your own question. It says California is going to impose a SPECIAL tax on billionaires.

[msc545]

Yes, indeed. They've been going far too long without being taxed properly.

[exitseven]

Marxism is great until tyou run out of other people's money.

[msc545]

says a person who knows nothing about economics whatsoever.

[exitseven]

I know a badly run government when I see it. I live in a state that has one.

[msc545]

You don't live here, and you don't know anything about the government here.

[exitseven]

I can smell it all the way across the country, .

[msc545]

You are entitled to your incorrect opinion.

[Anonymous]

It should be the whole country, tax the rich motherfuckers. It is us against them. The playing field needs to be leveled.

[Anonymous]

I would say: rich people worked for their money. Or if they won it in the lotto or what ever, what take it from them? As long as it was legal. Why punish people who worked hard or for their luck?

[CrazyRay43]

Using family money to start businesses is “working hard”, huh? 🤦‍♂️

Interesting reply coming from someone who probably can’t even break $65K 🙄

[msc545]

@CrazyRay43 that was from a Pink anon. I think we all know that women don't understand how money is really made. All they understand is how to spend it.

[Opinion Owner]

There is nothing wrong to use money from family business if it is ok with the owner/s. I am not jealous. Not all are born with a golden spoon. I am not. I know what it is to be hungry. But I would never be jealous!

[msc545]

Nonetheless, you made some remark about working hard for your money. People that use family money to start a business are not working hard at all. Comparatively speaking.

[Kingofkings1992]

It's fucking ridiculous that so much tax burden falls on the average American

[Hopeless30]

I dont think about it bkoz im not a billionaire...🤠

[Dargil]

Welcome to texas, Florida and tennessee.

[msc545]

I think billionaires are used to nice things. Nice things do not include Texas, Florida, or Tennessee to any great extent. Texas is a shithole, and so is Tennessee. As for Florida, it's not a shithole, but the climate and the bugs kinda make it damn unpleasant. Nobody with a lot of money is going to voluntarily live in these places. They might build a vacation place in Florida, particularly in the Keys, but year-round, I don't think that's going to happen.

[Dargil]

Well then. Live in Tennessee Texas or Florida and have no wealth except for two room condominium in california. No bank deposits, no investments. To have nice things, you have they have the money to buy them. And California is trying to take that money away to pay for union workers and retirement pensions. Galveston, Nashville and Tampa are pretty nice places to live. Please democrats, don't move to any of those cities. All you'll do is screw things up.

[msc545]

No I took the trouble to get an education and I make a very good living here in California and I have a nice place to live which is far from being a two-room condominium as you put it. Enjoy your flyover state and hateful politics.

[Dargil]

Please, stay there

[msc545]

I plan to, either here or Hawaii or Europe.

[Zionne]

billionaires will always find ways

[msc545]

That is a rather obtuse comment.

[Razp_Sorbet]

Absolutely a good thing.

[Pohjolan]

Doesn't matter if all states don't do it.