3 Comments
User's avatar
Zac Hill's avatar

This is an incredible story. How much is known about what drove the desire for a just clearly extremely worse solution? Basic “eh who likes paying taxes anyway lol?”

Kevin Hawickhorst's avatar

It's even odder than that. They got to skip paying taxes once, but suddenly moving tax day by 6 months seems like the most painful way to raise taxes. You can budget for tax rate hikes, but moving tax day really messes with your finances.

No clue why they thought this was a reasonable solution. I suspect some combination of 1) it's an easy solution, 2) it is less likely to be as salient as a tax rate hike, even if more painful to businesses.

A.W. Martin's avatar

I kinda like it (note: not an endorsement) because it is a solution which requires basically no trust. This was an era where New York State was marred by scandal after scandal of judges either waiving or assigning assets, liabilities, obligations, etc. which were assumed to have been iron-clad. Whole railroads changed hands in mid-night sessions with dubious legitimacy, so I can sympathize with anyone who worried what would happen to a special bond class assigned to just one part of a magnificently complicated corporation like consolidated New York.