United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: It Shouldn't Be Illegal to Work at Home
Source:
Reason
URL Source: http://reason.com/archives/2018/03/24/it-shouldnt-be-illegal-for-rec
Published: Mar 26, 2018
Author: Nick Sibilla
Post Date: 2018-03-26 05:35:45 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 4100
Comments: 63
When Lij Shaw's daughter was born, he decided to work from home so he could spend more time with his family. A record producer in Nashville, Shaw found a slightly offbeat solution to achieving work-life balance: Investing over $100,000, he completely soundproofed his house's detached garage and transformed it into The Toy Box Studio, a professional recording space featuring state-of-the-art digital equipment and classic analog devices. Over the next decade, Shaw hosted countless musicians, one of whom even mixed the album that won the first ever Grammy Award for Best Roots Gospel Album. During this time, not one of his neighbors ever complained to Shaw about noise, traffic, or anything else regarding his studio. Nonetheless, in 2015, Nashville's code enforcement ordered Shaw to cease and desist. Only by dropping the studio's recording rates from his website and removing its address from Google Maps was he able to escape prosecution. Business for the studio—Shaw's main source of income—plummeted. Nashville's zoning code bars most businesses from serving clients in the owner's home. Shaw tried to have his home rezoned. But though he received overwhelming support from dozens of neighbors and even some members of the city's planning commission, the Nashville Metro Council denied his application. And so in December, Shaw—along with the Institute for Justice, where I work, and the Beacon Center of Tennessee—filed a lawsuit challenging Nashville's client ban for home occupations. "A man's home is his castle," he says. "I should have the right to earn a living in mine." The prohibition "makes outlaws out of perhaps thousands of Nashvillians who…are simply trying to earn an honest living," according to the suit. There are at least 1,600 home-based enterprises in operation in the city, and since many such companies are forced to operate illegally, the true count is most likely even higher. Joining Shaw in his lawsuit is Pat Raynor, a licensed cosmetologist who similarly had her home-based salon destroyed. She tried three different ways to gain legal recognition for the business, yet six years later, Raynor still cannot see clients in her own home. Nashville is hardly alone in restricting these businesses. In Dunwoody, Georgia, the City Council unanimously denied a permit to Rhett Roberson, a board-certified therapist, who wanted to turn his basement into a physical therapy space. Several of his neighbors had vigorously lobbied against his application, with one claiming that allowing Roberson to see clients on site would be a slippery slope to other clinics opening in the area, including "psychiatrists treating sex offenders or even veterans with PTSD." A few miles west in Cobb County, Georgia, code enforcers actually cited the popular gaming vlogger Justin Chandler for earning a living as a "professional YouTuber." With the nom du jeu "KOSDFF," Chandler currently has over a million subscribers to his channel. But by uploading gaming videos and making money from content produced at home, the county claimed he was operating an unlicensed residential business. His income doesn't even involve seeing clients at his house, but to avoid further legal trouble, he handed over $470 for a license. Many cities across the country, including Los Angeles, Nashville, San Francisco, and Washington, ban home-based companies from having more than one employee who isn't a resident. By capping payroll so severely, these jurisdictions needlessly prevent entrepreneurs from growing their businesses and creating new jobs. According to a survey published by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2016, home-based businesses generated nearly $632 billion in total revenue in 2012. In fact, slightly more than half of America's businesses were primarily home-based. Many iconic American companies began as little more than dreams in their founders' houses. Apple, Google, and Hewlett-Packard were started in garages in Northern California; Walt Disney drew the first Mickey Mouse cartoon in a studio at his home. Fortunately, lawmakers are starting to develop more respect for private property rights. Last year, Utah banned cities and counties from imposing licensing fees on these businesses. And a few months before that, Chicago changed a rule to allow such enterprises to hire non-residents as couriers and the like—so long as they work outside the home in question.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-12) not displayed.
.
.
.
#13. To: Tooconservative (#9)
You don't like zoning laws? Voters shouldn't embrace them?
I guess you don't understand how and why that government should be on a local basis as opposed to all this international BS. You have the power to change the laws!
Libertarianism -- great in theory, lousy in reality.
Over-officiousness and Gummint over-regulation run amok. People to Gummint: GET OUT!
You can't be serious.
That makes sense.
Correct. And the residents of Nashville have the power to write the zoning laws they want, and those laws bar most businesses from serving clients in the owner's home. If they want, the residents of Nashville have the power to change those zoning laws. They don't want to, and that's their decision, not ours.
The above case... No visitors. Yet the State is demanding their cut. Isn't this more about intrusive gummint and regulation? IF you conduct a phone call out of your home and derive ANY income from that phone call, isn't THAT the same thing?
Not it doesn't. How do you write a constitutional zoning law that favors one business over another? This isn't fascist Italy under Benito Mussolini.
Seems like a reasonable accommodation, right? Legit point. Missing info from the report: 1) How much traffic did this create in a residential area (along with degree of "activity"?) Just because there were no complaints doesn't necessarily mean there were no objections. This case does indeed have TWO sides to consider -- both legit. Zoning IS a consideration.
There are actually cases of exclusions. They are called, "Use Variances." They are considered and given all the time.
Yeah, I didn't think so. TC makes a great point. WHERE is that line drawn?
"Any individual, partnership, corporation, or entity which engages in any activity with the object of gain, profit, benefit, or advantage in the unincorporated area of Cobb County is considered to be engaged in business and must obtain an Occupation Tax Certificate, commonly known as a business license, for each location in Cobb County prior to engaging in these activities." This is not a State license. It's a county license. Don't like it? More to another county.
How about this as a guide for a residential business?
Yes I see and agree to certain degrees... However, there are such designations as "Use Variances" that require application. Q: Do you propose audits that ensure not more than 25% of any home be used for "business"? Moreover, are you proposing (according to the above graph) that in NO case shall ANY person related to ANY business (under the guise of "entertainment" or "dinner") be allowed at a residence in strict accordance to this law?
Too broad a definition. It's a county license. Don't like it? More to another county. Wait; Since when do we have a "Representative Government"? WE DON'T. No, not even at the local zoning level. You typically have officials, attorneys or a board of whatever speaking for constituencies based on personal political preference. FACT. Do you also support the City of San Francisco's "right" to ban "Happy Meal" from fast food restaurants? BUT, endorse public masturbation about Gay parade floats?
How do you give a variance to a business allowing them to serve clients in their home but not allow others to do the same? That's not a variance. That's changing the entire zoning regulation.
Happens ALL the time, I assure you. A case is made by the applicant. The logistics for the Use Variance are considered and neighbors sent notice. Neighbor may oppose Variance, but opposition is does not necessarily negate application approval. This is a POLITICAL PROCESS. Yes, DESPITE existing Zoning Ordinances.
Its about taxation and property values. If you are in the city limits they want their cut. Sucks but to be fair its the cost of doing business. I get taxed on my business property and all the assets inside my property. My problem is they are always trying to over value everything so they can charge more taxes. If they would remove all the illegals and illegal business they would have plenty of taxes coming in!
+100! Because YOU are a tangible source of easy Gummint revenue. But this same Intrusive Gummint won't go near the Illegal persons, properties or their assets; They won't even prosecute nor issue vehicular tickets to them. The ONLY reason our taxes are insufficient and public and social services are overwhelmed (despite blatant over-taxation at the Local/State/Feral level) is because...40 million ILLEGALS are bleeding citizen/tax-payer funded resources. (Oh...as our over-taxation is used to subsidize Gummint-worker Platinum Bennies and Retirement Parachutes.)
So .... apparently you acquiesce to your local government and pay them obediently. Do you ever take the time to handle the problems you have addressed in a formal way besides making a comment or two on an irrelevant chit-chat channel?
Yep. And county board members are elected and can be unelected. "Do you also support the City of San Francisco's "right" to ban "Happy Meal" from fast food restaurants?" The ban targets the Happy Meal because it includes a free toy, claiming the free toy target-markets children who are unable to make healthy decisions for themselves. Sure. I support that. I also support McDonald’s response which now charges ten cents for the toy -- with the proceeds benefitting the Ronald McDonald House Charity -- meaning the toy is no longer a free incentive. "BUT, endorse public masturbation about Gay parade floats?" The Libertarian side of me supports public masturbation. Harms no one.
What do all these regulatory cases have in common?: They are essentially ALL ARBITRARY. The Libertarian side of me supports public masturbation. Harms no one. Did I miss the sarcasm tag?
I've read many comments on this threads concerning this Toy Box Studio case. I've read mentions of city ordinance and voter participation regarding agreement to city ordinances concerning private property used for commercial purposes. I have yet to read of any mention the term "grandfather clause" which would in some cases take precedent over contract law concerning realtors brokering deals with buyers on how they many live in their homes. I am all all about property rights and disgusted when city officials want to impose restrictions on how private property owners may live their lives. If it becomes the law where private home owners cannot live as free citizens without city officials imposing tax infringements and sanctions against some but also tell them they cannot smoke in their own homes then why even own a home for that matter. What this has now become is a fascist way of living where you have to pay tuppence to the bullies just to survive. If this is what it is coming to, just rent like poor folks do and make the government pick up the tab on living expenses. Eventually, the government won't be able to take care of all this expense and the whole damn system crumbles. Inaddition, I also just thought about this "voter agreement on zoning laws". The real purpose of zoning laws is to take away private property rights and turn them into a public good under the guise of eminent domain. Only educated voters would understand where this case is going.
Only a few applications make it to the full board. And if it does go to the board, it's usually a small exception to one part of the ordinance. The kind of variance you're referring to would negate the entire ordinance.
I had a year where the valuation actually went down! But they increased the multiplier, such that I ended up paying more in taxes. The government WILL NOT do without their money. You may have to cut back on your standard of living to make ends meet. They never will.
You guys bring shame to LF. You just bend down and acquiesce to government as opposed to standing tall and fighting for your own dignity, community and far more important: your rights.
You can. If they value your $200,000 property at $300,000 for tax purposes, you can certainly file a complaint. They'll come out and do a re-evaluation and admit their mistake -- they should have used $350,000. Now what are you going to do, smart ass? Spend $100,000 on lawyers proving you're right and they're wrong?
My county board has spent the last 9 months drawing up an ordinance regulating wind turbine farms. I can't begin to count the number of public meetings I've attended, where inputs and suggestions from the county residents are heard. They're maybe half done with the ordinance. Now the residents will be presenting scientific studies, personal testimony from people living near a wind farm, ordinances from other counties, legal restrictions, health impacts, set-backs and a dozen other issues. I can assure you. There's nothing arbitrary about the process. You'd be laughed out of the room if you couldn't support your claim.
Well you can sit back and let them, complaining all the while about how terrible it all is. Or you can get off your fat, lazy ass and attend a few city council or county board public meetings to find out how they intend to screw you next. Then you can organize, speak out, and force them (through the ballot box) to represent you properly. Geez Louise. I've never come across more helpless people than on this forum. You all forget we're a democracy and you have a voice.
Gosh I hope so.
When I went to the tax assessor's office to complain about the multiplier increasing, they told me I had to take it up with each of the government units -- of which there were about 15. For example, the library multiplier went from .000763 to .000792. Fire department from .001014 to .001109. And so on. Add them all up and you arrive at the total multiplier increase. Meaning, I'd have to fight -- and win -- 15 different battles at 15 different agencies, demonstrating why they didn't warrant an increase. And if I was successful, I'd pay $450 less per year in taxes. And you say it's shameful if I don't do this?
And the other half made up on the fly. IOW, Arbitrary. Politically based. Do you think you're the only one who has participated in such scenarios and hearings?; Been intimately involved in that scene as well as in local politics? Now the residents will be presenting scientific studies, personal testimony from people living near a wind farm, ordinances from other counties, legal restrictions, health impacts, set-backs and a dozen other issues. Come on. All too often the "process" and protocols are all Kabuki Theater with deals and decisions already pre-determined. This exercise is intended to give the impression that there is "fair consideration" given to the issue. "WHO you know" applies. I can assure you. There's nothing arbitrary about the process. You'd be laughed out of the room if you couldn't support your claim. "Laughed out" by whom? The attorneys and officials who run the local/State/Feral Kabuki Theater process? If at the local level the observing, attendant citizenry would likely either quietly listen to cases of arbitrary decisions made based on politics or influence. Some would pipe up and reinforce the opposition/pro argument. The only thing you can "assure" me of is how issues are addressed in your own little local Utopian hamlet. I can assure you that it is NOT typical. A frequent modus operandi for Officials (especially in Democrat-run towns/counties) is to remove the person who happens to bring up Inconvenient Truths. Now it IS possible that you reside in a town or county where the officials and lawyers play it fair and above boar, and are apolitical. There still are such animals in America. But that is NOT the typical case in most towns and county gummints.
No. 9 months down. 9 months to go.
ARBITRARY decision, unproven claim. POLITICS. Unconstitutional demand besides. A "Bake-The-Cake!"-like edict. Sure. I support that. I also support McDonald’s response which now charges ten cents for the toy -- with the proceeds benefitting the Ronald McDonald House Charity -- meaning the toy is no longer a free incentive. So McDonalds responds by caving in to Gummint blackmail. Nice. And you support it. If McDonalds wanted to engage in FREE incentive, who is the SF Gummint to interfere in business whose commerce decision are perfectly LEGAL? Do you also concur with San Francisco's arbitrary decision to STEAL taxpayer revenue to subsidize Illegal Invaders and murderers? To arbitrarily enforce SOME laws but not others? You seem to be inconsistent in you support for The Law. Unless your position is to support any and all "laws" as Gummint interprets it from a political perspective?
Q: Is this town or county governed by (R) or (D)?
Well buckaroo, how about leading by example! Then let me know how it works. I believe states can tax anything and anyone. I mean constitutionally speaking.
Actually, I did just that! I got off my "lazy fat ass", and attended a city hearing concerning a bar business that was about to lose its license because of some city law concerning purchasing beer from a licensed wholesale distributors vs. going to a private seller. Due to improper handling of the case, the state dropped the charges against the individual. However, the city chose to go around that acquital and re-try the owner in city hall for the same crime again. This violates the doctrine that one cannot be tried twice for the same crime. We all know this to be double jeopardy. It is what we taught in high school. A hearing was set up but the owner was never notified except for when I told them about it just two days before it was to take place. The owner was never officially served legal process in accordance with the laws of the state. That is where I stepped up and wrote a rebuttal brief on behalf of the owner and handed it to them. I accompanied them to the hall hearing and sat there to observe the entire proceedings. From what took place there, council members would not allow the defendant to speak to defend that they were never served notice and that the hearing needed to be cancelled and moved to a proper court. There was no court reporter present and when members of the audience tried to record with their cellphones, one of the council members told them to turn it off and that an official transcript of the hearing would be issued upon request. The problem is there was no court reporter present. And then there was no transcript ever recorded. But I was there.
And if I was successful, I'd pay $450 less per year in taxes. You need to create a strategic plan that addresses an analysis of the 15 agencies. Have you heard of "Pareto Analysis?" Line up the 15 agencies in a ranking order from large to small, say in a spreadsheet; create a 80%/20% benchmark of value for the 450 bucks. Go after those agencies most apparent to your requirements.
Is that yella code for running off to another country? Fu*k off, hotdog knobber. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Yeah, I didn't think so. You didn't think so. Don't answer for me. If it's his land I don't give a shit.
Comments (54 - 63) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThis is what happens when the voters embrace zoning laws.
#14. To: misterwhite (#12)
Fine. Change the law. Until then, enforce what's on the books.
#15. To: Tooconservative (#10)
What if misterwhite decided he wanted to open a "home business" with women (or men) offering "massage" next door to your house, with horny skeezy dudes coming and going at all hours of the day and night and with some loud music and drug traffic occurring as well?
#16. To: Deckard (#0)
#17. To: misterwhite (#1)
Hmmm. What if he turned his detached garage into a 7-11? Doesn't he have a right to earn a living?
#18. To: buckeroo (#5)
Perhaps the local ordinance was written poorly although well intentioned by those that approved it. It should be re-written to take into account certain exclusions.
#19. To: buckeroo (#14)
You have the power to change the laws!
#20. To: misterwhite (#1)
A few miles west in Cobb County, Georgia, code enforcers actually cited the popular gaming vlogger Justin Chandler for earning a living as a "professional YouTuber." With the nom du jeu "KOSDFF," Chandler currently has over a million subscribers to his channel. But by uploading gaming videos and making money from content produced at home, the county claimed he was operating an unlicensed residential business. His income doesn't even involve seeing clients at his house, but to avoid further legal trouble, he handed over $470 for a license.
#21. To: Liberator, buckeroo (#18)
It should be re-written to take into account certain exclusions.
That makes sense.
#22. To: misterwhite, Deckard, TooConservative, buckeroo (#7)
(Edited)
It was written to allow people to work from their home, but not to allow customers coming and going all hours of the day and night in a residential area.
2) How much noise?
3) At what hours were "business operations"? Shaw hosted countless musicians, one of whom even mixed the album that won the first ever Grammy Award for Best Roots Gospel Album. During this time, not one of his neighbors ever complained to Shaw about noise, traffic, or anything else regarding his studio.
#23. To: misterwhite, buckeroo (#21)
How do you write a constitutional zoning law that favors one business over another? This isn't fascist Italy under Benito Mussolini.
#24. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone, misterwhite (#10)
What if misterwhite decided he wanted to open a "home business" with women (or men) offering "massage" next door to your house, with horny skeezy dudes coming and going at all hours of the day and night and with some loud music and drug traffic occurring as well? Would you embrace his right to run his home business next door to you and your children?
#25. To: Liberator (#20)
No visitors. Yet the State is demanding their cut. Isn't this more about intrusive gummint and regulation?
#26. To: Liberator (#24)
(Edited)
WHERE is that line drawn?
#27. To: misterwhite (#26)
#28. To: misterwhite (#25)
(Edited)
"Any individual, partnership, corporation, or entity which engages in any activity with the object of gain, profit, benefit, or advantage in the unincorporated area of Cobb County is considered to be engaged in business and must obtain an Occupation Tax Certificate, commonly known as a business license, for each location in Cobb County prior to engaging in these activities."
#29. To: Liberator (#23)
There are actually cases of exclusions. They are called, "Use Variances." They are considered and given all the time.
#30. To: misterwhite (#29)
(Edited)
How do you give a variance to a business allowing them to serve clients in their home but not allow others to do the same? That's not a variance. That's changing the entire zoning regulation.
#31. To: Deckard (#0)
#32. To: Justified (#31)
I get taxed on my business property and all the assets inside my property. My problem is they are always trying to over value everything so they can charge more taxes. If they would remove all the illegals and illegal business they would have plenty of taxes coming in!
#33. To: Justified (#31)
I get taxed on my business property and all the assets inside my property. My problem is they are always trying to over value everything so they can charge more taxes. If they would remove all the illegals and illegal business they would have plenty of taxes coming in!
#34. To: Liberator (#28)
You typically have officials, attorneys or a board of whatever speaking for constituencies based on personal political preference. FACT.
#35. To: misterwhite (#34)
#36. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
#37. To: Liberator (#30)
Happens ALL the time, I assure you.
#38. To: Justified (#31)
My problem is they are always trying to over value everything so they can charge more taxes.
#39. To: misterwhite, Justified (#38)
The government WILL NOT do without their money. You may have to cut back on your standard of living to make ends meet. They never will.
#40. To: buckeroo (#33)
Do you ever take the time to handle the problems you have addressed in a formal way besides making a comment or two on an irrelevant chit-chat channel?
#41. To: Liberator (#35)
What do all these regulatory cases have in common?:
They are essentially ALL ARBITRARY.
#42. To: goldilucky (#36)
"when city officials want to impose restrictions on how private property owners may live their lives."
#43. To: Liberator (#35)
The Libertarian side of me supports public masturbation. Harms no one.
Did I miss the sarcasm tag?
#44. To: buckeroo (#39)
(Edited)
You guys bring shame to LF. You just bend down and acquiesce to government as opposed to standing tall and fighting for your own dignity, community and far more important: your rights.
#45. To: misterwhite (#41)
My county board has spent the last 9 months drawing up an ordinance regulating wind turbine farms. I can't begin to count the number of public meetings I've attended, where inputs and suggestions from the county residents are heard. They're maybe half done with the ordinance.
#46. To: Liberator (#45)
And the other half made up on the fly.
#47. To: misterwhite (#34)
(Edited)
The ban [in San Francisco] targets the Happy Meal because it includes a free toy, claiming the free toy target-markets children who are unable to make healthy decisions for themselves.
#48. To: misterwhite (#46)
9 months down. 9 months to go.
#49. To: buckeroo (#39)
You guys bring shame to LF. You just bend down and acquiesce to government as opposed to standing tall and fighting for your own dignity, community and far more important: your rights.
#50. To: misterwhite (#42)
Or you can get off your fat, lazy ass and attend a few city council or county board public meetings to find out how they intend to screw you next. Then you can organize, speak out, and force them (through the ballot box) to represent you properly.
#51. To: misterwhite (#44)
Meaning, I'd have to fight -- and win -- 15 different battles at 15 different agencies, demonstrating why they didn't warrant an increase.
#52. To: buckeroo (#39)
You guys bring shame to LF. You just bend down and acquiesce to government as opposed to standing tall and fighting for your own dignity
#53. To: Tooconservative (#10)
What if misterwhite decided he wanted to open a "home business" with women (or men) offering "massage" next door to your house, with horny skeezy dudes coming and going at all hours of the day and night and with some loud music and drug traffic occurring as well? Would you embrace his right to run his home business next door to you and your children?
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]