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: 4104
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
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Hmmm. What if he turned his detached garage into a 7-11? Doesn't he have a right to earn a living?
What if assholes minded their own business and left the guy alone unless he committed a real crime.
You mean selective enforcement of the laws? Laws for some but not for others? The Rule of Man instead of the Rule of Law? Is that what you're suggesting?
I mean get your head out of regulation is God. Assholes like you fucked up the country with your over regulation. I would like to be your neighbor. I'd have a garage sale every day just to annoy you.
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.
If you want to get rid of the regulation (ie., zoning), that's different. Is that what you want?
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. Seems like a reasonable accommodation, right?
Laws can be changed. What seems "reasonable" at one time is not so "reasonable" at a later time. It is a function of those that participate in the legislative process to create the requirements.
This is what happens when the voters embrace zoning laws. It even applies to cute little girls running lemonade stands. Whether we like it or not in a particular case, provided that the laws are followed as construed, there is nothing wrong with this.
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? Yeah, I didn't think so.
And this Law is you guys, of course. You see, if you obey all laws, the society will grind to a halt in the best case. There are worse.
Fine. Change the law. Until then, enforce what's on the books.
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?
Comments (41 - 63) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: misterwhite (#1)
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2)
What if assholes minded their own business and left the guy alone unless he committed a real crime.
#4. To: misterwhite (#3)
#5. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite (#4)
#6. To: A K A Stone (#4)
I mean get your head out of regulation is God.
#7. To: buckeroo (#5)
Perhaps the local ordinance was written poorly although well intentioned by those that approved it.
#8. To: misterwhite (#7)
#9. To: Deckard (#0)
#10. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite (#4)
I would like to be your neighbor. I'd have a garage sale every day just to annoy you.
#11. To: misterwhite (#3)
(Edited)
You mean selective enforcement of the laws? Laws for some but not for others? The Rule of Man instead of the Rule of Law?
#12. To: buckeroo (#8)
(Edited)
Laws can be changed.
#13. To: Tooconservative (#9)
This 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?
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]