I woke up this morning to a scene from a Bruce Willis movie. There was a robbery, an MIT police officer shot and killed, a carjacking, police chase, shoot-outs, even grenades! The entire city of Boston and some of its surrounding communities were on lock-down. With the images of bombed-out Back Bay still fresh in my mind, this insomniac regretted the inability to go back to sleep and escape from the nightmare unfolding.
Of course, I'm watching all of this on my computer 42 miles away from the chaos. My community isn't on lock-down. Police aren't warning me to stay away from my windows. But the very first blog post I ever wrote talked about where I'm from, and I proudly answered the question by saying, "I'm from Boston." I might currently live in New Hampshire, but I'm from Boston. I find a reason to visit my city at least once a month, sometimes more. My kids can recognize the Boston skyline, and they get really excited whenever they see it. They've been asking me all winter when we can go back and have another picnic in Boston and ride on the swan boats again. Spencer plans to attend MIT when he gets older, and Naomi has her heart set on Harvard. (I didn't program them to say this; they came up with it on their own!)
Back Bay is one of my favorite areas of Boston, and it was attacked on Monday. Its media profile has been one of chaos and carnage. I drive through Cambridge nearly every time I go in town, and now that's being associated with the terrorists as well. And Watertown? Watertown is currently experiencing a door to door search by police, with residents being warned to only open the door for uniformed police officers. When I lived in Arlington, Watertown was home to one of my favorite restaurants. It was also the home of a boy I had a serious crush on in high school, and it was where my mother's best friend bought her first house. Now it has SWAT teams and a tank. Those are the images being broadcast to the world.
But that's not my Watertown. This isn't my Boston. I understand that events have happened which are outside of our control and that we must respond to them. I understand that many people's lives have been forever changed by what has happened and is happening this week, and in many ways they will never be the same. In some ways Boston will never be the same; we will always know that it can happen here. But we can incorporate that knowledge without it redefining us.
I've lived in the greater Boston area for more than three quarters of my life. I have lots of memories of the areas that have been affected this week. And I choose to keep my memories unsullied. I won't deny what happened, and I won't forget, but I won't let the events of this week replace everything I know of Boston. I expect Back Bay to be restored. I'm sure it will include some memorial to the victims, as it should, but that memorial will be incorporated into Back Bay. It won't replace Back Bay. Watertown will see the departure of the SWAT teams, guns, and tanks, and go back to being Watertown, with the memory of today slipping into the overall consciousness of the town but eventually losing its power. The T will run again, businesses will reopen, and Boston will again be Boston. We'll continue our fierce rivalry with New York, exchanging boasts and insults as we always have, but knowing that when things get serious we've got each other's back.
As soon as the weather's nice enough I'm going to take my kids to the Boston Public Gardens so we can have a picnic like we did last year, and ride on the swan boats again. I'm going to drive past MIT and Harvard, and listen to my kids talk about their futures. ("Does M-I-T spell MIT?" Hey, he's only four!) We'll go back to the Children's Museum, the Science Museum, and I think it's time I introduce them to the Museum of Fine Arts. We'll probably go back to Symphony Hall for Cartoon Fest next October. Because all of that is MY BOSTON, and I'm not going to give it up that easily.
The world is looking at Boston and calling it terror and chaos. And right now it is. But that's only temporary. I know what Boston really is, and I'm looking forward to seeing it again.
The random musings of author and publisher Karen Goltz.
Showing posts with label Boston. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boston. Show all posts
Friday, April 19, 2013
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
The Seductive Simplicity of a Studio Apartment
Don't get me wrong-- I love my husband and my kids. I love them more than life itself, and I wouldn't want to contemplate living without them. But the thing is, I have this daydream. In my daydream, life is simple. I live in a small, uncluttered studio apartment in the city (sometimes it's Boston, sometimes it's Manhattan, depending on my mood). It's a snap to clean, and it's quiet. I keep my own quirky schedule, because I live alone and I don't have to worry about carving out time for a 9-to-5-job-holding husband or messing up the routines of two small children. I go out frequently to shop for the necessities or run errands one or two at a time, because I don't have a car and I'm limited by how much I can carry. But it's the city, so everything's either walking distance or a short ride on the bus or subway. My life is simple, and quiet, and flexible.
In my daydream I'm not rich, but I live so simply that I don't need a lot of money, and I'm able to support myself with my writing. It's not like it was in my late teens and early twenties when I was working 60 hours a week at two crappy jobs I hated just to pay the rent on my should-have-been-condemned-by-the-Department-of-Health studio apartment. In my daydream, my studio is very nice, and I can pay for it just from writing.
Except I suffer from chronic insomnia, and if I'm writing out of the house full-time, I'll be spending all my time in my sleep area, making it very un-restful. That won't work. I'll need at least a one-bedroom apartment, so I can keep my sleeping area separate from my living and working area.
Wait a minute. Living and working area? Boundaries are important, and I'm going to need a way to unwind and relax when I'm not writing. Just moving to the couch and turning on the TV or opening a good book won't work if my computer is mocking me from three feet away. Since the sleep hygiene necessary for my insomnia prohibits my moving the computer or TV into my bedroom, clearly I need dedicated office space. So a two-bedroom apartment it is, with the second bedroom being used as office space and the living room as my living/recreation area.
Hmmm. A nice, two-bedroom apartment in the heart of the city. Manhattan is out--no way can I afford that! Boston's still possible, but a stretch. I don't think I could do it on writing alone, not right now anyway (hopefully someday my writing will really take off and it would be possible, but right now it's just not realistic). So I'll need to work an outside job. Part-time would be preferable, but a nice two-bedroom in a nice area of Boston? That'll require full-time work.
A full-time job while writing part-time from my not-so-small two-bedroom apartment. I'll need a cleaning lady to come every other week to dust and do the floors, kitchen, and bathroom. I hate cleaning, and that time would be better spent writing, anyway. Oh yes, and I'll need a car so I can do all my grocery shopping and whatnot in one quick trip. I might need to work some overtime.
You know, my daydream is beginning to sound pretty hectic and complicated. And lonely. Wouldn't it be nice to find someone to share the load, to enjoy each other's company over the mundane things like morning coffee and supper together after work, a simple, healthy supper at home that I would cook and he would do the dishes after.
And it would be nice to have a couple of kids. But the city's no place to raise them--we'd have to move to the suburbs. And daycare's so expensive, it would make more sense for me to stay home with them.
I'm sure I could fit writing in somehow...
In my daydream I'm not rich, but I live so simply that I don't need a lot of money, and I'm able to support myself with my writing. It's not like it was in my late teens and early twenties when I was working 60 hours a week at two crappy jobs I hated just to pay the rent on my should-have-been-condemned-by-the-Department-of-Health studio apartment. In my daydream, my studio is very nice, and I can pay for it just from writing.
Except I suffer from chronic insomnia, and if I'm writing out of the house full-time, I'll be spending all my time in my sleep area, making it very un-restful. That won't work. I'll need at least a one-bedroom apartment, so I can keep my sleeping area separate from my living and working area.
Wait a minute. Living and working area? Boundaries are important, and I'm going to need a way to unwind and relax when I'm not writing. Just moving to the couch and turning on the TV or opening a good book won't work if my computer is mocking me from three feet away. Since the sleep hygiene necessary for my insomnia prohibits my moving the computer or TV into my bedroom, clearly I need dedicated office space. So a two-bedroom apartment it is, with the second bedroom being used as office space and the living room as my living/recreation area.
Hmmm. A nice, two-bedroom apartment in the heart of the city. Manhattan is out--no way can I afford that! Boston's still possible, but a stretch. I don't think I could do it on writing alone, not right now anyway (hopefully someday my writing will really take off and it would be possible, but right now it's just not realistic). So I'll need to work an outside job. Part-time would be preferable, but a nice two-bedroom in a nice area of Boston? That'll require full-time work.
A full-time job while writing part-time from my not-so-small two-bedroom apartment. I'll need a cleaning lady to come every other week to dust and do the floors, kitchen, and bathroom. I hate cleaning, and that time would be better spent writing, anyway. Oh yes, and I'll need a car so I can do all my grocery shopping and whatnot in one quick trip. I might need to work some overtime.
You know, my daydream is beginning to sound pretty hectic and complicated. And lonely. Wouldn't it be nice to find someone to share the load, to enjoy each other's company over the mundane things like morning coffee and supper together after work, a simple, healthy supper at home that I would cook and he would do the dishes after.
And it would be nice to have a couple of kids. But the city's no place to raise them--we'd have to move to the suburbs. And daycare's so expensive, it would make more sense for me to stay home with them.
I'm sure I could fit writing in somehow...
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Welcome Back, Now Bend Over!
For all the years I spent trying to get out of Massachusetts, I was actually very happy to be returning. I like the culture, I like the diversity, I even like the climate (yes, really!). My new neighbors have been very nice, with several stopping by the house to introduce themselves, sometimes bringing bagels or brownies. Old friends have contacted me to reconnect, and all in all we've felt very welcomed.
Until my husband went to register the cars at the RMV (Registry of Motor Vehicles, for any non-Massholes reading this).
We expected that there were going to be hefty registration fees, and while we certainly didn't like it, we were OK with it. What we didn't expect, however, was the sales tax scam being run by the state with the full cooperation of licensed auto dealerships.
Let me back up. In July of 2007, when Tom and I were legal residents of New Hampshire, we bought a car at a licensed dealership in Acton, MA. Why did we go to Massachusetts to buy a car? Because we were looking for a very specific type of car (Volvo station wagon of a certain vintage with a manual transmission), and we would go any reasonable distance to get it. A dealership in Acton had it, so we bought it.
Now, usually you pay sales tax on a purchase at the point of sale. Massachusetts changed the rules for vehicles, most likely because of all the Massholes who were going up to sales tax-free New Hampshire and buying their cars there. So in Massachusetts, you pay sales tax for your car when you go to the RMV to register it. Well, we lived in New Hampshire, so we registered it there, where we paid all applicable taxes and fees. No, we didn't pay a sales tax, but we did pay a vehicle license tax which is based on the car's purchase price when it was new (even if you bought it used, which we did). Not an insignificant amount of money.
Fast forward four years. Since purchasing the car, we've moved to Iowa, New York, and now Massachusetts. Each time we properly registered all of our cars, and we properly retitled them in each state. My husband went to the RMV to do the whole song and dance again in Massachusetts (by now an old hand at it), and was told that he can't register the cars without a bill of sale for each vehicle. Massachusetts didn't dispute that we legally own the cars (our valid New York titles are sufficient proof of that); they just wanted to ensure that we acquired them legally and paid all applicable taxes. How conscientious of them. So after much digging, we found the bills of sale from my car (bought four years ago) and one of Tom's cars (bought seven years ago), both obtained from licensed Massachusetts dealers and legally registered in New Hampshire at the time of purchase. Our 'spare' car was purchased from a private party in New Jersey six years ago, and Tom had to provide that person's name and address.
Having to find that paperwork was bad enough, but here's where it got ugly.
The Mass RMV accepted the car purchased from a private party in New Jersey six years ago as being on the up and up, and just collected the regular registration fees that we were expecting to pay. But the cars purchased in Massachusetts were another matter. Buried deep in Massachusetts law is the following: "If a nonresident of Massachusetts purchases a motor vehicle in Massachusetts and takes title to and/or possession of the vehicle in Massachusetts, the sale is subject to the Massachusetts sales/use tax irrespective of whether the nonresident intends to use the motor vehicle within or outside Massachusetts." (Chapter 64H) How is this to be done if the purchaser is not registering the vehicle in Massachusetts? Letter Ruling 77-13 states: "No dealer can make delivery of a motor vehicle to an out-of-state purchaser who takes delivery of the vehicle in Massachusetts without first receiving evidence that the required sales tax has been paid. This payment is made on Form ST-7R at either the registry or any state tax office and the dealer must retain evidence of payment in case of an audit." In other words, the dealerships were legally required to fill out this form and inform us of our tax liability, and then NOT release the titles to us until we could prove that we'd paid the required tax. Neither of them did that. They just took our cash and gave us the titles, with no hint that there was anything more we needed to do.
So when Tom went to register the cars and produced bills of sale from Massachusetts dealers, he was informed of his tax liability, along with the nice detail that we were now also on the hook for penalties and interest, plus we would be assessed at the current 6.25% rate, not the 5% sales tax rate that was in effect at the time of purchase. The penalties and interest more than doubled what we owed for my station wagon. Did the RMV care that the dealerships were negligent in their legal responsibilities? Not their problem, mon. Furthermore, the woman Tom dealt with at the RMV went on a bit of a rant about how this happens all the time, and how few if any dealerships comply with this requirement, leaving people like us screwed for hundreds or even thousands of dollars more than they should have paid. (You know it's bad when an RMV employee is doing your complaining for you!) The biggest victims, according to the woman at the RMV, are retirees who split their time between Massachusetts and Florida.
This isn't a new requirement. That letter ruling I referenced dates back to 1977, and it hasn't been superseded. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts doesn't bother enforcing this law because it's a cash cow for them. Enforcement would cut their revenue drastically. So instead they stick it to people who would be happy to comply with the laws if the people responsible for informing us of them actually did what they were supposed to do. After all, if ignorance of the law is no defense, and violation of the law results in higher revenues, of course they want to keep people as ignorant as possible!
Massachusetts does have a reciprocal relationship with most states. If this whole thing had happened this way except we'd lived in New York (which also collects sales tax at the time of registration) instead of New Hampshire, then Massachusetts would have credited us with the amount of tax we'd paid in New York and only charged us the difference (plus penalties and interest on that difference), if any. But they don't recognize the vehicle license tax we paid in New Hampshire, because technically it's not a sales tax, so we're considered delinquent on the whole amount.
If we had known about this at the time we purchased my station wagon, we would have paid the $50 or $100 to have the dealership deliver the car to us in New Hampshire, which, according to Massachusetts General Laws, would have exempted us from the tax liability entirely. But we weren't informed, and the dealership illegally released the title to us when we picked up the car in Acton, so now the state gets hundreds of extra dollars.
The obvious thing would be for us to go after the dealerships themselves, if the state won't. Unfortunately, both dealerships have since closed, even though at least one of them is currently operating in a new location under a new name (same owner). But it's legally a different entity, and therefore not responsible for the actions of its former existence. How convenient.
Yes, this has turned into more of a rant than I'd intended, but it's really frustrating to get hit with a four-figure registration fee that should have been half of that when you've tried to do everything right. It's not like the state caught up with us after we spent years flouting the law; the law was concealed from us by the dealerships' illegal actions, and by the failure of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to enforce their own 30+ year old law.
Massachusetts, I realize you're having trouble balancing your books, along with virtually every other state in the union (except North Dakota, I think). But please don't attempt to solve your fiscal woes by screwing over your citizens. Taxes are bad enough; partnering with auto dealerships to stick consumers with exorbitant penalties is just obscene.
Until my husband went to register the cars at the RMV (Registry of Motor Vehicles, for any non-Massholes reading this).
We expected that there were going to be hefty registration fees, and while we certainly didn't like it, we were OK with it. What we didn't expect, however, was the sales tax scam being run by the state with the full cooperation of licensed auto dealerships.
Let me back up. In July of 2007, when Tom and I were legal residents of New Hampshire, we bought a car at a licensed dealership in Acton, MA. Why did we go to Massachusetts to buy a car? Because we were looking for a very specific type of car (Volvo station wagon of a certain vintage with a manual transmission), and we would go any reasonable distance to get it. A dealership in Acton had it, so we bought it.
Now, usually you pay sales tax on a purchase at the point of sale. Massachusetts changed the rules for vehicles, most likely because of all the Massholes who were going up to sales tax-free New Hampshire and buying their cars there. So in Massachusetts, you pay sales tax for your car when you go to the RMV to register it. Well, we lived in New Hampshire, so we registered it there, where we paid all applicable taxes and fees. No, we didn't pay a sales tax, but we did pay a vehicle license tax which is based on the car's purchase price when it was new (even if you bought it used, which we did). Not an insignificant amount of money.
Fast forward four years. Since purchasing the car, we've moved to Iowa, New York, and now Massachusetts. Each time we properly registered all of our cars, and we properly retitled them in each state. My husband went to the RMV to do the whole song and dance again in Massachusetts (by now an old hand at it), and was told that he can't register the cars without a bill of sale for each vehicle. Massachusetts didn't dispute that we legally own the cars (our valid New York titles are sufficient proof of that); they just wanted to ensure that we acquired them legally and paid all applicable taxes. How conscientious of them. So after much digging, we found the bills of sale from my car (bought four years ago) and one of Tom's cars (bought seven years ago), both obtained from licensed Massachusetts dealers and legally registered in New Hampshire at the time of purchase. Our 'spare' car was purchased from a private party in New Jersey six years ago, and Tom had to provide that person's name and address.
Having to find that paperwork was bad enough, but here's where it got ugly.
The Mass RMV accepted the car purchased from a private party in New Jersey six years ago as being on the up and up, and just collected the regular registration fees that we were expecting to pay. But the cars purchased in Massachusetts were another matter. Buried deep in Massachusetts law is the following: "If a nonresident of Massachusetts purchases a motor vehicle in Massachusetts and takes title to and/or possession of the vehicle in Massachusetts, the sale is subject to the Massachusetts sales/use tax irrespective of whether the nonresident intends to use the motor vehicle within or outside Massachusetts." (Chapter 64H) How is this to be done if the purchaser is not registering the vehicle in Massachusetts? Letter Ruling 77-13 states: "No dealer can make delivery of a motor vehicle to an out-of-state purchaser who takes delivery of the vehicle in Massachusetts without first receiving evidence that the required sales tax has been paid. This payment is made on Form ST-7R at either the registry or any state tax office and the dealer must retain evidence of payment in case of an audit." In other words, the dealerships were legally required to fill out this form and inform us of our tax liability, and then NOT release the titles to us until we could prove that we'd paid the required tax. Neither of them did that. They just took our cash and gave us the titles, with no hint that there was anything more we needed to do.
So when Tom went to register the cars and produced bills of sale from Massachusetts dealers, he was informed of his tax liability, along with the nice detail that we were now also on the hook for penalties and interest, plus we would be assessed at the current 6.25% rate, not the 5% sales tax rate that was in effect at the time of purchase. The penalties and interest more than doubled what we owed for my station wagon. Did the RMV care that the dealerships were negligent in their legal responsibilities? Not their problem, mon. Furthermore, the woman Tom dealt with at the RMV went on a bit of a rant about how this happens all the time, and how few if any dealerships comply with this requirement, leaving people like us screwed for hundreds or even thousands of dollars more than they should have paid. (You know it's bad when an RMV employee is doing your complaining for you!) The biggest victims, according to the woman at the RMV, are retirees who split their time between Massachusetts and Florida.
This isn't a new requirement. That letter ruling I referenced dates back to 1977, and it hasn't been superseded. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts doesn't bother enforcing this law because it's a cash cow for them. Enforcement would cut their revenue drastically. So instead they stick it to people who would be happy to comply with the laws if the people responsible for informing us of them actually did what they were supposed to do. After all, if ignorance of the law is no defense, and violation of the law results in higher revenues, of course they want to keep people as ignorant as possible!
Massachusetts does have a reciprocal relationship with most states. If this whole thing had happened this way except we'd lived in New York (which also collects sales tax at the time of registration) instead of New Hampshire, then Massachusetts would have credited us with the amount of tax we'd paid in New York and only charged us the difference (plus penalties and interest on that difference), if any. But they don't recognize the vehicle license tax we paid in New Hampshire, because technically it's not a sales tax, so we're considered delinquent on the whole amount.
If we had known about this at the time we purchased my station wagon, we would have paid the $50 or $100 to have the dealership deliver the car to us in New Hampshire, which, according to Massachusetts General Laws, would have exempted us from the tax liability entirely. But we weren't informed, and the dealership illegally released the title to us when we picked up the car in Acton, so now the state gets hundreds of extra dollars.
The obvious thing would be for us to go after the dealerships themselves, if the state won't. Unfortunately, both dealerships have since closed, even though at least one of them is currently operating in a new location under a new name (same owner). But it's legally a different entity, and therefore not responsible for the actions of its former existence. How convenient.
Yes, this has turned into more of a rant than I'd intended, but it's really frustrating to get hit with a four-figure registration fee that should have been half of that when you've tried to do everything right. It's not like the state caught up with us after we spent years flouting the law; the law was concealed from us by the dealerships' illegal actions, and by the failure of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to enforce their own 30+ year old law.
Massachusetts, I realize you're having trouble balancing your books, along with virtually every other state in the union (except North Dakota, I think). But please don't attempt to solve your fiscal woes by screwing over your citizens. Taxes are bad enough; partnering with auto dealerships to stick consumers with exorbitant penalties is just obscene.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


