It's No Secret Why Some Dems Are Pushing for Their Convention to Be...
Biden Threatened to 'Rethink' US Support for Israel, But Tried to Keep Those...
Here's What Happened When Pro-Hamas Activists Tried to Block Traffic in FL
Progressives are Mentally Defective
Electoral College Mischief Not Unprecedented—You Don’t Have to Look That Far Back
Maternal Mortality and the Failure to Value Motherhood
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 217: Celebrating Mother’s Day With the Mother of...
A Problem to Fix: GOP House Candidate Alison Esposito Calls Out Antisemitism on...
The Way Clarence Thomas Describes DC Is Truly Terrifying
Democrat Believes Joe Biden’s Israel Threat Took Unnecessary 'Pressure off of Hamas'
Trump Flies Potential VP Pick to Massive 80,000 Person Rally
Is the Private Sector Ready For the Rising Threat of AI Cyber Warfare?
Why Are Jews and Christians Coming Together to Pray for Israel
Veterans Affairs OIG Calls for Full Investigation into $10.8 Million in Improper Incentive...
Illegal Aliens May Decide the Outcomes of National Elections, Without Even Voting
Tipsheet

Acting Out: Robert Redford Sues New York for $1.6 Million Bill

Is it too late to film a sequel to "The Sting?" Hollywood actor Robert Redford is suing the state of New York after facing a nasty $1.6 million tax for the sale of his company's part-ownership of the Sundance Channel in 2005.

Advertisement

In May, the New York Department of Taxation and Finance claimed Redford owed $845,066 in taxes, plus $727,404 in interest on the sale of Sundance. Redford, however, claims he already paid off taxes from his income on the sale in the state of Utah. He sued the department on July 30 in the Albany County Supreme Court. From his complaint:

Sundance T.V.'s (INC) business activity in 2005 was "limited to the holding of an interest in Limited. INC managed its passive investment in Limited, paid its business expenses and maintained its books and records, all from its out-of-state location," Redford says in the complaint.

Limited, in turn, owned part of the Channel and received trademark revenue from it. "Neither NC nor Limited had an office, or property, or employed anyone within New York," the complaint states. "Neither entity had any property, payroll or receipts, located in or deemed attributable to the conduct of a trade or business in New York.

"Plaintiff did not use his ownership interest in INC, nor did he use his indirect ownership interest in Limited or Channel, in any trade or business carried on by him in New York. Further, plaintiff did not have any property, payroll or receipts located in or deemed attributable to the conduct of a trade or business in New York.

"In 2005, Limited sold a portion of its interest in Channel to an unrelated third party. The gain related to this sale was passed through to the direct and indirect partners of Limited, including plaintiff by way of INC."

Advertisement

The actor will soon find out if his case has a happy ending. Whatever the outcome, at least he's proving there are wealthy liberals who don't want to pay higher taxes.

A copy of Redford's lawsuit can be read here.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement