Gangsterism, plain and simple, from the liberal metropolis formerly known as the City of Brotherly Love:
Dick Yuengling may be throwing back a few of his own brews after receiving a civil lawsuit from the city that claims his brewery, D.G. Yuengling and Son Inc., has failed to pay more than $6.6 million in city taxes, interest and penalty fees.
How does a Pottsville-based beer company that doesn't have a brewery or a plant in Philadelphia come to owe millions in business-income and -receipts taxes to the city?
It's not clear, because no one from the city would comment on the suit or explain even the basic foundation of the claims.
What the city constitutes as a taxable activity "is essentially a factual determination made on a case-by-case basis," according to the regulations listed on the city's website.
The civil suit against Yuengling was filed in Philadelphia last week and claims that America's oldest brewery failed to pay its business tax, though the suit does not detail what activities Yuengling conducted within Philadelphia that the city determined to be taxable.
When the law is determined on a case by case basis, there is no law to be obeyed, only immunity from government malice that can only be purchased in cash from the party in power. Which are almost always Democrats because this is how they roll, all the way down from Barack Obama to Senator Bob Menendez. From Tammany Hall to Mayor Daley.
$6.6 million based on some tax they kinda just made up and decided Yuengling needs to pay while refusing to divulge even the smallest bit of detail as to why? Shady-ass city being shady.
It’s a wonder who the Yuengling guys pissed off to make this sorta thing happen. Did Dick Yuengling leave a bloody hooker in Mayor Nutter’s beach house? Are the Yuengling trucks involved in the heroin trade and the company failed to pay the city their cut? So many possibilities.
Whatever it is doesn’t matter unless the price of Black & Tan goes up. Then we have a problem.
I like the way B-Sports takes the gangsterism as a given. And they inadvertently make the point, in their final sentence, that it's OK to beat up on the "rich", as long as nothing happens to the middle class.
Is that considered a "problem"?