May someone explain to the political imbecile roaring over the public media and making provocative claims without any reservation for their ignorance that there is no single rule that stipulates how the power relationship between the two exist universally, everybody can craft its own version based on the reality on the ground, the requirement. This is to be stipulated in a political agreement of the parties of the agreement.
The basic definition of federalism: an agreement on how to share power (responsibility) between the agreeing parties, nothing more and nothing less. If you agreed on then you can settle yourself for having the right to collect taxes in your territory and diburse the share of the other party accordingly, and then relinquish the rest of responsibilities to the other party of the agreement, at least theoretically.
Federalism is an agreement on how to share power, generally. The actual implementation can look like very much different based on the agreed up contract. Just because America agreed up on something, Germany doesn't follow the same path and implement the copy of American Federalism, nor does Switzerland the same.
Just because America and Germany agreed on a certain version of the contract, that doesn't necessarily mean Ethiopia has to follow their footpath. Ethiopia has got its own (home-made) requirements that it needs to solve (address) by implementing a certain version of the contract. No one can argue the requirements in Germany, India, or somewhere else were exactly the same to warranty the implementation of the same solution (agreement). This takes a logical thinking, but the guys are far from this, I think.
https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-i ... efits.html