State Domicile and Residency

The New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal affirmed an Administrative Law Judge determination that two taxpayers remained New York residents because the taxpayers did not establish that they had changed their domicile to Florida during the relevant tax years. Because the taxpayers spent “more than 30 but less than 184 days in New York,” the

The Utah Supreme Court ruled for taxpayers John and Brooke Buck, finding they were not domiciled in Utah during tax year 2012. The Court held that the State Tax Commission had incorrectly applied Utah’s statutory domicile presumption that attaches when a taxpayer claims a residential exemption for property tax purposes. As addressed in more detail

In a decision dated January 18, 2022, the Arkansas Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) held that a married couple remained domiciled in and residents of Arkansas for individual income tax purposes for the 2013 through 2018 tax years, rejecting the couple’s assertion that they had abandoned their Arkansas domicile by relocating to another state.

An employee’s state of residency, and in some cases the city and/or county of residency, may significantly affect their employer’s withholding tax obligations. Given the expected increase in permanent remote work, residency complications may exacerbate an employer’s state withholding compliance burdens.

In this SALT@Work column for the November/December issue of Journal of Multistate Taxation and

In a personal income tax residency decision that involves a fair amount of schadenfreude, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed a criminal tax evasion conviction of a District domiciliary and denied a motion to suppress documents obtained through extensive summonses issued by the Office of Tax and Revenue.

For background, the taxpayer filed

On July 27, the Indiana Department of Revenue found that a taxpayer had abandoned her Indiana domicile and was therefore no longer subject to Indiana state income despite the taxpayer erroneously listing her permanent address with her employer as her old Indiana-based address.

The taxpayer protested the imposition of Indiana income tax and provided the

Residency/domicile is a critical issue in a state-tax analysis because, as a general principle, a state taxes its own residents on all their income from whatever sources it is derived (typically with a credit mechanism for some or all tax paid to another state on that same income). However, regardless of residency and regardless of

A New York Administrative Law Judge recently determined that a taxpayer was liable for income tax as a statutory resident of New York State and New York City for the entire 2014 tax year, as he maintained a permanent place of abode in New York City and was physically present in New York State and