5 ms·

I’m really surprised that nobody has set up address as a service yet so that you can claim for example to live in New York by virtue of an address auto command

I’m really surprised that nobody has set up address as a service yet so that you can claim for example to live in New York by virtue of an address auto command “a New York salary”.

Avicebron 4y ago
I'm not a lawyer, but this seems illegal on its face. Just from a tax perspective for the government, I feel like people would immediately start trying to game it for taxes.
- CalRobert 4y ago
  I don't know if it matters but I have a limited company and am an employee of said company, which means I deal with taxes on my own and can perform work for (almost) any company in the world - I just invoice them like any supplier. Maybe this is the future? Though some companies would rather you were their employee I suppose.
  - chii 4y ago
    > I have a limited company and am an employee of said company, which means I deal with taxes on my own and can perform work for (almost) any company in the world which means you're a contractor, rather than an employee. I do think this is a better way tbh, as you can potentially own all of your healthcare costs, and optimize your taxes properly. And you can probably charge a lot more as a contractor, to make up for the lack of job security etc.
    - CalRobert 4y ago
      I don't get a lot of tax optimisation (my home country makes it really hard to do anything useful) but I DO have a much easier time getting better-paid work from the US. Otherwise I'd need to go through something like oysterhr.com, boundlesshq, etc.
    - jjeaff 4y ago
      It might be a better idea for high income people. But it is often used to take advantage of regular employees. It is a poor reflection of our tax system that running your own entity that you then pay yourself out of can have lower taxes than simply earning money as an employee.
  - ejb999 4y ago
    I think an awful lot of employers would prefer you were a contractor; in the USA at least, it is the IRS/government that prevents this from happening more by putting the fear into said employers that they will be fined and forced to pay back taxes for anyone improperly classifying people as contractors when they are in fact employees.
    - Tangurena2 4y ago
      It was the tax reform act of 1986 that removed the "safe harbor" provision for engineers and computer professionals. In the city where I currently live, lots of small businesses try to claim that their employees are contractors. Those businesses depend on the ignorance of their workers.
    - vladvasiliu 4y ago
      Are contractors taxed less than companies in the US? In France, companies also like to contract out a lot, either to "freelance" or regular outsourcing shops. The reason I put freelance in quotes is that there's no such thing here, legally. You have to have some form of company, through which you invoice the client. But then, whenever you want to get the money out of the company to pay rent and eat, you'll be hit by, more or less, the same taxes the employer would pay. For a given unit of work, it's not cheaper to contract out, there's no real tax loophole. As far as I know, the state doesn't really care. It may even prefer it, since contractor rates are usually higher than salaries, so they get to get more tax. The only situation where it would crack down on this is if the would-be employee complained. Since this is considered a "precarious" arrangement, if the contractor can prove that they're basically an outsourced employee, they can ask to be converted to an actual employee and the state will back them up.
      - jjeaff 4y ago
        Contractors are taxed at a higher rate, or really, the same rate, but in an employee situation, the employer must pay half of the tax. However, depending on what you do, people can end up paying less in taxes overall as a contractor because you have more flexibility for deductions. There are very little options for an employee to deduct any expenses in the US, whereas, a contractor could potentially deduct the cost to commute to an office, their cellphone and home internet (if used for work) and even a portion of their rent/mortgage for a home office.
ejb999 4y ago
great - and then you have to pay NYC taxes. Probably something you want to avoid, unless you actually live there.
jsty 4y ago
There’s plenty of virtual office / forwarding address services, but claiming you live at one when you don’t for a pay gain risks (1) fraud against your employer; and (2) tax fraud (if eg in a different city / state / country).
- ericmay 4y ago
  What’s the definition of where one lives? For example what if you wanted the NYC salary and you rented out a bunk bed for $50/month and traveled around the country while working remote? Cities definitely don’t have the resources to track you down and I’m not sure employers especially larger ones have any mechanisms in place to keep track. I’m not advocating for this just surprised it’s not more well known. Though I suspect it’s common and just not talked about much for obvious reasons. Certainly there are also jobs that require you to physically work from a given state as well for example. How do so called digital nomads handle it from a tax perspective? Do they maintain a residence for tax purposes? Is that any different?
  - FartyMcFarter 4y ago
    Whether something is illegal is different from whether it's easy to enforce. It's hard to say how likely they are to enforce this, but you're definitely taking a risk by pretending to live somewhere. What makes it more problematic is that it's not just tax offices that would be interested in finding out. The company you work at may also get in trouble with the tax office as they pay employment taxes too, so they are probably interested in the fact that you're deceiving them. If your manager suspects you're not being truthful and follows up with HR this could easily get you in trouble. As remote work becomes more popular, it becomes more likely that companies will pay attention to this. Knowing all of that, I'd find it quite hard to justify playing these games. It just seems like asking for trouble, with a pretty good chance of getting it.
    - ericmay 4y ago
      Legality is different than enforcement, but the two aren't totally separate. For example, it's de facto not illegal to drive 5mph over the speed limit on the highway. No police officer will pull you over for that unless they have some other prior reason. So in that sense, lack of enforcement has made the practice legal.
pydry 4y ago
Why bother? If somebody wants to pay you less because you live in upstate NY rather than Manhattan just reject them and move on. If the reason is bullshit, there's no need to bullshit back. If the reason isn't bullshit (e.g. coz they want you in their Manhattan office on a moment's notice) then having a virtual address won't help.
- ghaff 4y ago
  Or, for a different perspective, someone won't pay you a premium because you want to live in Manhattan because they don't actually care where in the country you live.
davidmurdoch 4y ago
I know someone that lived in Mexico but listed a friend's address in NYC on all work paperwork.
- bathtub365 4y ago
  How did that go come tax time?
  - red-iron-pine 4y ago
    Having done this with VA and WA -- went fine w/ VA, went ugly w/ WA. WA has no state income tax, but a beefier payroll tax, so it's cheaper for me but more expensive for the company.
  - davidmurdoch 4y ago
    Pretty sure he pays NY taxes like normal. Not sure about Mexican taxes.
John23832 4y ago
Sounds like a good way to complicate your taxes. Especially if you’re claiming to live in California or New York. You know the old saying, noting is certain except death, and the will of the department of taxation for the state of (California|New York).
elteto 4y ago
And then pay New York taxes? And possibly NYC too?
- behringer 4y ago
  You don't actually live there. Filing NY taxes could be tax fraud if you don't live there,although the rules may allow you to if you work there.
philwelch 4y ago
Seattle would be a better choice—still a relatively high cost of living but no state income tax yet.
Mountain_Skies 4y ago
My state's DMV is able to identify postal addresses that are not physical residences. My guess is that they get this data from USPS, which requires remailing services to register their business. Wouldn't be surprised if the DMV also checks for how many people at a given address have applied for a government ID and if it exceeds a particular threshold, flag it for investigation.
- ericmay 4y ago
  Yea but you could legally run a bunk house or even just keep a spare bed “available” for someone for $50/month or something and they “live there”. Not saying it would be worth it per-se but definitely ways around that for anyone who is willing. The government can’t regulate something like that very well.
  - RestlessMind 4y ago
    IANAL. Let's say you do that trick of renting a bunk in state X and actually go live in another state Y. Now what if your employers does not want any ties with the state Y and hence avoids establishing a nexus there? By your actions, state Y has a reason to come after your employer since their employee lives in Y (by how Y decides its residency requirements). Pretty sure a legal battle will ensue with you branded as a liar and a deceiver. Depending on how pissed your employer is, it might even go on your personal records which can haunt you next time someone runs a background check while hiring you.

I’m really surprised that nobody has set up address as a service yet so that you can claim for example to live in New York by virtue of an address auto command “a New York salary”.

Avicebron 4y ago

I'm not a lawyer, but this seems illegal on its face. Just from a tax perspective for the government, I feel like people would immediately start trying to game it for taxes.

CalRobert 4y ago
I don't know if it matters but I have a limited company and am an employee of said company, which means I deal with taxes on my own and can perform work for (almost) any company in the world - I just invoice them like any supplier. Maybe this is the future? Though some companies would rather you were their employee I suppose.
- chii 4y ago
  > I have a limited company and am an employee of said company, which means I deal with taxes on my own and can perform work for (almost) any company in the world which means you're a contractor, rather than an employee. I do think this is a better way tbh, as you can potentially own all of your healthcare costs, and optimize your taxes properly. And you can probably charge a lot more as a contractor, to make up for the lack of job security etc.
  - CalRobert 4y ago
    I don't get a lot of tax optimisation (my home country makes it really hard to do anything useful) but I DO have a much easier time getting better-paid work from the US. Otherwise I'd need to go through something like oysterhr.com, boundlesshq, etc.
  - jjeaff 4y ago
    It might be a better idea for high income people. But it is often used to take advantage of regular employees. It is a poor reflection of our tax system that running your own entity that you then pay yourself out of can have lower taxes than simply earning money as an employee.
- ejb999 4y ago
  I think an awful lot of employers would prefer you were a contractor; in the USA at least, it is the IRS/government that prevents this from happening more by putting the fear into said employers that they will be fined and forced to pay back taxes for anyone improperly classifying people as contractors when they are in fact employees.
  - Tangurena2 4y ago
    It was the tax reform act of 1986 that removed the "safe harbor" provision for engineers and computer professionals. In the city where I currently live, lots of small businesses try to claim that their employees are contractors. Those businesses depend on the ignorance of their workers.
  - vladvasiliu 4y ago
    Are contractors taxed less than companies in the US? In France, companies also like to contract out a lot, either to "freelance" or regular outsourcing shops. The reason I put freelance in quotes is that there's no such thing here, legally. You have to have some form of company, through which you invoice the client. But then, whenever you want to get the money out of the company to pay rent and eat, you'll be hit by, more or less, the same taxes the employer would pay. For a given unit of work, it's not cheaper to contract out, there's no real tax loophole. As far as I know, the state doesn't really care. It may even prefer it, since contractor rates are usually higher than salaries, so they get to get more tax. The only situation where it would crack down on this is if the would-be employee complained. Since this is considered a "precarious" arrangement, if the contractor can prove that they're basically an outsourced employee, they can ask to be converted to an actual employee and the state will back them up.
    - jjeaff 4y ago
      Contractors are taxed at a higher rate, or really, the same rate, but in an employee situation, the employer must pay half of the tax. However, depending on what you do, people can end up paying less in taxes overall as a contractor because you have more flexibility for deductions. There are very little options for an employee to deduct any expenses in the US, whereas, a contractor could potentially deduct the cost to commute to an office, their cellphone and home internet (if used for work) and even a portion of their rent/mortgage for a home office.

ejb999 4y ago

great - and then you have to pay NYC taxes. Probably something you want to avoid, unless you actually live there.

jsty 4y ago

There’s plenty of virtual office / forwarding address services, but claiming you live at one when you don’t for a pay gain risks (1) fraud against your employer; and (2) tax fraud (if eg in a different city / state / country).

ericmay 4y ago
What’s the definition of where one lives? For example what if you wanted the NYC salary and you rented out a bunk bed for $50/month and traveled around the country while working remote? Cities definitely don’t have the resources to track you down and I’m not sure employers especially larger ones have any mechanisms in place to keep track. I’m not advocating for this just surprised it’s not more well known. Though I suspect it’s common and just not talked about much for obvious reasons. Certainly there are also jobs that require you to physically work from a given state as well for example. How do so called digital nomads handle it from a tax perspective? Do they maintain a residence for tax purposes? Is that any different?
- FartyMcFarter 4y ago
  Whether something is illegal is different from whether it's easy to enforce. It's hard to say how likely they are to enforce this, but you're definitely taking a risk by pretending to live somewhere. What makes it more problematic is that it's not just tax offices that would be interested in finding out. The company you work at may also get in trouble with the tax office as they pay employment taxes too, so they are probably interested in the fact that you're deceiving them. If your manager suspects you're not being truthful and follows up with HR this could easily get you in trouble. As remote work becomes more popular, it becomes more likely that companies will pay attention to this. Knowing all of that, I'd find it quite hard to justify playing these games. It just seems like asking for trouble, with a pretty good chance of getting it.
  - ericmay 4y ago
    Legality is different than enforcement, but the two aren't totally separate. For example, it's de facto not illegal to drive 5mph over the speed limit on the highway. No police officer will pull you over for that unless they have some other prior reason. So in that sense, lack of enforcement has made the practice legal.

pydry 4y ago

Why bother? If somebody wants to pay you less because you live in upstate NY rather than Manhattan just reject them and move on. If the reason is bullshit, there's no need to bullshit back. If the reason isn't bullshit (e.g. coz they want you in their Manhattan office on a moment's notice) then having a virtual address won't help.

ghaff 4y ago
Or, for a different perspective, someone won't pay you a premium because you want to live in Manhattan because they don't actually care where in the country you live.

davidmurdoch 4y ago

I know someone that lived in Mexico but listed a friend's address in NYC on all work paperwork.

bathtub365 4y ago
How did that go come tax time?
- red-iron-pine 4y ago
  Having done this with VA and WA -- went fine w/ VA, went ugly w/ WA. WA has no state income tax, but a beefier payroll tax, so it's cheaper for me but more expensive for the company.
- davidmurdoch 4y ago
  Pretty sure he pays NY taxes like normal. Not sure about Mexican taxes.

John23832 4y ago

Sounds like a good way to complicate your taxes. Especially if you’re claiming to live in California or New York. You know the old saying, noting is certain except death, and the will of the department of taxation for the state of (California|New York).

elteto 4y ago

And then pay New York taxes? And possibly NYC too?

behringer 4y ago
You don't actually live there. Filing NY taxes could be tax fraud if you don't live there,although the rules may allow you to if you work there.

philwelch 4y ago

Seattle would be a better choice—still a relatively high cost of living but no state income tax yet.

Mountain_Skies 4y ago

My state's DMV is able to identify postal addresses that are not physical residences. My guess is that they get this data from USPS, which requires remailing services to register their business. Wouldn't be surprised if the DMV also checks for how many people at a given address have applied for a government ID and if it exceeds a particular threshold, flag it for investigation.

ericmay 4y ago
Yea but you could legally run a bunk house or even just keep a spare bed “available” for someone for $50/month or something and they “live there”. Not saying it would be worth it per-se but definitely ways around that for anyone who is willing. The government can’t regulate something like that very well.
- RestlessMind 4y ago
  IANAL. Let's say you do that trick of renting a bunk in state X and actually go live in another state Y. Now what if your employers does not want any ties with the state Y and hence avoids establishing a nexus there? By your actions, state Y has a reason to come after your employer since their employee lives in Y (by how Y decides its residency requirements). Pretty sure a legal battle will ensue with you branded as a liar and a deceiver. Depending on how pissed your employer is, it might even go on your personal records which can haunt you next time someone runs a background check while hiring you.