5 ms·

> ny/ca/ma type states don't want their white collar workers moving to low tax states and working from there NY doesn’t care where you live, they’ll gladly tax

> ny/ca/ma type states don't want their white collar workers moving to low tax states and working from there NY doesn’t care where you live, they’ll gladly tax you and aggressively pursue said taxes no matter if you get any benefit from those tax dollars or not.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
While it is a travesty that the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the “convenience rule”, NY state only taxes income from work performed outside of NY state if the worker sometimes works within NY state and could have worked in NY state. https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/memos/income/m06_5i.pdf https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/memos/income/m06_5i.pdf The premise is: >If a nonresident employee . . .performs services for his employer both within and without New York State, So if you never worked in NY state, or move away from NY state, then you are not liable for NY income taxes.
- WkndTriathlete 3y ago
  I've read through the NY state convenience rules. They are written so poorly that Albany, in theory, can tax someone who attends on-site meetings in NY for two days out of the year that otherwise works remotely from Fairbanks, Alaska, which is utterly ridiculous. At some point I expect SCOTUS will slap that law down based on the Interstate Commerce Clause but the correct challenge has not reached the docket yet. But I also expect that almost everyone that might be affected by this has just worked around the NY state law by now. But for those of you considering working remotely for a company based in New York state you should be aware of the convenience rules. Based on my reading of them I would recommend against working remotely or ensure that the company helps you comply with the convenience laws so you don't fall afoul of them.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    > They are written so poorly that Albany, in theory, can tax someone who attends on-site meetings in NY for two days out of the year that otherwise works remotely from Fairbanks, Alaska, which is utterly ridiculous. Every state has the right to collect tax from income earned from work performed within the state’s boundaries. Sports players and performers often pay a ton of state income tax while only working in a state for 3 hours. Are you suggesting that people who travel to work to NY owe NY income taxes on ALL of their income, even that which was earned outside of NY? > At some point I expect SCOTUS will slap that law down based on the Interstate Commerce Clause but the correct challenge has not reached the docket yet. I am not so sure about this. With the South Dakota Wayfair ruling, and the proliferation of “market based sourcing” rules for determining taxable revenue, even this conservative Supreme Court does not seem to be leaning towards canceling that. Right now, if you have a business in one state (including just you working by yourself as a 1099 contractor), and sell your services to a recipient in a state with market based sourcing rules, then you will owe business taxes to the state where the benefits of your work was received, even though you never stepped foot or even shipped anything physical to that state. See this for example: https://www.withum.com/resources/new-jersey-legislation-implements-major-tax-changes-including-market-based-sourcing-for-partnerships/ https://www.withum.com/resources/new-jersey-legislation-impl...
- Analemma_ 3y ago
  I'm guessing you're just citing what you found in a Google search and have never actually dealt with NY taxes. In reality, NY state demands payment from you if you so much as checked your work email inside JFK while you were waiting for a connecting flight. I know literally dozens of people who can attest to this fact.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    I did the best I could by linking to a document regarding the policy being discussed on New York’s state website. Not sure how I could do better unless I had experience litigating this very issue. > In reality, NY state demands payment from you if you so much as checked your work email inside JFK while you were waiting for a connecting flight. This qualifies as working within the state of NY, and hence makes you liable for paying taxes on the income (from that work only). I do find it egregious that NY state would go after a worker for checking work email in an airport, but that is a separate issue from what the person I replied to had erroneously insinuated, which is that NY taxes income from work performed outside of NY, even if you move away.
- jsjohnst 3y ago
  > So if you never worked in NY state, or move away from NY state, then you are not liable for NY income taxes. Sorry, it’s not that simple. I’m not speaking about things “I’ve read”, I’m speaking from first hand experience including fighting this via attorneys. I (as well as others) have not stepped foot in the state of NY for work for an entire calendar year in the past, did not live in NY when hired nor have any even pseudo claim to residency, yet do to convenience of employer regulations, pay NY state income tax on all income from said employer.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    That is wild. I do not see how that should survive a legal challenge (obviously it somehow has thus far if you are experiencing it), given the wording that NY state itself uses in their own tax law. Especially if you live and work in a state with income tax, because the Supreme Court ruled that the state where you work has the right to tax your income and other states have to give you a tax credit for taxes paid to the other state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comptroller_of_the_Treasury_of_Maryland_v._Wynne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comptroller_of_the_Treasury_of... Does your employer show an employer ID on your W-2 for the state you work in? Seems crazy to me that another state would allow New York to take its income tax from a person working in their state, and the federal courts to allow this to continue. Makes a mockery of the whole system.

lotsofpulp 3y ago

While it is a travesty that the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the “convenience rule”, NY state only taxes income from work performed outside of NY state if the worker sometimes works within NY state and could have worked in NY state. https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/memos/income/m06_5i.pdf https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/memos/income/m06_5i.pdf The premise is: >If a nonresident employee . . .performs services for his employer both within and without New York State, So if you never worked in NY state, or move away from NY state, then you are not liable for NY income taxes.

WkndTriathlete 3y ago
I've read through the NY state convenience rules. They are written so poorly that Albany, in theory, can tax someone who attends on-site meetings in NY for two days out of the year that otherwise works remotely from Fairbanks, Alaska, which is utterly ridiculous. At some point I expect SCOTUS will slap that law down based on the Interstate Commerce Clause but the correct challenge has not reached the docket yet. But I also expect that almost everyone that might be affected by this has just worked around the NY state law by now. But for those of you considering working remotely for a company based in New York state you should be aware of the convenience rules. Based on my reading of them I would recommend against working remotely or ensure that the company helps you comply with the convenience laws so you don't fall afoul of them.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  > They are written so poorly that Albany, in theory, can tax someone who attends on-site meetings in NY for two days out of the year that otherwise works remotely from Fairbanks, Alaska, which is utterly ridiculous. Every state has the right to collect tax from income earned from work performed within the state’s boundaries. Sports players and performers often pay a ton of state income tax while only working in a state for 3 hours. Are you suggesting that people who travel to work to NY owe NY income taxes on ALL of their income, even that which was earned outside of NY? > At some point I expect SCOTUS will slap that law down based on the Interstate Commerce Clause but the correct challenge has not reached the docket yet. I am not so sure about this. With the South Dakota Wayfair ruling, and the proliferation of “market based sourcing” rules for determining taxable revenue, even this conservative Supreme Court does not seem to be leaning towards canceling that. Right now, if you have a business in one state (including just you working by yourself as a 1099 contractor), and sell your services to a recipient in a state with market based sourcing rules, then you will owe business taxes to the state where the benefits of your work was received, even though you never stepped foot or even shipped anything physical to that state. See this for example: https://www.withum.com/resources/new-jersey-legislation-implements-major-tax-changes-including-market-based-sourcing-for-partnerships/ https://www.withum.com/resources/new-jersey-legislation-impl...
Analemma_ 3y ago
I'm guessing you're just citing what you found in a Google search and have never actually dealt with NY taxes. In reality, NY state demands payment from you if you so much as checked your work email inside JFK while you were waiting for a connecting flight. I know literally dozens of people who can attest to this fact.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  I did the best I could by linking to a document regarding the policy being discussed on New York’s state website. Not sure how I could do better unless I had experience litigating this very issue. > In reality, NY state demands payment from you if you so much as checked your work email inside JFK while you were waiting for a connecting flight. This qualifies as working within the state of NY, and hence makes you liable for paying taxes on the income (from that work only). I do find it egregious that NY state would go after a worker for checking work email in an airport, but that is a separate issue from what the person I replied to had erroneously insinuated, which is that NY taxes income from work performed outside of NY, even if you move away.
jsjohnst 3y ago
> So if you never worked in NY state, or move away from NY state, then you are not liable for NY income taxes. Sorry, it’s not that simple. I’m not speaking about things “I’ve read”, I’m speaking from first hand experience including fighting this via attorneys. I (as well as others) have not stepped foot in the state of NY for work for an entire calendar year in the past, did not live in NY when hired nor have any even pseudo claim to residency, yet do to convenience of employer regulations, pay NY state income tax on all income from said employer.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  That is wild. I do not see how that should survive a legal challenge (obviously it somehow has thus far if you are experiencing it), given the wording that NY state itself uses in their own tax law. Especially if you live and work in a state with income tax, because the Supreme Court ruled that the state where you work has the right to tax your income and other states have to give you a tax credit for taxes paid to the other state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comptroller_of_the_Treasury_of_Maryland_v._Wynne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comptroller_of_the_Treasury_of... Does your employer show an employer ID on your W-2 for the state you work in? Seems crazy to me that another state would allow New York to take its income tax from a person working in their state, and the federal courts to allow this to continue. Makes a mockery of the whole system.