Posted on 03/30/2005 7:01:06 AM PST by TexanTransplant
Court rules telecommuter must pay taxes
By Michael Gormley, Associated Press Writer | March 29, 2005 ALBANY, N.Y.
-- A telecommuter who lives out of state while working by computer for a New York employer must pay New York tax on his full income, the state's highest court ruled Tuesday in a case that could have wide implications in the growing practice.
The Court of Appeals said that computer programmer Thomas Huckaby who lives in Nashville, Tenn., owed New York income tax for his full salary, not just the time he spent working at his employer's New York offices.
......The issue split the court, and the majority acknowledged the decision could discourage telecommuting. "New York has the right to tax 100 percent of a nonresident employee's income derived from New York sources," according to the 4-3 decision by Court of Appeals. The court relied on a fairness rule called the "convenience of the employer" under law that says a worker's income is taxable if he chooses to live outside the state, as opposed to if he or she was transferred there. In a strong dissent, Judge Robert Smith argued that the basis of the majority's decision that all income is taxable is "that the commissioner says it is ... The majority cites no authority at all, and offers no persuasive reason, in support of this new interpretation." "To say a person's taxability depends on where his employer is wrong," said Huckaby's attorney, Peter Faber of New York City. "I think this is an issue of national significance."
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Well, what other ruling did anyone expect from the state of New York? It's a place where "It belongs to the state" is the default answer to almost any question you care to ask.
If it applies to americans, then let's hope it also applies to India, South Africa, and other telemarketers and telecomputer businesses.
Either no charge for everyone or the reverse, everyone gets the same charge.
Is it any wonder why many people don't report or under report income at every opportunity?
Sounds like a stretch to me.
What are the extended repercussions for employees of companies headquartered in New York?? Does the opposite apply too??? If it does then employees in New York who telecommute as employees of companies outside of New York should not have to pay taxes to New York right?? If that is true then how simple would it be for employers to rearrange reporting authorities. The judges may have outsmarted themselves on this one.
If they can tax telecommuters...a sales tax on internet purchases is not that far away.
Seriously.
All the more reason for major revamping of the tax codes to reflect the realities of 21st Century Life and assigning tax revenues to locales where services are actually used and not where a tax hungry public entity (Is there any other kind?) can try to collect them.
I already collect one for in-State purchases.
pay taxes in the state you reside in and also the state you telecommute to. What part of your earnings do you have left after that?
No. You see, this is how New York wants it to run:
He's fortunate that Tennessee doesn't have an income tax, because he'd be paying two state income taxes on top of his federal taxes.
A UN tax would solve that problem. Kofi wants it.
I think it is time for another BOSTON TEA PARTY. Taxation, AND THE LIBERALS DRIVING IT, way out of control.
New York seems to be at the forefront of trying to squeeze every tax dollar it can out of non-New Yorkers.
I don't get it. If he refuses to pay the taxes is there an extradition treaty? Seems to me this is one for the Supreme Court. What if someone publishes a book in New York but lives in Wyoming? Are they required to pay New York and Wyoming taxes?
You're being to logical.
This is a one way street. Money always belongs to the state, we are just serfs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.