I’m guessing this might also affect cities as well because in you are working for an NYC company from your home in Florida, do you really need to pay NYC taxes?
However the work is performed and income worked for in “Z” state.
.
.
.
.WW, PSHS
I don’t know though because this could end up punishing states that make taxes better for companies because they want to tax the workers.
It’s not normally based on company HQ, unless you work for HQ.
For example our HR/Payroll vendor is HQ’d in Texas, out consultant is based out of an office in Maine. She works in a number of different states but pays Maine income tax because that is where her employer is located even though the HQ is in Texas.
.
.
.
.WW, PSHS
That’s my thought as well.
Here is some more information.
.
.
.
.WW, PSHS
I wouldn’t think so. But, this seems to involve those who telecommute.
If this goes to the SCOTUS, could it have national implications?
Does it have national implications if accepted by the SCOTUS?
I’d say yes.
Congress can also step in to make more uniform rules amongst the states.
.
.
.
.WW, PSHS
1 Like
I’d certainly hope so. I also expect corporations will find loopholes to protect themselves from losing valuable employees.
This does make the most logical sense.
NH’s claim will prob hold, but not establish wide precedent. MA has claim to the taxes, because of use of services. NH residents usually get most off the MA taxes offset anyway, with adj for use of roads, services, etc.
As someone personally affected by this, I expect only one time, temporary relief for the portion of work (reports, etc) I’m doing from (my NH) home, but not long term removal of liability.
This is fairly unique to the NH-MA relationship. Lots of people in Hillsborough and Rockingham counties commute the 10 to 40 miles into MA for high paying jobs, but live in NH because real estate is more affordable.
To be clear, there’s not really a tax advantage in NH. We have no income or sales tax, and no state property taxes, but local taxes and fees are very, very, very high; plus, we don’t get a lot of bang for our buck, or good quality entry level workers. NH, until it figures its ■■■■ out, basically just exists to export managers and technicians to Mass, and then have 7 really poor counties, plus great mountains.
Exactly. NH has no mechanism to obtain these ‘savings’. With the exception of Rooms and Meals, gasoline and tobacco taxes, and control of all the liquor, all NH taxes are local.
Sununu has political motives.
I’m sure this has to do with the GOP fanaticism of starving the state of tax receipts.
Sununu is pretty standard fare Weld, Baker, Romney Republican, but also not very bright.
He’s cruising to re-election, despite the rest of the state going high-margin blue, because he knows how do nothing.
This is probably about Maggie Hassan’s Senate seat.
NH has very few services, and fewer state level protections. If you live here, it helps to be a.) affluent, b.) healthy and c.) okay with getting Lyme Disease.
correction, works remotely in RI with a work product delivered to MA
will be interesting. is work done remotely done at home, or at work? does the work count where its delivered or where its performed? by logging into the companies computer system, are you “at work”? are the companies servers even there?
seems fairly straight forward to me. MA is not entitled to collect taxes from workers that is not performed in MA. What is the difference between this and fedexing in a work product? If MA can tax this than any company with remote servers can have their employees taxed by the state the servers are in.
I think MA is going to win this one. The money generated is being done by a company in MA. The recipient’s income is being paid by a company in MA. The fact that technology offers the chance to work remotely is a non sequiter IMHO.
