 
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | Double taxation... ...nothing new for gov't. I'm sure TN will come after the guy too saying he earned the money in TN.
There is no end to the greed of gov't.
Perhaps they can start taxing those employed in call centers in India.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
 | 
jtanner
To Add Speed, Add Lightness
Premium
join:2003-01-14
Cumming, GA | Re: Double taxation... TN doesn't have state income tax. But it's an interesting point--what happens when someone lives in Massachusetts and telecommutes to NY? Wouldn't they get taxed twice?
Jim | |
|
| | |
| | | |
| | | | 
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
 ·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Double taxation... said by moonpuppy  :How dare you cheat Virginia out of their income tax?  And what about all the gas you are not using? Doesn't Maryland deserve their massive gas tax too? :D:D This could get ugly as how many people tele-commute from other states? How many people want to be taxed twice? Or, how about being taxed in every state where your company has a location in?  I think I'll just take half my salary and donate it to the county and the state so they can build more roads for the traditional commuters. Then I'll take the other half of my salary and spread it around to all the states where the company I work for has offices: California, District of Columbia, Massachusetts, New York (gasp!), North Carolina, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia. I'll be sure to reserve some for my home state: Maryland.
Too bad there will be nothing left to donate to the other countries where the company I work for has offices: Brazil, Canada, India, Russia, United Kingdom. If there were, I could help provide health care and retirement income for those who live in countries where the government subsidizes those services.
Who needs disposable income anyway? | |
|
| | | | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
 ·Comcast
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Re: Double taxation... I fear them pressing this issue more. If so I and a lot of people will be hurting.
I vpn into networks in 5 or 6 countries plus ones in almost all 50 states. Just this morning I vpned into Pa. Ny. Nh. RI. Conn. Ne. and Fl. , does this mean under this the whole slew of them have the ability to chase me down for taxes ? If so Ma. where i actually live is gonna be screwed on my taxes.
Greed has no bounds I guess. Start taxing the people who are outsourced to other countries. Because then that will drive up their cost as well and maybe the work will come back to North America.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | I thought you were going to pay me for FIOS?
:D:D
It seems government wants more and more but give less and less. | |
|
| | | | | |
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs: | Re: Double taxation... Heh, not if I have to pay income tax to a dozen different states. Then again, if I have to pay income tax to a dozen different states, I won't be able to afford a network connection!
Maybe this is a ban on telecommuting disguised as a tax? | |
|
| | | | | GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| said by JTRockville :I think I'll just take half my salary and donate it to the county and the state so they can build more roads for the traditional commuters. If you were in my county >3/4 will go to public schools and not to roads. | |
|
| | | xrobertcmx
Premium
join:2001-06-18
Sterling, VA
clubs: | That was how it worked when I was in the Army. I was stationed in CO, but I paid state income tax to VA.
--
4 More years and we won't have a country. | |
|
| | | | 
cao1964
join:2000-08-09
Danville, PA
| Re: Double taxation... said by xrobertcmx :That was how it worked when I was in the Army. I was stationed in CO, but I paid state income tax to VA. Oh I feel your pain, but lucky for me at that time my home state was Florida so I had no taxes, now its Penn, and I am been tax big time, time to move again. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | 
xdeadhead
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA | haha living in taxachusetts, i bet they are already being taxed twice.
--
I am not herbert. | |
|
| | | 
ronpin
Imagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana
 ·AT&T Southwest
2 edits | Re: Double taxation... This is GREAT NEWS!!! - maybe now all those outsourced jobs in India and China get to pay US taxes -- so we can retire!  (hey - "freedom is on the march" -- better pay up!)
--
When Clinton lied -- no one died. | |
|
| | | | 
Idjk
@207.43.x.x | Re: Double taxation... Just what I was thinking tax all the 'outsourced' jobs!!it might bring some jobs back. | |
|
| | | | 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| said by ronpin :This is GREAT NEWS!!! - maybe now all those outsourced jobs in India and China get to pay US taxes -- so we can retire! (hey - "freedom is on the march" -- better pay up!) I like it! Maybe we can get something back for all of the outsourcing.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | | | | 
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Double taxation... said by n2jtx :said by ronpin :This is GREAT NEWS!!! - maybe now all those outsourced jobs in India and China get to pay US taxes -- so we can retire! (hey - "freedom is on the march" -- better pay up!) I like it! Maybe we can get something back for all of the outsourcing. Tariffs are pretty damn bad things. Trust me on this one. We may not like outsourcing but the "simple" tariff "fix" is even worse. | |
|
| | | | | |
ronpin
Imagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana | Re: Double taxation... Since when is an income tax a tariff??? | |
|
| | | 
Sweet Witch
Be the flame, not the moth.
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-15
Gallifrey
·Comcast
| Amazingly enough, 'taxachusetts' has fewer taxes than many other states (including CT), and tac-free shopping is just a run up the highway in New Hampshire!!
--
Never argue with an idiot. They’ll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. | |
|
| | | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs: | Re: Double taxation... Shhh. they start moving around here and rent will go even more. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Double taxation... said by bostonkarl :Ya, I never understood taxachussets thing. Maine is the least tax friendly New England state, believe it or not. Mass rates below the median of all states. » money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/···dex.html Thats because of the stigma Massachusetts got and thus worked hard to vote against higher taxes probably mostly to debunk the stigma. Having Republican governors since 1988 (in the most liberal state of the union) didn't hurt. | |
|
| |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | said by jtanner :TN doesn't have state income tax. Jim My bad, I thought I remembered some whooplah about them starting it a year or two ago. But still, TN gets their revenue some someplace whether it's higher property tax, sales tax or whatever. If you are taxed by another state it's double taxation unless TN doesn't collect any revenue from the general public at all.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
| | nshulga
join:2002-06-06
Morrisville, PA
| I live in PA. I used to telecommute to a Boulder, CO division of a French (well, worldwide) company. I now telecommute to a Boston, MA division of a California (well, worldwide) company. In both cases they deducted local (ie CO/MA) income tax the first month, then (presumably, after checking with their tax department) refunded it and deducted PA income tax from that point on.
New York is very creative about taxing people, though, so I've to say I'm not surprised. I remember filling out NY state non-resident returns back when that stuff was done with pen and paper. It was worse than the federal form - they basically make you do something like federal income tax twice, first time to determine total income, the second time to determine NY income. They use total income to determine your tax rate. Then, of course, there's NYC tax as well.
The short-term solution is to make sure this is built into your salary. A better solution is to work elsewhere and enjoy NYC on weekends. They'll figure a different way to rip you off, but at leats it's less paperwork that way. | |
|
| | |
I HATE TAXES
| Re: Double taxation... it's not just Nude York that's creative.
If I work in any state for 2 weeks or more (count it as 80 hrs), then I have to file in that state. Bet you can't hear me scream about that, can you?
Seems there's some strangely crafted set of laws, that enable this.
Now, when it comes to tele-comuting, it gets even stranger. I like JT, do work all around the globe. I'm not sure how this is going to finally play out, but the only thing I know for sure is, it's going to be ugly.
I'm just waiting for some creative state to say that if I use the telecommunications lines as they traverse that state, I should be required to pay some kind of "infa-structure" support cost while I'm using the network lines in that state.
You know, before long, we'll be taxed out of existence.
I'm of the firm opinion, we should off shore some of our executive management and our state; local and federal legislators. | |
|
| 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | Sounds like a good idea to me.
NY is one of the greediest states in the country when it comes to taxes. I mean taxed for telecommuting, give me a freakin' break.
I've got a good idea for all these companies. Go set up a data center in Florida. No state income tax. Then they can tel NY to shove it... | |
|
| | 
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
Newtown, PA
| Re: Double taxation... Though I agree with telling them to shove it, I am doubtful its smart to put a data center in Florida. Unless you can afford the emergency standby needs from the strain of hurricanes.;)
But this is not the last we'll hear of this. I figure some law professor will open debate in a classroom, and some tech-saavy lawyers will (EFF?) commit to this as unfair taxation.
How about dumping our old CRTs in the Hudson? Or old modems?
(I know, more EPA violations..its pollution)
I had a friend that worked in the city and lived in NJ. He paid BOTH NJ and NYC wage taxes. heck, I worked 1 mile inside Philadelphia and had to pay local borough and philly wage taxes. I would have to pay telecommuting too (as an employee of a company located inside their zone).
Sounds to me like:
-quit the job and consult for them or
-get them to compensate for costs (electricity, systems, cable/WAN connection) if not already
-make salary worth it
(sucks. money you save on commuting, protection to environment and pollution and you still get shafted!) | |
|
| gbrown759
join:2003-05-03
Ridgeland, MS | TN has no state income tax, but I'm sure there are a few "guys" in a smoky back room trying to find a way to get their share too. | |
|
| |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: Double taxation... said by gbrown759 :TN has no state income tax, but I'm sure there are a few "guys" in a smoky back room trying to find a way to get their share too. They're getting the revenue somewhere...if they aren't directly taxing income then it's coming from property tax or something else. They guy still ends up paying twice.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
|
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| There is no end to the greed of gov't.
Perhaps more precisely, there is no end to the greed of man.
This is, of course, absurd. But I think the entire U.S. tax system, on the federal and state level, is a dirty kid in the mud that needs to be cleaned up again like he was in 1986. | |
|
|
morethanhuman
@verizon.net
| All of those reading these posts concerned with the truth about the Income Tax should read a small book called
Cracking the Code, The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America by Peter Hendrickson (www.losthorizons.com)
The truth about our Tennessee telecommuter is that he is not liable to ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL (Federal or State).
I wish you the best in your efforts to live a more free and truthful life.
Patrick Mooney
www.unlearning.org | |
|
| |
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Double taxation... said by morethanhuman :
All of those reading these posts concerned with the truth about the Income Tax should read a small book called
Cracking the Code, The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America by Peter Hendrickson (www.losthorizons.com)
The truth about our Tennessee telecommuter is that he is not liable to ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL (Federal or State).
I wish you the best in your efforts to live a more free and truthful life.
Patrick Mooney
www.unlearning.org
Yeah, you're right. Who needs schools, roads, the military, law enforcement, agriculture, the post office or any of that "government" jazz. | |
|
| | |
| | | 
alanhdsl
Premium
join:1999-10-09
Phoenix, AZ
·Qwest.net
| Re: Double taxation... By breaking the law. This is one of those "The IRS is illegal" sites.
It's certainly valid to question taxation policies, but in no way are income taxes outright illegal. You might check out www.quatloos.com for what happens to a lot of these guys. | |
|
| | |
morethanhuman
| Relating to this question and all of the replies thus far posted on this topic....
If you work in the PRIVATE SECTOR, NONE of your earnings are taxable under the Federal income tax laws (and most state laws, too).
I have had a ZERO tax liability with Federal and State governments (NJ & VA) for the last three years because I woke up to the same truth that hundreds of Americans are waking up to everyday.
The simple answer is because income taxes are EXCISE TAXES related to specific types of economic activity (usually government-related). The rest of us get suckered into the scam through ignorance and deception...and we stay there because we are afraid to act on the truth.
This will be my last post to this forum, because you must take it upon yourself to learn more and educate yourself. Simply go to »www.losthorizons.com and read what is on that site. More importantly, get the book I mentioned in my previous post.
You now have the information you need to save you thousands of dollars every year, which I'm sure you can spend much more fruitfully than our bottom-feeding bureaucrats at all levels of government.
Your dreams and your freedom remain in your hands.
Patrick Mooney
»www.unlearning.org | |
|
| | | | 
CrazyFingers
join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO | Re: Double taxation... More tax-protester drivel from a whackadoodle nut-job.
Good luck explaining to the judge that you're using the same tired arguments that were tossed out of court 25 years ago as frivolous crap.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| my dad works in NY-State and but we live in CT, id have to double check but i dont think that he is required to pay CT State income tax.
that said unless this guy's company is auto-subtracting NY state tax i dont see how they can even go after him. i doubt that they could convince the TN state police to arrest the guy and then ship him to NY.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| bookie
join:2001-05-17
Cordova, TN | Back on the offshore tech thing. Say a tech takes a lot of calls from New York. How long before he is taxed for that? Or any other state?
What about telemarketers? | |
|
| |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: Double taxation... said by bookie :Back on the offshore tech thing. Say a tech takes a lot of calls from New York. How long before he is taxed for that? Or any other state? What about telemarketers? What I'm thinking is if NY can tax workers out of state, why can't they tax workers out of the country...and by that meaning force in state companies to withhold the taxes so the state gets their money.
This is a VERY slippery slope. The SC should have taken this case as I think it affects interstate commerce (and thus is a Constitutional issue).
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
| | | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Double taxation... said by oliphant :This is a VERY slippery slope. The SC should have taken this case as I think it affects interstate commerce (and thus is a Constitutional issue). But there is also nothing stopping New York and Tennessee from establishing a reciprocal tax agreement that is similar to the one that exists between New York and New Jersey. No federal action would be needed, and since there is no federal law that directly addresses the issue, the Court technically did the right thing by not acting. Without a reciprocal agreement, you end up paying taxes to both states.
--
Rove / Rumsfeld 2008! | |
|
| | | |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: Double taxation... said by pnh102 :said by oliphant :This is a VERY slippery slope. The SC should have taken this case as I think it affects interstate commerce (and thus is a Constitutional issue). But there is also nothing stopping New York and Tennessee from establishing a reciprocal tax agreement that is similar to the one that exists between New York and New Jersey. No federal action would be needed, and since there is no federal law that directly addresses the issue, the Court technically did the right thing by not acting. Without a reciprocal agreement, you end up paying taxes to both states. It's still an interstate commerce issue...just because 2 states agree to rape their citizens with F-ed tax rules doesn't make it legal.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
| | | | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Double taxation... said by oliphant :It's still an interstate commerce issue...just because 2 states agree to rape their citizens with F-ed tax rules doesn't make it legal. Unfortunately it is legal. For example, as I mentioned in another post, Pennsylvania has a reciprocal tax agreement with New Jersey which allows for Pennsylvanians working in New Jersey to pay only Pennsylvania income taxes and vice versa. However, Pennsylvania has no such agreement with Delaware. Pennsylvanians who work in Delaware end up paying income tax to both Pennsylvania and Delaware as a result. Unless the Federal government passes a law and says that this is illegal, it will continue to happen. The Supreme Court does not have the legal authority to "invoke" such a law when one does not exist.
--
Rove / Rumsfeld 2008! | |
|
| | | | | |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: Double taxation... said by pnh102 : The Supreme Court does not have the legal authority to "invoke" such a law when one does not exist. That would certainly be a new concept for the modern court.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
|
Sweet Witch
Be the flame, not the moth.
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-15
Gallifrey
·Comcast
| This is such bullsh*t! You sould only pay taxes on the state you live in, especially if you telecommute. If you want to cover the cost of road repairs, put up a toll road, don't just tax everyone.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They’ll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. | |
|
shaner
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Calgary, AB
| what junk What a line of crap. Where does it end? If I travel to New York on a business trip, does that mean I'll have to pay NY income tax an any money I make on that trip? Or if I do some project which a NY company buys? I mean, this is absolutely the stupidest thing I have ever read.
--
Click this and read. -> »www.actsofgord.com/
»Canadian Wireless FAQ
I'm laying pipe,
all night long,
laying pipe,
to satisfy that woman.
- David Wilcox | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | No taxation with out representation Technically, since he doesn't live in New York, he wouldn't have voting rights, etc... Thus, couldn't he argue that he was being unconstitutionally taxed because there is no one representing him (in New York since it is a state tax). | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| Of Course .... Of course this has nothing to do with NY being one of the states with the highest levels of State "Entitlement" programs around. The pols have to find a way to pay for all those "Bread and Circuses" so they can keep getting re-elected.
--
"Gun Control: The notion that Matthew Shepard tied to a fence post in the middle of Wyoming is morally superior to Matthew Shepard explaining to the local sheriff how his attackers got all those fatal bullet holes." ~Dan Weiner | |
|
|
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Of Course .... said by qdemn7 :Of course this has nothing to do with NY being one of the states with the highest levels of State "Entitlement" programs around. The pols have to find a way to pay for all those "Bread and Circuses" so they can keep getting re-elected. I think New York having the second largest economy in the United States and the tenth largest in the world (larger than most countries!) may have a bit more to do with it than any entitlement programs (which, if they had their taxation codes in order they could easily afford without nickle and diming anyone). This has a sense to do with "et eh buddy, if you are going to make NYC wages, you are going to pay NYC taxes like everyone else who makes NYC wages." | |
|
| musicnyc
join:2000-08-12
New York, NY | A typical ignorant Texan. Just look at the trouble your President has caused our country. | |
|
| |
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs | Re: Of Course .... Just couldn't leave the national politics out of it, could you?
Thanks for drawing the discussion down to a new low, douche.... | |
|
| |
broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by musicnyc :A typical ignorant Texan. Just look at the trouble your President has caused our country. Ever been to Austin? It'll eat the NYC posturing, b.s., pseudo-intellectual disco-punk freak-folk scene alive. | |
|
adams_aj
join:2004-08-31
Smithville, MO
| Taxation without representation I'm already facing taxation without representation. Old news. I live outside of Kansas City, MO, but since I work in the city, I have to pay their city earnings tax. I don't get to vote in city elections. Bam. Nothing I can do about it. If you either work or live in KC, you pay the tax. Period.
They're actually looking at forcing the Kansas City Royals' (baseball) and the Chiefs' (football) opposing players, coaches, etc. to pay the earnings tax when they come to play. . . hasn't gone very far, though, but that would add up to a nice, tidy sum if they can pull it off.
--
DW6000, DirecWay Small Business, Galaxy 4R 99W, trans 1018, 3PC network, WinXP/2000/98, LinkSys WRT54GS. Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati | |
|
Jim Gurd
Premium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI
·Comcast
| Federal courts It seems he could still appeal through the federal courts. The SC refused to hear it but doesn't mean that other courts at the federal level will refuse the case. It looks like he went directly from the NY courts to the SC.
What would happen if he refused to pay? Would (or could) they come after him in Tennessee? | |
|
| fantomposter
Phantom Poster
Premium
join:2002-09-21
Independence, OH
| Re: Federal courts said by Jim Gurd :It seems he could still appeal through the federal courts. The SC refused to hear it but doesn't mean that other courts at the federal level will refuse the case. It looks like he went directly from the NY courts to the SC. I am not a lawyer, so not sure on this.....
It went to the Supreme Court because State appeal process had been done and there was still a question that might involve the Federal Constitution. In those circumstances you go straight to the Supreme Court, there are no in between stops at the regular federal level.
I think this one is a done deal now. | |
|
vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD | Based on that Logic Tennesee should charge the city of new york tax for providing the living enviornment for a new york employee.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | TN sue NY? Could the Attorney General of TN sue the state of NY for infringing on the rights of one of their citizens and extending thier powers? | |
|
GreggE
Thinking - Thinking
Premium
join:2003-06-01
Mid Tenn
| More Tax This guy is not using the roadways, Police Dept, Fire Dept, or Medical emergencies services. He has no representation in that state and cannot vote. What in the hell are they taxing him for if not greed. He doesn't get to use anything in that state, yet he has to pay his share of it. Complete BS | |
|
| tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
| Re: More Tax said by GreggE :This guy is not using the roadways, Police Dept, Fire Dept, or Medical emergencies services. He has no representation in that state and cannot vote. What in the hell are they taxing him for if not greed. He doesn't get to use anything in that state, yet he has to pay his share of it. Complete BS I think you over looked the fact that the company paying his salary benefits from being in NY. The _WHOLE_ premise of the taxation is because the _NY employee_ _CHOOSES_ to live in TN. Again... the NY employee is simply living in TN. Since when did representation or the ability to vote have anything to do with paying taxes? I don't vote. So I don't need to pay taxes?
Here is what is _really_ taking place... income is being paid to an employee in the state of NY. NY has a _right_ to tax that income. In this case it is irrelevant that the person chooses to live outside of NY. That is _his_ choice! Because he _chooses_ not to live in NY does not negate NY's right to tax his income.
We may not like paying taxes on income but it's required. | |
|
| | vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD
1 edit | Re: More Tax said by tcope :Here is what is _really_ taking place... income is being paid to an employee in the state of NY. NY has a _right_ to tax that income. In this case it is irrelevant that the person chooses to live outside of NY. That is _his_ choice! Because he _chooses_ not to live in NY does not negate NY's right to tax his income. We may not like paying taxes on income but it's required. There is no such thing as a [insert state here] employee. That person works for a company and that company is a [insert state here] company. The supreme court already recognizes that money crosses state lines by the sales tax ruling. So money is not being paid to an employee in NY it is being paid to an employee in TN. By your argument, if I order a book from a seller in CA while I am in MD, I am actually giving the money to the seller in MD via wire, and thus sales tax is applicable in Maryland. This is not the case. The money is crossing state lines by virtue of residence, and the same case should be applied here. He is a resident of the state of TN, and he should pay TN income tax. The income is gained in TN the salary is paid out in NY.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
|
| | |
GreggE
Thinking - Thinking
Premium
join:2003-06-01
Mid Tenn
| Re: More Tax said by vic102482 :said by tcope :Here is what is _really_ taking place... income is being paid to an employee in the state of NY. NY has a _right_ to tax that income. In this case it is irrelevant that the person chooses to live outside of NY. That is _his_ choice! Because he _chooses_ not to live in NY does not negate NY's right to tax his income. We may not like paying taxes on income but it's required. There is no such thing as a [insert state here] employee. That person works for a company and that company is a [insert state here] company. The supreme court already recognizes that money crosses state lines by the sales tax ruling. So money is not being paid to an employee in NY it is being paid to an employee in TN. By your argument, if I order a book from a seller in CA while I am in MD, I am actually giving the money to the seller in MD via wire, and thus sales tax is applicable in Maryland. This is not the case. The money is crossing state lines by virtue of residence, and the same case should be applied here. He is a resident of the state of TN, and he should pay TN income tax. The income is gained in TN the salary is paid out in NY. Exactly...How many big companies have Headquarters in another state than the one you work in. Should we be required to pay tax in that state because they have a physical address there? | |
|
| | |
| | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: More Tax said by JTRockville :Do people who commute to NY but live, say, in NJ, pay income tax to NY as well as NJ? Probably not. I know I am not answering your question, however there is a reciprocal tax agreement between Pennsylvania and New Jersey which allows for people who in one state but live in the other (except for those people living in NJ and working in Philadelphia) to pay their home state's tax. I worked in New Jersey for 2 years and only paid income taxes to Pennsylvania.
I know there is a similar agreement between New York and New Jersey but I am not sure of the specifics.
--
Rove / Rumsfeld 2008! | |
|
tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
| Other Point of View I don't agree or disagree with what NY did in this case. I can see both points of view.
I'll mentioned NY's point: the employee worked for and was paid by a company operating in NY. He _choose_ to work in TN. If his work _required_ him to be in TN, he would be exempt from NY taxes. If everyone were allowed to avoid state taxes simply by choosing to live outside the state then the states would loose billions in tax revenue. NY is _supporting_ the company that is paying the programmer. They should be entitled to tax the money the company pays to the programmer. | |
|
| Jamuka
join:2005-06-06
| Re: Other Point of View Yea, but how much is NY actually losing due to this one guy or the few telecommuters that are out there? I'm sure they are not losing billions because of this alone. So if they're not, why the hell are they taxing him if not for greed? Yea, and NY has billions in tax revenue right now and do they ever say we have enough revenue? NO! Nobody ever does, so that argument just doesn't wash. | |
|
| | tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
| Re: Other Point of View said by Jamuka :Yea, but how much is NY actually losing due to this one guy or the few telecommuters that are out there? I'm sure they are not losing billions because of this alone. So if they're not, why the hell are they taxing him if not for greed? Yea, and NY has billions in tax revenue right now and do they ever say we have enough revenue? NO! Nobody ever does, so that argument just doesn't wash. So it's okay to let one person go... how about 2? 5? 100? 1000? Where is the line drawn? Telecommuting is growing _greatly_ every day. The state should enforce it's laws at all times... not just once the problem gets out of hand. | |
|
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs: | Your logic applies to traditional commuters as well. Why narrowly target telecommuters for the double tax? | |
|
bgraham
join:2001-03-15
Smithtown, NY
·Verizon FIOS
| NY State Taxes The NY state tax attitude is why 3 of the last 4 companies that I have worked for have left NY state.
One company I worked for was bought by a private individual. He came here for 2 weeks and decided to get the hell out of NY because we had to pay a yearly fee or licence to have the company name on the building. Cannot remember if the fee went to the town or the county.
Doesn't orange county in california tax telecommuters? I remember when i telecommuted for a company that moved from NY to South Carolina I paid NYS taxes but the company had to pay some kind of payment, permit or licence or whatever for one employee who telecommuted from Orange county CA. | |
|
| 
Pirate515
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY
|  Re: NY State Taxes
said by bgraham :The NY state tax attitude is why 3 of the last 4 companies that I have worked for have left NY state. I couldn't have said it better myself. As if 9/11 was not enough to drive quite a few big businesses out of New York, the two money-grubbing pigs (a.k.a. Pataki and Bloomberg) have raised taxes to make their decision about leaving NY a lot easier. On top of it all, they are killing small and medium-sized businesses with their BS tickets. I am about to start looking for some real estate to buy, and if Bloomberg wins this election, I'll be buying something in NJ and getting the hell out of NY ASAP (I already work in NJ).
And in case you've been wondering why the crime has gone down in NYC, it is because cops are too busy writing tickets for petty parking violations, and hence have a lot less arrests to report. Just because they aren't arresting as many criminals doesn't mean that they are not out there.
On a good note, I heard that Bloomberg just got a $2.5M ticket for putting his campaign posters on public property; supposedly he broke the law that he himself helped pass. WOOT!!!
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
A MESSAGE to the RIAA and the MPAA: You shouldn't wound what you can't kill... | |
|
| |
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| My $.02 I live in South Florida. The parent company of my division is in NY. The division I work for is in Indiana.
While I presently work out of an office of said parent company, this will change soon and I will work from home.
Since FL has no state income tax either, I do not presently pay any state income tax.
And frankly that is the way it should be. The tax needs to be based on the person's permanent residence, not the location of the company they work for.
Otherwise I would theoretically pay tax on NY and IN...and let me tell you that ain't gonna happen.
This is purely greed by the state of NY looking for yet more income. I guess they don't like the idea that NY companies would hire people from other states and not move them to NY so they could collect income tax.
K.
--
TheGlobalMind.com
Chaos, panic & disorder. My work here is done.
Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | |
|
| |
| tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
| said by GlobalMind :I live in South Florida. The parent company of my division is in NY. The division I work for is in Indiana. While I presently work out of an office of said parent company, this will change soon and I will work from home. Since FL has no state income tax either, I do not presently pay any state income tax. And frankly that is the way it should be. The tax needs to be based on the person's permanent residence, not the location of the company they work for. Otherwise I would theoretically pay tax on NY and IN...and let me tell you that ain't gonna happen. This is purely greed by the state of NY looking for yet more income. I guess they don't like the idea that NY companies would hire people from other states and not move them to NY so they could collect income tax. Are you required to work in FL? If so, NY would allow you an exemption for NY taxes... as the article states. So this is already covered. Your situation is probably different then the person's in the article.
Here is the part that most people, including yourself, is overlooking; it's legal for some states to tax income. This is done because the company paying the income benefits from being in the state. The state provides the infrastructure of the state and allows businesses to operate. So, we can all agree it's legal for NY to tax incoming being paid from NY companies to NY employees. Now... because the person _chooses_ to live someplace else is irrelevant. Because someone chooses to live outside of NY does not change anything. | |
|
| | jp10558
Premium
join:2005-06-24
Willseyville, NY
| Re: My $.02 I'm sorry, so since I work for Best Buy, I should pay income tax in all 50 states??? I don't see why I should pay tax based on where the company is located. It doesn't make sense to me.
AFAIK till now, all taxes were based on where you live. If that's not the case, then the whole net sales tax thing got a whole lot easier. You pay the sales tax where the company is located (and watch a whole butload of companies move to a state w/out sales tax). I mean, they shouldn't be able to have it both ways.
--
Opera 8.5(Build 7700); Windows XP Pro SP2;Athlon 64 3400+; 1GB PC3200 DDR; 1M/128k DSL; NOD32(Version 2.5.25); Outpost Pro 3;Proxomitron 4.5j Grypen 10/25/05(Opera mod),GPG ID:0x0A1C6EE3 | |
|
| | | tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
| Re: My $.02 said by jp10558 :I'm sorry, so since I work for Best Buy, I should pay income tax in all 50 states??? I don't see why I should pay tax based on where the company is located. It doesn't make sense to me. AFAIK till now, all taxes were based on where you live. If that's not the case, then the whole net sales tax thing got a whole lot easier. You pay the sales tax where the company is located (and watch a whole butload of companies move to a state w/out sales tax). I mean, they shouldn't be able to have it both ways. Only if you get _paid_ from offices in all 50 states. I mentioned in another post that it does not matter where your company has a presence. Only two places matter... where you get paid and where you live.
"Net sales tax"???? We are discussing _income_ tax. | |
|
mooNow
@progress.com | Offshore workers Does this mean states in which a company hires offshore workers can now tax those offshore workers as well? | |
|
| Mad Mac
join:2003-03-10
Moorpark, CA | Re: Offshore workers There is at least one state that is trying to tax pro wrestlers on money earned while working in that state. Root cause of this particular problem (as with many things of this nature) is that technology has outpaced the law. | |
|
|
Fatal Vector
@sfldmi.ameritech
|
Here we have a nice, graphic example of how your government could care less about anything (including you) except money. And, now that the legal precedent has been set by the supreme court, you can be sure that all the other states will hop on board of this new gravy train, Just like the leeches they are.
In the end, this will spell doom for most telecommuting, etc, since the whole purpose of it was to avoid the expense of office facilities for the workers (and, of course, if you are considered a "sub contractor", guess who is responsible for all the FICA and unimployment etc...) and whatever taxes. This will make it pointless to go that route because you will still get stuck for the taxes, etc, and it will not be worthwhile to do unless the company you work for covers your ass. And you know you have a snowballs chance in hell of that happening, Mr sub contractor.
Aint working for corporate america grand? | |
|
| | chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA
| Re: Offshore workers I have work in MD for four years and my Income Taxes are paid in VA.
This ruling is s***d... why he should pay income taxes to a local government that wont be serving his Residency needs…
And this guy will be double tax… although TN do not have income TAX his SALE TAX is higher.. and he wont get credit for any TAX paid in NY. If you get tax for income in one state you can usually get credit in the other state for whatever they taxed you. | |
|
| | wilbywilson
join:2001-02-24
Arlington, VA
| well, i hate the sounds of this whole thing too. but, I imagine lots of telecommuters live in and file taxes in the same state as which they telecommute. so at least those peoples won't be affected by this sham. now, if they come up with a specific "telecommuting" tax even if you live in the same state, that would spell doom for telecommuting. | |
|
dick white
Premium
join:2000-03-24
Annandale, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| like or not, this is the deal ... The NY income tax is imposed not only on NY residents, but on non-residents when the source of the income is from within NY. There is nothing unconstitutional about this basis of taxation, and several states (CA and OH that I know of) use it. If you are not a resident of NY but get hit with some NY source income, you can usually declare an offset on your home state tax return for the income that is to be taxed in NY (typically it is called "credit for taxes paid to another state," but it is not a dollar-for-dollar tax credit, but rather an allowance against your taxable income; thus if your home state tax rate is lower you'll see less of a reduction in your home state tax than the amount you owe to NY...).
There is nothing new here except the inexperience of the guy's company. The company has no formal business presence in TN, only in NY. If they had seen it coming, they should have established a corporate "field office" in TN at the guy's home address and staffed it with one employee. It would have meant taking out a business license in the TN town and some other minor paperwork, but that would pale in comparison to all the sturm und drang that has now been wasted on the court battles.
dw | |
|
|
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Re: like or not, this is the deal ... Dick,
Good points. This is why I don't think at least in my situation that this type of thing would fly.
From what I can see here if your company has an office in the state which you reside, regardless of whether or not you actually work in that office...you're covered.
K.
--
TheGlobalMind.com
Chaos, panic & disorder. My work here is done.
Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | |
|
| | dick white
Premium
join:2000-03-24
Annandale, VA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: like or not, this is the deal ... yup, the key here is the combination of state rules and business organization. Not all states have source income taxes, so nonresidents employed by a company organized in an ordinary tax state have no problems - they pay tax only to their home state no matter where they earned it. (And if, like you, they live in a no-tax state, they pay no tax.) But if the company is organized in a source-tax state, then they need to carefully reorganize their business so non-resident employees have a "source" of income from outside the parent corp. state.
And then you get into all the various forms of organization. As previously noted, "contract" workers have a whole different set of issues to deal with (including the legal questions of whether they are truly independent contractors or actually employees but incorrectly assigned as non-employees), and then there are partnerships. If the partnership has a multi-state presence (think law firms and accounting firms with NYC and LA offices...), the general partners owe will income tax to several states in proportion to the total partnership income from those states even if they work only in one of the offices.
It is wild, and as I said before, the problem here is that the company lawyers and accountants appear to have had no clue of the business/tax environment they were operating in. It's too bad they created so much trouble for the poor schmuck in TN. He deserved better from his employer.
dw | |
|
chuckpint
join:2001-07-06
Evanston, IL
| States working it out. Note that at least in the Midwest, most states have a deal with their neighboring states. If you live in one state, and work in another, you only pay to one state. The states have worked that out. But that is only for neighboring states. Since Tennessee and New York are so far apart that no one would physically commute from one to the other, they have no such deal. I'd be curious to hear from someone that lives in New Jersey, but works in New York. I'm sure they don't pay full income taxes to both states. | |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Remember The Supreme Court decided not to hear the case, there is no ruling and no precedent, they simply let the lower court decision stand. This is not done yet. | |
|
|
I HATE TAXES
| So what happens if ...
And Crazy Eddy used to say he was InSane! |
All you do is to send email back and forth between you and several others.
Would this too be considered working in other states?
I'm not all that bright.. so I guess I don't get it...
Sumptin's rotten in the kitchen, I just can't find it... | |
|
|
I HATE TAXES
| Re: So what happens if ... Or.. what happens if you work on the premisis of a company in your home state and have to tele-commute to another system in another state some of the time...
Are you still considered a tele-commuter?? THIS SUCKS!!! | |
|
| tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
1 edit | said by I HATE TAXES :
Let's say for arguments' sake, you don't actually log into a system in another state (ie. new york for example).
All you do is to send email back and forth between you and several others.
Would this too be considered working in other states?
I'm not all that bright.. so I guess I don't get it...
Sumptin's rotten in the kitchen, I just can't find it...
It would not matter how many states you interacted with... only two states would be involved (the state where you are paid from and the state where you live). It's not a question of "work product" and where it goes. It's a question of where the company issues the income check and where the person lives. | |
|
anonME
@ev1servers.net | and visa versa ? Does anyone know of a case where a NY resident is telecommuting to another state and NY exempts that OTHER state's employee from paying NY state income tax? | |
|
| dick white
Premium
join:2000-03-24
Annandale, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: and visa versa ? yes, it works both ways, but is entirely dependent on how the tax laws of the specific states are written. Everyone who lives in or who has any income from a business or other source of income located in NY even if not a NY resident must pay NY income tax. Similarly everyone who lives in or who has any income from a business or other source of income located in CA even if not a CA resident must pay CA income tax. (These are only 2 examples, several other states do it too.) For a nonresident, the amount taxable in either state is the amount that was from the business source in that state. The only exception is when a nonresident lives in a state whose own tax laws do NOT have a provision for crediting income taxed in another state - there are only a few of them, but don't know which they are without researching it. So... A NY resident with some CA source income (or conversely, a CA resident with some NY source income) would split the taxes - NY income would be taxed in NY and CA income would be taxed in CA, and each state tax authority will require the taxpayer to file a copy of BOTH state returns showing that the other state actually got that share of the tax bite. The tax authorities know which are the few states where this doesn't apply, and if your mailing address is in one of those states, they won't bother you. But if you live in a state that allows out-of-state credits, they will hound you and hound you and hound you until you file the NY return and amend your home state return to take the credit.
A NY resident working in a state that doesn't have a source tax provision in its tax code owes tax on everything to NY because of the NY residency.
The issue here is that there are a handful of states who have written their income tax laws very carefully to capture taxes from non-residents who can't possibly vote the bastards out of office in the next election. Kinda like the exorbitant hotel taxes you pay when travelling. Don't like them? Well, stop by the mayor's office on your way to the airport and tell him/her you aren't going to vote him/her back into office next time if this hotel tax stays on the books...
dw | |
|
LinuxJunkie
join:2005-01-19
Cyberspace
| NY Sucks Just another piece of evidence to prove what most people in this country have known for years: New York sucks. They've been ripping off people from my state (CT) who work in NY for years with their double taxation. To quote a line from Family Guy: "And I think I speak for everybody when I say New York and everybody from there can go fornicate themselves with an iron pole." | |
|
| flynlr
Premium
join:2002-12-02
Salt Lake City, UT | Re: NY Sucks here's a thought you live in cali and telecommute to say Britain. but your bits and bytes bounce off routers in several states and countries. . let the fun begin. | |
|
| | MrBentor
join:2003-02-18
Seattle, WA
·Comcast
| What does Tennesee say? Ok then, say my company is in Washington State, where there is no Income tax, and my employee telecommutes from New York; I guess that that employee won't have to file any of his income derived from a Tacoma Washington Based Company?
I think that this guy should have not filed with New York, he should also tell them to F*Off and not give them any money. There is not much New York can do. I doubt Tennessee would agree with NY’s assertion and allow such a collection to proceed. I know that Washington State would make such a claim very difficult to collect. | |
|
| | | MrBentor
join:2003-02-18
Seattle, WA
·Comcast
| Peonage! Answer this:
Does a man or woman have a Right to be compensated for their labor?
Is something that is a Right taxable? If so how and why?
If being compensated for one’s labor is not a Right then what is it?
If you do not have a Right to be compensated for your labor then are you just a peon or slave?
An (income) tax on one’s labor is anathema to freedom and liberty; it should be stamped out, it should be fought at every possible turn. Such a tax directly goes against a man or woman’s right to work and make a living. The system in place now is a tax on your labor and hard work. The way it is now, you do not have a Right to the fruits of your labor.
Furthermore an (income) tax on one’s labor is a very much like a form of peonage which was supposedly abolished. (See 42 USC 1994) | |
|
| | | | tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
·Comcast
| Re: Peonage! Rather then people explaining the obvious to you, try this for your answer. Don't pay incoming tax of any kind. I'm sure your answer will be delivered by the IRS and the Federal Court system.
(just another loony who thinks the govt does not have a right to tax people) | |
|
| | | | | MrBentor
join:2003-02-18
Seattle, WA
·Comcast
| Re: Peonage! said by tcope :Rather then people explaining the obvious to you, try this for your answer. Don't pay incoming tax of any kind. I'm sure your answer will be delivered by the IRS and the Federal Court system. I was not referring to an Income Tax in itself; I was referring to a compensation for labor being taxed and considered as income. There are other ways of taxation that do not trample directly on people’s right to their work. When the income tax system was devised, compensation for labor was not considered as income, it was never was. That at the time was considered a “direct tax” which is prohibited by the U. S. Constitution. Somehow that has changed and been redefined.
Things like capital gains, the income on artificial entities would be truly valid income taxes. Other options would include a tax on consumption, commercially sold goods and services (a sales tax), and import tariffs, all indirect taxes, or user fees.
The current system is onerous at best.
said by tcope :(just another loony who thinks the govt does not have a right to tax people) Technically governments don’t have rights, they have powers, and I think that they tend to overstep their powers.
Besides it is not obvious, and you never answered the question. I asked a specific question and made a specific commentary. I never said that they did say that the government did not have the power to tax people, I intim they do not have the power to lawfully tax certain things and activities. There is a difference.
And yes, I have dealt with the IRS and the Federal Court System. A sucky part-time job and I don’t do that anymore as it was just way to disheartening.
Their biggest issue is that they so often do not even follow the law, that is the Statutes at large (USC) or the regulations (CFR); they tend to follow the (their) policy; whether it be written or not. That is if it is not in their favor... Policy is not law or regulation but they often treat it as such. A good example is Title 26 USC Sec: 6203 which states in part “… Upon request of the taxpayer, the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer a copy of the record of the assessment… this is reiterated by CFR 26 § 301.6203–1 where it states (rephrased for simplicity) …that if the taxpayer requests an assessment, one must be provided and signed by an appropriate delegate of the Secretary of the Treasury. If you ask for one you will not get one, never. They say it is policy not to provide an assessment and will force you to pay a tax without that legal document. The courts are split on this, most have sided with the taxing agency (out of being intimidated,) some have sided with the taxpayer and ordered the tax expunged unless it was properly assessed. Under the actual law no signed assessment when one is asked for, means no legal duty to pay, in practice the agency overrides the regulation with policy. Unfortunately due to the power they yield, they can come down with basically unlimited resources on some poor sucker who has little or no means or help.
Of course we are all just cogs in the machine, aren’t we? | |
|
|
|
|
Telecommuting Income Tax
So if Company "AAA" builds their OWN building, puts their own "AAA" sign on the building, then they have to pay a fee? For what? Advertising? This is the height of ludicrousness. 