California State Tax Issues

The Part-Time Resident Tax Trap

Published on: January 28, 2019 | by Manes Law

Sunny Taxxy California

Most of the world knows the Palm Springs area for its picturesque golf courses, celebrity homes and halcyon weather. Among the taxing authorities in Sacramento, however, the words “Palm Springs” conjure up less carefree images. Spurred by the state’s appetite for tax revenues, the Franchise Tax Board, California’s main tax enforcement agency, has tapped into a new revenue source: taxing seasonal visitors to popular vacation spots in California, where residents often have second home. Palm Springs is one such area. But so is Santa Barbara, Sonoma County, San Diego.

Seasonal Visitors As Tax Targets

This is how it works. California taxes residents based on their worldwide income, from whatever source, no matter how far-flung. In contrast, California taxes nonresidents only on their income derived from California sources. For instance, these might include a limited partnership operating in California or rent from an investment property. Since California has the highest income tax rate in the country, visitors who suddenly find themselves defined as “residents” may face a large and unexpected tax liability.

Obviously, the FTB would like to claim everybody who sets foot on California soil as a resident and subject their income to California tax. That’s their job, after all. As many seasonal visitors have discovered, the FTB’s policies sometimes seem not to fall too far short of that mark.

A special division of the FTB has for years systematically targeted seasonal “part-time” residents for audit (I use the term “part-time” loosely, since we are talking about nonresidents who spend part of the year here, not part-time legal residents per se; but the term has stuck). Though other vacation spots experience their share of audits, historically the most common casualties are affluent “snowbirds” who own vacation homes in the Palm Springs area as an escape from the winter blasts of the Midwest or northern states. In fact, many of the major cases in residency taxation are eerily similar: they usually involve Midwesterners who own winter vacation homes in Palm Springs and environs. If the FTB finds significant taxable income coupled with meaningful contacts with California (such as a vacation home, business interests or long visits to the state), it can lead to the launch of a full-blown residency audit. Continue reading

Internet-Based Companies and “Doing Business in California”: Be Careful What Your Website Says About You

Published on: November 19, 2018 | by Chris Manes

The Issue

With more and more companies forgoing brick and mortar by operating their business through the internet, tax authorities find it increasingly difficult to determine which enterprises are subject to state income taxes and which aren’t. Typically, California has taken an aggressive stance. In 2011, it passed a new law that defined “doing business” in California beyond being physically present by having offices or operations. Instead California sought to define what constituted an “economic nexus” to the state, using factors such as sales, payroll, and inventory. In 2013, comprehensive regulations went into effect casting a broad net over the activities of out-of-state corporations and pass-through entities (LLCs, partnerships, S corporations) as doing business in California. Judicial decisions interpreting those rules are just starting to trickle in. The picture that is emerging indicates that non-California internet businesses need to be wary or they may find themselves subject to California taxation.

Why Does It Matter Whether Your Company Is “Doing Business” in California Or Not?

First, why does it matter if California determines an internet company is “doing business” in California? It may matter a great deal. The determination that an out-of-state entity is doing business in California is one of the ways California can impose income taxes on that business, even if they have no physical presence in California (the other is based on the entity earning California-source income). In some cases, there may be a tax liability even if the company made zero income from California sales. Continue reading

Leaving California – Relocating Your Business Out of State

Published on: September 15, 2018 | by Chris Manes

It’s no secret that California has a high state income tax rate. In fact, it has been the undisputed income tax champion for the past decade or so (the middle brackets are more compressed, and some states even have higher middle bracket rates). Nonetheless, despite somewhat overblown media reports, most Californians aren’t in a position to tear their businesses up by the roots and transplant them to low- or zero-income-tax havens like Nevada, Texas and Washington State. Often those businesses have to operate in California, since that’s where the market for the product or service is, or there is valuable cachet in having a California location such as Silicon Valley or Orange County. And often for small businesses and startups, the owner has to be present in-state for the enterprise to operate and grow.

But that’s not always the case, especially when a taxpayer owns numerous entities and some of the income derives from service contracts (usually for management work) among the entities or between the entities and the owner. Moreover, as e-commerce continues to grow in market share, a physical presence in California becomes less and less necessary for many businesses, and relocation may result in tax savings for sales to non-California customers. Some companies may have started in California, but as they’ve prospered, they can operate from any state. In cases like these, some strategic use of out-of-state entities can result in large enough tax savings to make the major step of relocation worthwhile. But details matter.

The Rules Of California Residency Taxation

Before we can address the benefits and pitfalls of relocation, we need to first give an overview of California’s income tax system relating to individual residency and business domicile. Changing residency is not a panacea for every tax problem. It only works in certain situations. And to determine where it works requires understanding the basic rules of how California taxes individual residents, nonresidents and businesses. Continue reading

California and Nonresident Whistleblower Awards: No Good Deed Goes Untaxed – Or Does It?

Published on: January 27, 2018 | by Chris Manes

Whistleblower awards are big business. In 2016 alone, the IRS paid over $60 million to whistleblowers. The SEC awarded a similar amount. A patchwork of other whistleblower laws involving 57 federal statutes and 44 states, including California, also result in tens of millions in annual payouts. Not all whistleblower laws involve awards, but rather damages for retaliation. For instance, Penn State was ordered to pay coach Michael McQueary $12 million after firing him for reporting the notorious Jerry Sandusky to college officials. Though the amounts vary widely year to year, the trend is more tips filed, more whistleblower cases, bigger awards.

Whistleblower cases usually take a long time, with many obstacles along the way that can derail final payment. The average is three years. It’s a long wait, but it does provide an opportunity for tax planning for those who don’t want to be taxed by California for an award that can run from hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of dollars (my practice has involved tax planning for clients who received awards along most of this spectrum).

How Are Whistleblower Awards Taxed?

At the federal level, the taxation of whistleblower awards has been highly litigated and subject to Congressional tinkering. But the ultimate result is the proceeds of the award are taxed as ordinary income. How to calculate the amount of the “proceeds,” and whether a deduction for attorney’s fees (which are usually a large percentage of the award) is allowed, depends on the particular federal statute that applies. Continue reading

Happy Halloween for Nonresidents: It’s 4600 Notice Time Again

Published on: October 26, 2017 | by Chris Manes

California’s Franchise Tax Board (FTB) sends out 4600 Notices “Request for Tax Return” when it gets a tax “information return” with a California address on it, but the taxpayer doesn’t file a California return, either as a resident (a Form 540) or as a nonresident (a Form 540NR). An “information return” are documents like a 1098, 1099, K-1 or W2. There are other reasons, but this is a major one.

To give a common example, if a nonresident owns a vacation home in California with a mortgage, and he told the lender to send the Form 1098 mortgage interest form to his vacation home address, he has likely just earned a 4600 Notice. That’s because the FTB will see a 1098 with a local address associated with a person who hasn’t filed a California tax return.

This is a common mistake. It also happens with Form 1099-INT involving bank interest from a local bank account (often involving de minimis amounts), or payments from brokerage accounts or out-of-state pensions. The lesson is, nonresidents should never use a California address (whether it’s a vacation home or a relative’s place) for any tax information document.

Frequently Asked Questions: California Residency Rules

Published on: October 8, 2017 | by Chris Manes

Manes Law has over two decades of experience in advising clients on California residency law, handling residency audits, assisting businesses relocate out of California, and appealing residency determinations. Based on this experience, we have assembled this list of frequently asked questions and provided brief answers.

1.Q. How does California tax residents versus nonresidents?

A. California taxes residents on all their income, from any source, no matter where it is generated. In contrast, nonresidents are only subject to California income taxes with respect to “California-source” income (that is, income generated in California). If a nonresident has no California-source income, then the nonresident should owe no taxes to California.

2.Q. I am a nonresident who owns a California vacation home. If I spend more than six months in California, am I automatically a resident?

A. No. There is a lot of mythology on the internet about the “six-month presumption.” While it’s always better from a residency perspective to spend less time in California, spending more than six months in California does not automatically make you a resident. In fact, no one thing will ever make you a resident, and no one thing makes you a nonresident. The test for legal residency is complex and involves many factors (discussed here). You can spend more than six months in California without becoming a resident, but you should plan carefully to make sure an extended stay plus other contacts don’t result in an audit or unfavorable residency determination. Nor is it a good idea to spend more than six months year in and year out. Doing so suggest a closer connection to California than your home state. In addition, beware of the nine-month presumption, discussed in the next question. See our article, “The Six-Month Presumption In California Residency Law: Not All It’s Cracked Up To Be“.

3.Q. I’ve heard that if I spend more than nine months in California, I am definitely a California resident. Is that true?

A. California law applies a “nine-month presumption” to visitors. That is, if you spend more than nine months in California in any tax year, you are presumed to be a resident. But the presumption is rebuttable. Other factors may apply that result in you not being a legal resident, despite the extended stay. Prudence, however, suggests you shouldn’t tempt fate with a stay of such length. As a practical matter, there is only one old case in which a taxpayer spent more than nine months in California and was able to rebut the nine-month presumption. So, be forewarned. Continue reading

Guidelines for Determining California Residency: A Primer for Serious Snowbirds

Published on: September 1, 2017 | by Chris Manes

Seasonal Visitors to California and Residency Anxiety

Out-of-state visitors who own vacation homes in California or otherwise spend significant time here on a seasonal basis (traditionally known as “snowbirds” because the season is inevitably winter) are often anxious about their residency status. There’s good reason to be. California rules for determining residency are notoriously difficult to grasp. It’s altogether possible for the innocent actions of a nonresident to trigger a residency audit. And sometimes the audit has a bad outcome, with tax consequences that bite. Let’s go over the basics of how California determines residency for tax purposes. They can be confusing, and sometimes brutal.

How Residents And Nonresidents Are Taxed

California residents are subject to California state income tax on all income regardless where earned. It doesn’t matter what or where the source. If a California resident derives income from investments in Saudi Arabia or from pensions accrued while working out-of-state, California will tax that income. The resident may qualify for a credit for paying taxes to other states, but the default rule is, a resident’s global income is subject to California income tax. Period. With a top bracket rate that is currently the highest in the nation, California residency comes with a significant tax impact.

In contrast, nonresidents are only subject to California state income tax on their “California-source” income. That may be zero or it may be significant. California-source income takes many forms, some obvious, some more subtle. It could be rents derived from California real estate or income from business operations or wages for performing temporary work in-state (obvious). Or it could be a portion of the sales proceeds attributed to a noncompete clause when a founder sells his California business, or the gain from non-statutory stock options vested while the employee worked in California (not obvious). To celebrity name drop, when LeBron James, an Ohio resident, used to play the Lakers at Staples Center for the Cleveland Cavaliers, he paid California taxes on the income he made on game night, which in his case was no small amount. [By the way, now that James signed with the Lakers, he has a different problem: whether he can work for a California employer, train and practice here for a significant part of the year, and still remain a nonresident – the answer is yes, but that’s a different analysis (see, “Nonresidents Working Remotely for California Businesses: How to Take Paul Newman’s ‘The Sting’ Out of Your Taxes“).

So, the stakes can be high when determining whether a taxpayer is a California resident or not.