leaving California

Liquidity Events, the Interim Home Problem, and Determining the Date for Changing California Residency: A New FTB Case Sheds Some Light

Published on: June 22, 2021 | by Chris Manes

The Case

A new case from California’s Office of Tax Appeals brings some clarity to how strictly California dates a change of residency for income tax purposes when a resident moves out of state shortly before a liquidity event. The case, Appeal of J. Bracamonte, OTA, Case No. 18010932 (May 2021), emphasized the importance of how much time a resident spends in California after the purported move. Bracamonte also sheds light on the “interim home” problem, which occurs when a resident moves into an out-of-state rental pending purchase of a permanent home in their new home state, while retaining ownership of their former primary residence in California. Finally, the ruling – probably inadvertently – seems to provide guidance on the date for determining when a taxpayer’s residency status is relevant to a liquidity event (the date of the closing, the date of the income receipt, or the date when an enforceable agreement is in effect). The case can be found here.

Background: How Does California Date a Change of Residency?

Changing residency from California is binary: it happens on a specific date. How do we know that? The Franchise Tax Board, California’s tax enforcement agency, requires that a resident leaving California identify the specific date of the residency change on Schedule CA of the Form 540NR “Part-Year” return, which exiting taxpayers, with few exceptions, have to file for the year they move. The exact question on the schedule is: “I became a California nonresident (enter new state of residence and date (mm/dd/yyyy) of move).” By the way, nonresidents moving to California also have to complete Schedule CA, conversely disclosing the date they become residents.

It bears mentioning that changing residency is a legal concept, and most taxpayers don’t know the rules or how to apply them to a calendar. This means there is no easy answer to when a residency change occurs. In fact, it can be totally counterintuitive. When the FTB asks an ambiguous question, it’s usually intentional. The FTB hopes the taxpayer will make a mistake that might be advantageous to the tax authority. Serendipitously, the taxpayers in Bracamonte did just that, originally putting a move-date on their 540NR that made no sense factually, something they were grilled about during trial, presumably eroding their credibility in the eyes of the court. Continue reading

Do You Need California Residency Tax Planning? Not Everybody Does, But Those Who Do, Really Do

Published on: August 11, 2019 | by Chris Manes

The Issue

Nobody needs reminding that California is a high income tax state. Most people know there can be tax benefits from changing residency or maintaining nonresidency status where California is involved. With a top bracket rate of 13.3%, California residency at the time of a large capital gains event (such as a startup sale or IPO, for instance), can result in millions of dollars of state income taxes, while across the border in Nevada, the tax would be zero. But details matter. The amount of tax savings, if any, achievable through strategic residency tax planning depends on various moving parts: sources of income, types of compensation, connections people want to or must maintain with California, community property rules (for married couples), the cost and inconvenience of acquiring nonresident status, to name a few. The refrain found everywhere on the internet that huge tax savings beckon every resident to flee the state is simplistic at best. Accordingly, considerable forethought, usually with CPA assistance, is advisable before committing to a residency plan. This article discusses why.

How California Taxes Residents vs. Nonresidents

First the basics.

California residents are subject to California state income tax on all their taxable income regardless of the source. It doesn’t matter if the income comes from the moon, if it is taxable, then California tax system claims jurisdiction. It’s possible a California resident to qualify for a credit for taxes paid in another state for out-of-state income, and some income types are exempt on their face in California (such as social security retirement benefits), but the default rule remains: a resident’s worldwide income is subject to California income tax. Period. Continue reading

Study of Total Tax Burden by State: Some Expected and Not-So-Expected Results

Published on: June 30, 2019 | by Chris Manes

A recent study comparing the states by income tax, sales tax, property tax, average overall tax burden and average effective income tax rates, including dollar for dollar and by percentage, produced expected results about California’s high tax burden, but also some surprising insights. It wasn’t unexpected that California failed to appear in the lowest 10 states for any tax category. What was surprising for some, however, is that California didn’t appear in the top 10 states for any category except average overall tax burden, and sales taxes. In fact, this confirmed what residency tax planners should know as a matter of course: changing residency from California doesn’t equal tax nirvana for every taxpayer. The details matter. How much tax savings a residency change can produce, if any, or if indeed leaving California will result in a higher overall tax burden (to a taxpayer’s consternation), depends on numerous factors, including the destination state.

The study, carried out by HireAHelper, an online booking agency geared to people looking for moving services, used Bureau of Labor Statistics figures. It conforms to similar studies over the last decade or so.

The Results

The study showed that California’s average total effective state and local income tax burden (income taxes, sales taxes and property taxes) is – no surprise – in the top ten, in a dollar for dollar comparison. Only New York, Illinois, Oregon, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Minnesota exceeded California in this category. However, as a percentage, using median income, California is squarely in the middle of the states at 8.9%, tied with South Carolina, of all places. California is also not in the top ten states for effective income taxes, using a method of applying the average effective rate to the median income and expressed in dollars (that is, what median income taxpayers actually pay in dollars versus what they would pay based on marginal rates – but query whether that’s a helpful metric). As might be expected, California appears in the top 10 states with the highest sales tax rates.

Needless to say, the traditional zero income tax states of Nevada, Texas, Washington State, Wyoming, Florida, South Dakota and Alaska came out smelling like a rose in overall tax burden, and also in almost every other category. Continue reading

Five (More) Internet Myths About California Residency Rules

Published on: June 24, 2019 | by Chris Manes

Is Bigfoot a California Resident?

Manes Law discussed its top five internet myths about California tax residency rules in a previous article. Here are five more. Again, they’re in no particular order, but the commentary should provide some indication about how important they are and why.

Myth #1: Leave California, Sell Your Business, And You’re Home Free

Many of our clients are founders exiting startups, either through an IPO or purchase by another company. Or they are long-term business owners in traditional industries who plan to sell their California-based company after retiring out of state. The widespread internet meme insists these scenarios always result in zero California income tax on the gain, even though the sale is of a California business.

The basic concept is correct: if a nonresident sells his interest in a California business (that is, corporate shares, limited liability company memberships, partnership interests), the traditional rule is California can’t tax the gain. But not so fast. Numerous factors play a role in determining whether a business sale by a nonresident will escape California’s tax system.

The first is, the transaction must in fact be the sale of a business interest, not the sale of business assets. For good tax reasons, purchasers often prefer to buy assets, not business interests, if the value in the company is in the assets, not the brand. And in some industries, an asset sale is the standard for a business purchase. But take note: if the assets are situated in California, an asset sale by a nonresident results in California-source income, taxable by California regardless of the residency status of the seller. Generally, only interest sales are eligible for tax-free treatment by California when the owner is a nonresident. 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

Leaving California, But Coming Back to Work: Income Tax Traps After Changing Residency

Published on: June 12, 2018 | by Chris Manes

It’s no trick to leave California to avoid its high income taxes – if that’s all you want to do. You can sell all your California assets, including your home, terminate all business contacts, never spend any time in the state after your move, close all your financial accounts, sever all your professional and social connections. And so forth. Taxpayers who leave California lock, stock, and barrel don’t really have to worry about residency issues (despite scary stories on the internet). But in fact, most people who change their legal residency from California have something else in mind. They also want to or have to retain contacts with the state. That might mean a vacation home or income properties; it might be managing a California business remotely, with operations in the state; it might involve working while in California, from meeting potential clients or investors to working at a branch of an employer for designated periods. The last situation, which is fairly common, requires planning, since changing residency may not be enough to avoid California income taxes if your work for an out-of-state or in-state employer brings you back to California.

When Changing Residency Isn’t Enough

A typical situation involves a business owner who changes legal residency and moves the business out of state. But it can also involve an executive who moves out of state, but still has to make business trips to California, because that’s where the company’s client base or operations are located. Well and good. Unless a taxpayer changes legal residency, everything else is moot from a tax perspective. But the fact is California is an economic powerhouse. Few businesses, especially those in high-tech and financial services, can succeed without participating in the California market. And that often means meeting with and cultivating potential clients or investors in Los Angeles or Silicon Valley, where the capital, expertise and demand resides, or spending time working at a California branch of the company.

If that’s the case, it’s important to understand the differences between personal residency versus doing business in California versus working while physically present in California. These are three separate tax circumstances, which require different approaches to manage. Continue reading

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