Pandemic-boosted remote workforce may be in for a shock at tax time:
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a trend that was already well underway: employers letting their workers perform their jobs remotely, from home, most or all of the time. But even if you and your employer both know exactly where you live and work, you may be surprised to learn that state departments of taxation can have some very different ideas about where "here" is. As a result, Texans, Utahns, and Arkansawyers who work for New York- or Massachusetts-based companies will have income taxes withheld from their paychecks, even if they've never set foot in the home office.
In the wake of the pandemic, dozens of major companies are embracing employees' desire to stay remote, increasing their support for working from home permanently. Some businesses have even closed offices or let leases lapse, counting on a physically distant, flexible workforce to reduce their real estate needs.
In many ways this can be a win/win: employers can save overhead costs on expensive square footage in high-demand cities, and employees can save time and money by skipping the commute and dialing in from, basically, anywhere they want. New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles are expensive; maybe you want to move to Montana and dial in from the woods, or get a nice little ocean-view place in Florida. Unfortunately, as far as the state is concerned, your beachside cabana may as well be squarely in the middle of Manhattan, and you will be taxed as such.
So dear soylentils, are any of you in this situation due to working from home, and what have you heard related to income tax? In addition, for those of you who are outside the U.S., do you have an income tax? If so, how does it work?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by looorg on Monday January 04 2021, @12:05PM (2 children)
Income tax isn't really a big issue here as far as the pandemic goes. Nothing really changed in that regard. I worked a lot from home before, still do. The income tax isn't an issue in that regard as there is a national income tax, so it doesn't matter where you are. Then there is a municipal tax based upon where your live or your registered residence is, I don't recall the exact definition now but I think your registered residence is where you get the majority of your sleep even if you own multiple residences or something such. It's basically where you are and where you consume resources (like roads, hospital, school etc). So working from home changed nothing in that regard, you live where you live.
There have been a few other issues that have popped up tho that might become more urgent or interesting such as if you can make deductibles for working from home and having your home office. If you have your own company then it's not an issue but if you are just working from home employed by someone else then it might be somewhat of an issue. Then we have the issues of who is responsible for equipment and support, should the company send me furniture, pay part of my utilities bills (electricity etc). What about insurance, if I get injured when working from home -- is that the company insurance or is it my insurance. Questions like that have started to be noted and talked about more.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday January 04 2021, @05:29PM (1 child)
I thought the new tax laws nixed the home-office deduction.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:21AM
The home-office deduction was changed in the TCJA to only apply to those who are self-employed or employed by a disregarded entity in which they have an ownership interest as long as other rules are satisfied.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday January 04 2021, @12:52PM (4 children)
If the lockdowns in places like New York remain and workers continue to work remotely, then there is less and less incentive for companies to be registered in places like New York. So, this year the State of New York might tax the bejeezus out of its companies to try to fill its budget gaps, but we might start to see a massive flight to low tax locales. If that happens, places like New York and California with high overhead will see their balance sheets capsize into the red. Remember, it was not so long ago that New York City was crushed by its debt load and struggled to deliver basic services like garbage pickup; those times are right around the corner again. New York City gets most of its revenue from property taxes (interesting side note: up until two years ago those property taxes were calculated according to maps kept on vellum), so if all its companies vacate the properties in Manhattan and around the city its finances will take a breathtaking plunge.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @01:12PM (3 children)
Commercial real estate might take a dive, if big companies reduce their office space. My guess is that there are many companies that would like a NY City address, and if this becomes more affordable at least some of them will move in--even if only for a small "presence" in the Big Apple.
Real estate near the exchanges in the financial district will still be in very high demand--due to proximity (latency) to the server farms. Traders want that information sooner than their competitors.
(Score: 4, Touché) by rcamera on Monday January 04 2021, @01:26PM (1 child)
except the major exchange datacenters are all in new jersey. nyse is in mahwah, which is ~40 miles from the city. nasdaq is in ny4/ny5 in carteret ~20 miles from the midtown "market site".
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Monday January 04 2021, @01:30PM
oops, my bad - carteret us NY11 (nasdaq)
NY[45] is secaucus (home to directedge and BATS)
/* no comment */
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Monday January 04 2021, @07:39PM
If coronavirus lockdowns have taken geography and physical proximity out of the work equation, what does a NYC address matter anymore? If Amazon's online shopping behemoth has made Walmart's bricks-and-mortar stores increasingly irrelevant, how much more unimportant is it that the latter's corporate HQ is in Bentonville, AK?
Cities like NYC that are hiking taxes on companies, locking down hard on retail, and whipsawing regular families with their on-again, off-again school closures are going to crater hard and see the cachet of their locales evaporate in the harsh light of day.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by fakefuck39 on Monday January 04 2021, @01:08PM (23 children)
I've done quite a bit of remote work, and had my own company and done lots of corporate and personal taxes myself. this isn't true. legally, if you are classified as a remote worker, it does not matter where the home office is. you only pay taxes where you are.
the reason this article claims what it does has nothing to do with the irs. when someone becomes a remote worker, they need to refile their withholding forms. if they don't, well of course the original form will be used and their taxes withheld. and they can correct that and get a refund when they file.
there's no news here.
now, to answer the question at the end. as someone who has spent decades outside of the US, only being home a month or two some years, it depends. with most people, their income is still in the US, from a company registered in the US. Fed income taxes in this case remain unchanged.
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/persons-employed-abroad-by-a-us-person [irs.gov]
as far as state taxes in this case, it depends. if your company is in certain states, your income is kinda taxed but from the company, with an excise tax. this isn't deducted from your salary. if you're abroad, the excise tax on your earnings is still paid. if you own the company like I do, you're fucked and you pay the tax on your income despite being abroad. if you're in a state where the employee pays taxes, in all cases I'm aware of you only pay tax on the income earned while you're home - the abroad time is not counted. in some states, if you're away as little as 6 months you don't have to pay or file.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @01:39PM (21 children)
I'm not even American and I know that's bullshit. The USA is one of the few countries in the world that taxes their citizens who are living and earning abroad. The sole concession is that you can deduct income tax charged by the foreign country from the tax that the USA charges. In most developed countries, the higher local income tax means that no USA tax is payable, but it is because it is fully deducted, not because you don't have to.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @01:58PM
That's not true though. The US doesn't tax our citizens abroad unless they either work for the US government, military or make a ton of money. You get something like $70-80k tax free before the US starts taxing. Sure, in parts of Europe that might not be very much, but there's plenty of parts of the world where that's just about more money than you can spend without purposefully trying to run out of money.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Monday January 04 2021, @02:32PM
Right, as I said, you pay federal taxes while living abroad. Since you're not american, why are you commenting on something you know nothing about? If you work for a US company, and earn in the US, you pay full tax. Which is the example I gave.
The rest talks about state taxes. Do you even know what those are? Clearly not at all. Protip - before calling bullshit, it helps to first read what you're replying to, and second it helps to know what you're talking about. Which is not this.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @02:44PM (18 children)
But I think what the fake guy is saying is different than what you are saying.
If you live in one state you are registered as a citizen of that state. So let's say I live in California and I am a registered citizen of California. Let's assume I have a job in California. I also make money on the side in the stock market. Well, my broker may be located in Texas or wherever. So I make 60K from my work in California and I make 5K from trading on the side (hypothetically). I want to lie to the state of California on my state income taxes and not report what I made trading. I won't be able to get away with this. Why? The federal government will give the state government a copy of my federal income tax return electronically and the state will then try to tax me on what I made trading.
Now here is what the federal government won't do. They will not give Texas a copy of my federal income tax return. Why? Because I'm not a registered resident of that state.
and if I am employed in California it's hard for me to claim that I do not live in California and shouldn't be a registered citizen of California. My employer will report to California that I work in California.
Now where I guess it could be tricky, and where the controversy is, is if I'm a registered resident in Texas, I work in Texas remotely for a California company. Is the federal government going to give California a copy of my federal income taxes so that California can know what I made and tax me directly? Will/must my employer report to the state that I work for them and can California force the federal government to give them a copy of my federal income tax return or can they force my employer to tell them how much I made and can they force me to pay anything after the money has already hit my bank account (or can they only tax it ahead of time?). Will the federal government allow this.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @03:21PM
Sorry, I kinda wrote this in haste. A registered resident of a given state, not a registered citizen of a state, in each case that I put the wrong thing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @03:27PM
It should also be noted that what a lot of people do is they may claim dual residency in two states so they don't have to pay as much taxes based on where they report their income comes from. This could be true for people that are truck drivers, for example, that drive across multiple states. They will try to claim residency in a state with less taxes and claim as much of their income as they can came from that state while still living in California. They could lie and say that they stay in Washington, for example, where taxes are lower. Or they may not even claim to be residents of California but they may still live in California and pay rent under the table by co-renting with someone or sub-renting to avoid paying California taxes.
California has an income tax for example and perhaps other states either have lower income taxes or don't have income taxes at all.
(Score: 4, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Monday January 04 2021, @04:11PM (1 child)
I live in Texas, and for a year I worked remotely, for a company based in California. I did not pay any income tax to CA, and TX does not have an income tax.
Some years before that job, I lived in California, and paid their state income tax on my earnings. The first tax season without any earnings in CA, nearly 2 years later, they had the gall to demand that I prove I no longer lived in California, and threatened to garnish my pay if I did not respond in writing to their demand. Sent that notice to my address in TX, showing that they knew my new address and that it wasn't in CA. Besides which, the previous year I had sent, from my new TX address, tax payment for my last year in CA.
I have also lived in Virginia, North Carolina, and Iowa, and none of those states insisted on that kind of "proof". The whole thing strikes me as one of those desperation moves for more revenue, hoping that some of the recipients don't respond. Not that other states don't have their little tricks and angles-- North Carolina demands that residents report the total amounts paid for all goods and services ordered out of state, so they can impose their sales tax on those items. Don't want to miss out on sales tax revenues for things bought from Amazon and similar ilk! Since I hadn't ordered anything at all from any online retailer in the few months I was there, I had the easiest possible answer to that one: $0.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @04:26PM
I think that's where a lot of this discussion stems. California is very aggressive in their attempts to tax people in situations that don't look like they should fall within their jurisdiction and there is a lot of discussion over the extent that they can even do some of the things they would like to do and if the federal government would allow for it and how much they can actually enforce what they would like to enforce.
It drives people out of California but then California will still try to find a way to tax you regardless no matter how much you try to distance yourself from the state, lol. Then it ends up becoming a jurisdictional battleground.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Monday January 04 2021, @04:28PM (13 children)
That's not quite what the article is talking about. If you're interested, coogle "CT NYC taxes."
Some states require you to pay income tax where you live. Some states (like NY) make you pay taxes where you work. So for this common example, you live in CT, you work at an office in NYC. Many people do that - CT is cheaper, and NYC is higher salary - and they're an hour drive away. These people are double taxed on the same income by both states. It's crazy.
Now, you work remote - you're not in the NYC office, you're only in your home office in CT. You need to redo your employment tax to reflect that, and you'll no longer be taxed by NY. The article fails to mention this part to get clicks. If you don't redo your tax forms, you're going to get taxed in NY from every paycheck despite not being there anymore, and have to correct that at the time of filing to get your money back.
I also described a 3rd case for states where there is no personal tax, but instead an employer excise tax, which is something like TN.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Monday January 04 2021, @06:23PM (12 children)
you're wrong about ny/ct pretty much across the board.
i live in ct and work for a ny based company. we are not double taxed at the state level on ny-based income. the "paid to ny" amount comes out of what's due to ct, effectively zeroing it out. dividends & cap gains are taxed in ct, as one would expect (albeit at the rate of my full income, not just the ct-based income). in years where i've had ~0 in cap-gains/dividends, i've paid $0 in ct income taxes with a "nyc" income.
even if working remote (which i've been doing for a few years now), if the income is ny-based (company is registered in ny), ny gets their income-tax. good luck claiming that you're exempt from that. the "way around" is to "tele-report" to a non-ny branch, if one exists. nj is considering fighting this, but has not yet started the suit against ny. when they do, i'm sure ct, pa, and ma will jump on board
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Monday January 04 2021, @07:08PM (11 children)
cool. so you say I'm wrong, then quote proving me right
"The credit allowed will be the lesser of the tax paid to the other state or the tax which Connecticut imposes on the resident's out-of-state wages."
So, you live in CT yet pay NY level taxes, and you're remote and never to to NY. In addition, this tax credit to CT is I believe 7% max. you pay about 13% in NY
If you're working remote, and you're paying taxes for the NY company, that company is screwing you over. They need to claim you as a remote worker, and they're not doing that. They need to register as a foreign corporation in CT, and they're not doing that. That's not the state screwing you - that's your employer taking advantage of you being uninformed. Now if you went to the NY office even one day, that changes. If the employer wants you in the office but gives you the option to work remote, you for your convenience, and you chose remote - you're not a remote worker.
the covid remote work is not convenience, it's based on necessity, so you're wrong. but please, please don't listen to me and enjoy paying your 13% NY tax rate this year instead of the half of that you could be paying. please absolutely do that. don't even bother talking to an accountant, just assume you're right and I'm completely full of shit.
I lived in CT and worked in Westchester for a year and a half btw.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Monday January 04 2021, @08:13PM (10 children)
your statement is:
i'm not understanding where this supposed double-taxation of your is, nor where that's supported in the blockquotes. you end up paying an amount which is the greater of the amount due to ny OR ct; not the sum of them. if i owe ny $15k, and i owe ct $13k (for the same income), the ct amount is reduced by the lesser of them ($13k), so you pay ny $15k and ct $0. it's not exactly rocket science.
ct's top rate is indeed 7%, though i'm nowhere near that bracket (starts at $1mm). ny's top rate is 8.82% - i'm also nowhere near that bracket (starts at $2.1mm). where did you pull 13% from? all-in, i ended up paying an effective 6.36% rate to ny last year instead of the ~5.8% i would pay to ct - assuming i could get the same income from a ct-based company. i took the current "nyc" job instead of the competing offer i had from a stamford-based company because salary was over 50% higher. the math on that choice was pretty easy... 50% salary increase that costs ~0.50% is very much worthwhile.
as far as being a remote-worker, they have office space, including (until recently) a dedicated desk for me in the city. used to go in 1-2 times per month, up through february of this year. work from home has always been a convenience factor. seeing how there's only a few people in the company in ct, it doesn't make sense for the company to establish a relationship with ct. we're each paying a bit more to ny than we would to ct, but are able to offset that with significantly higher income. sucks that i'm not supporting the state i live in, but it's hardly the end of the world from a personal finance perspective.
i did have this conversation with my accountant, and hr (as have family & friends in similar situations); that's why i'm aware of these realities, and you (as you acknowledge) are indeed full of shit. congrats on your year and a half of experience that gives you so much knowledge on the topic (you were apparently paying 13% to ny and 7% to ct...?); i'll stick with the opinions of certified accountants on this one.
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Monday January 04 2021, @08:28PM (9 children)
Ok, I'll give you that - the double taxation thing I don't fully remember. I always paid both, but my CT taxes may have been due to cap gains. Maybe it was just the higher amount for salary. But let's look at that. You conveniently said in your example you had no cap gain. What if you did? What if they were short-term gains? You can't write off the higher percentage portion of your NY taxes against those in CT. That my friend would be being double-taxed.
Where do I get 13% from? That's how much I remember paying, and I remember because I don't like 13 as a number. Why so much? Because I'm not conveniently ignoring all other NY taxes, like, oh, the city tax, which was I think 4%.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Monday January 04 2021, @09:40PM (8 children)
no, still not double taxed. the short-term-gain/cap-gain/dividend income is taxed only in state of residence. it's not declared as income in ny, and therefore no income tax is owed to ny on it. i only owed $0 to ct one year; i blew out my brokerage account for downpayment on the house (but i owed a different state ~$4k on those gains, and over $15k in federal...). most years i owe a few hundred to ct based on investment income. i'll have a metric fuck-ton of ct-based "gains" this year because of a roth-conversion during the market lows.
i doubt your memory is correct regarding 13%. nyc tax is only collected if you live in nyc (or work for the city of ny). including city tax, you would pay ~13% (~9% state, ~4% city) on every dollar made after your 2.1mm-th dollar if you lived in the city. your average rate would be less than that, since the "first" 2.1mm is at lower rates. but you lived in ct, not nyc. and you worked in westchester, not for the city of ny - so nyc tax is 0% for you. it should be easy to figure out your effective rate; line 58 / line 36 on your IT-203 form - that's how i came up with 6.36% in the previous comment. or divide it by line 1 if you want to know your real effective rate.
back when nyc tax was paid by non-residents, it was in the sub 1% range; still wouldn't get you to 13%.
pfl/fli tax (paid family leave / family leave insurance) in ny is 0.27%, maxing out at $197, and started ~3-4 years ago. still couldn't get you to 13%. the only ny taxes withheld on my pay stub are ny-sit and ny-fli
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Monday January 04 2021, @10:50PM (7 children)
I'm not going to dig up tax returns here, but I was classified a "statutory resident" of nyc while being a resident of CT. I was not working for the city. I'm not counting the overall tax though like you are - I'm just adding up the tax brackets, so yes, your effective rate is lower. I do know I was in the highest tax bracket that year.
Westchester is where I went to the morning sales meeting, I had a marriott suite at the mall rented out there by the trump tower for a year. I would though, about 4 days a week go to clients in the city on the train, from westchester, so I paid city tax for nyc.
so, again, I am stretching the meaning of double taxed here. in my view, I should be able to write off the full NY taxes against my CT taxes - including capital gains. in my view, and it appears yours is different, that doesn't qualify as double-taxed. i hold my view because the ny taxes are taxes, which reduces my total usable income. if i can't write a portion of them off, that to me is double taxing. you're looking at salary and everything else separate. i'm looking at my total income as a single total, and that single income in being taxed by two states.
let me give you a different example. in chicago, we have very high property taxes. if you make past a certain amount, you can't write those off. the money you paid in property taxes to the city, you also pay state tax on.
in ct, out of the total money you earn that year, a portion went to taxes in ny. you then pay taxes again on that in CT. you logically get around that by saying your nyc salary isn't being taxed twice. to me, it's a single income pool, and the tax money paid to Anyone else, should reduce my tax liability by exactly that much in CT. To me, all the jurisdictions are "money i pay to *government*" - and if I pay someone taxes, that reduces my total by that amount. and if they want, they can fight it out among themselves. instead the people get fucked.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Monday January 04 2021, @11:22PM (6 children)
i see. so you make a generally broad statement of "These people are double taxed on the same income by both states", then justify that by citing your own overly complex situation (that you yourself don't seem to fully understand) by considering all different sources of income to be the "same income". you lived in ct, westchester, and the city, and are upset that you are required to financially support each of those municipalities. sounds like you're making things complicated, and then complaining that they're complicated.
"it's not fair to those of us making millions of dollars that claim residency in multiple states that we have to pay taxes in each of those states! cry for me!..."
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Tuesday January 05 2021, @12:18PM (5 children)
yes, a broad statement that doesn't apply to every single case. only applies to people who make cap gains - that's no one - right? no one has stock that goes up - that's those rich people, we should double tax them. people who rent a hotel room are now residents. gotcha. or, you know, that's something that ny does unfairly to steal people's money.
i'm not crying about anything, and I pay my damn taxes. it would be convenient for you to pretend i'm playing the victim, when I'm just dispensing information that applies to a lot of people. not you because you're poor. and seem to be crying about it.
did i get that about right there skippy?
see, I presented info that applies to a lot of people. i presented info that to those people would say qualify as double taxing - paying taxes, and not being able to write them off fully. why in the world would you think writing off taxes you paid from your cap gains income is fair? oh, right, because you have zero cap gains, it doesn't apply to you, and if it doesn't apply to you - screw everyone else who's not you.
i gotcha. you're an entitled person. you know what spreading misinformation is? taking a case that applies to a lot of people, then saying it's false because it doesn't apply to your specific case. i'm done w/ you buddy - you do you.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:34PM (4 children)
i make cap gains. the year i had $0 in ct was because i owed ~$4k to another state instead (moving year), remember? they weren't taxed by two states, shockingly. i've been accused of being a wallstreet fatcat by some and poor by others - i consider myself comfortably upper-middle class.
you "feel" like you pay taxes on the same income to multiple states, but all you keep talking about is that multiple income streams are taxed by different states. that's not double state taxing. you "feel" like you pay 13% ny-sit, but agree that's wrong. i get it, math is hard. let me guess - you'd show us your taxes, but aren't allowed because they're being audited?
please point out my misinformation - yours is too abundant to list. i recall you agreeing when i called bs on you quite a number of times so far. you make bold statements backed by "i vaguely recall something along the lines of..., but don't fully remember", pull numbers out or dark places, and even change the setting of the story when you're called out ("oh, uh... i lived in the city for 183+ days of that year..."). you could claim to be a resident of jupiter, but if you spend more time in the city than there, you're legally a resident of the city. yes, misinformation abounds.
you know what spreading misinformation is? taking your one specific bizarro fabricated case, then saying it's universally true because it applies to you in a story you are still in the process of inventing (as needed).
you might be done with me, but i've been having a ton of fun slapping you around over and over again; the dunning-kruger is strong with you. please come back.
it would have been super easy if you simply said you're double taxed on income because of federal and state; no argument there
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Tuesday January 05 2021, @05:26PM (3 children)
why don't you reply to what I wrote in the post you're replying to, instead of "too abundant to list." I didn't say I was wrong. what I said was you're claiming to be right because you don't define double taxed the same way i do.
if i can't deduct the full amount of taxes i pay to somewhere from my total income, i am being double taxed. period. reply to that. oh, you did, and what you said you don't count it like that.
by 13% i mean the tax category, not overall tax divided by total income. i literally said that. so yes, i agree 13% of overall tax is wrong.
no retard, i didn't say i lived in the city 183 days a year. you said i said it. I said I had a hotel room there. so i could change to go downtown, relax between meetings. renting a hotel does not make you a resident.
fuck off douche. i'm not reading your reply. you literally ignore what i said, and keep typing the same bs over and over again. i get it, we don't define double taxed the same way. i get it, you think renting a hotel room somewhere makes you a resident of the state. i get it. i don't agree. what is it you don't get?
don't answer that, i'm not interested in reading it. bbye now loser. why a loser? because you're not in that top tax category so more poor than me, and your way of thinking supports what I consider oppression by the government.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Tuesday January 05 2021, @07:04PM (2 children)
your stupid is showing again. i did point out your incorrect statements in-line. and you agreed. to almost every single one, so far. seems the only thing we don't agree on is whether or not a state should care about what you paid in a different state.
you didn't say you lived in the city 183+ days. but you did claim to be a statutory resident. let me define that for you;
so - you CHOSE to maintain a PPA in nyc, and spent more than 183 days in the state. you may think that renting a hotel room for a year doesn't make you a resident, but you're wrong. again. go ahead - read the blockquote again; i'll wait. they make the rules, which are easy enough to find and follow if you're interested. none of it even that difficult to understand. as stated earlier, you CHOOSE to complicate your situation, then complain that it's complicated. the rest of us "regular joe-shmoe commuters" put in our 4 hours of commuting per day and deal with it. we're not a bunch of wimps like you apparently are. i mean, come on.. if you learned to stop shitting your pants, you wouldn't need to change cloths between meetings. amiright?
nice to see you take the high road as always. "i have more money than you, so i'm better"; sounds like the parting cry of a whipped bitch who knows they lost an argument. also might not be accurate; annual income != net worth, champ. tax brackets are determined by taxable income, not assets. i thought you were supposed to be the master troll, but boy do you have thin skin. i guess that fits right in with the pampered lifestyle of needing a nap between meetings.
looking forward to your whiny bitch reply because we all know you need to have the last word. and each time it exposes you more and more as a whiny, entitled bitch. "i deserve to use the resources of this municipality, and it's not fair they expect me to pay for that privilege...". boo hoo. cry into your pile of money - sounds like it's making you very happy. boo hoo
/* no comment */
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday January 06 2021, @05:47AM (1 child)
didn't really read most of that, since you just keep repeating the same shit.
ny says i'm a statutory resident because i had a hotel room there i didn't even sleep in. that's bs.
you can't write off the full tax you pay in ny from your total income in ct. that's bs.
it's pretty simple. I'm not surprised can't figure it out though.
i'm not sure what you're not getting here. i'm not the one making things difficult here. these bs tax laws literally don't exist in 99% of the country. but do go on, keep defending getting fucked. i simply moved and took my income and tax dollars elsewhere the next year. i think you just like getting fucked by the man, and hey, nothing wrong with being a faggot. what's funny is you call me a wimp for not taking it in the ass, while you, unlike the rest of the country, support getting railed. you do you i guess.
"privilege to use this municipality" lol. what now? hey, take a look at your hotel bill. see those taxes? about 1/3 of the bill? that's not a privilege - that's a purchase, and ny is one of like 3 places in the whole country that does that. you simply sound like a cuck. you like to watch your wife get railed by a nig while you get it in the ass from the man. that's totally cool, i support all lifestyle choices, and gays and cucks have a right to enjoy the abuse.
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Wednesday January 06 2021, @01:34PM
i'll let you have your last word. enjoy! can't win an argument and jump right into the namecalling. fantastic debate tactic - a sure sign you have nothing to back your bizarre position. looked at a few of your other recent posts; you truly are a low information dunning-kruger mastermind.
well... just one more note; boy do you seem obsessed with homosexuality... how's that closeted thing going for you? or are you officially out yet? now i finally understand what the rented romp-room was for. sad.
and you're the one paying higher tax rate and ridiculous hotel taxes. who is it that's getting it up the ass by "the man"? ;-)
/* no comment */
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @02:46AM
I have worked for several 'remote' companies. Typically we setup a local company that was a 100% shell company owned by the main one and designated that as the main office. Simplified the tax structure quite a bit.
Now I *could* see this being an issue for many that had their taxes witheld at NYC rates but working in the middle of Texas somewhere but did not change your main office. You prob overpaid by a good portion your taxes. Or maybe the other way around. Usually you will see something like 'if you worked 50% out of state you can deduct the full amount...' but that is not necessarily true so if you used to work in a lower tax state then moved to a higher one you could end up with a bill. That is the only issue I could see. The first case you could get a sweet rebate. On the second case you could end up with a bill.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bradley13 on Monday January 04 2021, @01:17PM (6 children)
We moved to a tiny village in the mountains. This was planned anyway, with me having an apartment in the big city during the week. I've always been able to work a fair bit from home, so I probably would have spent 3-4 days in the city, and the other 3-4 days in the mountains. The tax situation is only slighly different: federal taxes are the same, but small-town taxes are slightly different from big-city taxes.
With Covid, I'm currently full-time home office; I'm not using the apartment. The tax situation isn't changed by this. I'm a professor, and the university will want physical classes to resume, so I am keeping the apartment - finding it was a bitch and it has my furniture in it. So my main benefit at the moment is a great view while working.
That said, I do expect some long-term changes. Now that we have all seen that online classes can work, and we have the tools and skills needed, some degree of online instruction will be retained. The university administration will see this as a cost-cutting measure, of course: fewer staff can teach more classes. No worries: the university administration will expand to suck up any savings. Attending university in 2022 is likely to be a lot different from 2019.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday January 04 2021, @04:17PM (3 children)
> university administration will expand to suck up any savings
I understand that's been going on for years now. Some university admin positions are real cushy jobs, basically just sinecures.
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Monday January 04 2021, @08:25PM (2 children)
Yep. 10 years ago, we had 1 admin to one instructor. Now it's about 1.6 admins per instructor. Needless to say, we have bigger classes and constant cost pressure. WTF all those new administrators do, is a mystery.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @08:53PM
They google you for reasons to withdraw tenure. Or ultimate fire you.
Then they can hire more administrators.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:40AM
We always joke that no one knows what they do. They just make up paperwork to send back and forth to make it appear like they are doing something, which ended up actually becoming something.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Monday January 04 2021, @04:41PM (1 child)
It's the only department(s) that actually grows on any university I have ever worked at. Can't have enough HR and Administrative staff. For the rest of them it's a constant struggle to find the funds and if anyone goes away it's at best a matter of replacement for that position.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @10:18PM
In addition the only thing HR and Admin seem to do is require you to fill out forms and host training on filling out forms.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @02:06PM (5 children)
This isn't even a first world problem, this is a rich people that are too cheap to have competent tax professionals problem. The people in this position are mostly people that are upper-middle class and up. The people actually doing the work to keep the country from completely collapsing mostly don't have this problem because we mostly don't get to work from home due to the nature of the job. If the work does get done remotely, a few months later the job is eliminated as redundant. Deutsche Bank was absolutely right about the fact that we need a tax on telecommuting to help compensate the people who can't do so because the job doesn't allow for it. Normally, the risks are not that high, but right now with the pandemic, the risks associated with getting sick range from a minor inconvenience to fatal.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @02:45PM (1 child)
Hey socialist, I earn my money and it's mine. Quit pretending that all my money is actually the government's and they let me keep only what they desire and give the rest to whoever is their buddy of the week.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:18PM
The money does belong to the government. Federal Reserve Note. They print it, they issue it electronically, and they give it to any bank that signs up.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Monday January 04 2021, @06:51PM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @08:57PM (1 child)
So people who are spending more to be employed (or did you think property taxes on that home office/additional phone/computer/broadband line/office chair all came free as perks?) and generally getting paid less than as if they'd been required to hit the office - those are the people who should be taxed more.
How dare they actually have higher expenses and lower income? Tax the sloppy shit out of those greedy motherfuckers!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:22PM
Right. You're getting paid less to telecommute than the people doing food, grocery, logistics, etc? Lol, so programmers are making minimum wage?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @05:55PM
The dough to keep the COVID-19 scam goin' has to come from some place (actuallly, many places).
(Score: 4, Funny) by DannyB on Monday January 04 2021, @06:09PM (2 children)
I have a grueling ten minute commute with five traffic lights (was three until a couple years ago).
The office is a ghost town. Only three people (including myself) and our offices are not close. (close the door office, with window) Easy to wear mask in hallway, kitchen, restroom, etc.
How could I be expected to get any actual work done from home?
At home, my wife would worry about hysterical maniacal laughter when I post on SN. That doesn't happen at the office because they know I program in Java.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2021, @10:21PM (1 child)
You should switch to riding bicycle then... *poof*... the traffic lights no longer apply. And you can probably get a carbon tax credit from the Biden crime family.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:24PM
Not paying attention to the lights while riding a bike is a good way to get run over.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 04 2021, @10:03PM
While I used to work in-office 4/5 days and from the rest of the time, and since March I have only been in-office for a total of maybe 5 hours across 4 visits, I still "work" for my local office, not the home office out of state. The company hasn't done anything silly like reclassify our place of employment.
Come to think of it, when I lived in Florida and worked for Texas - that never really came up either, being the two states (that I know of) with no income tax.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @03:37AM (1 child)
Have only paid taxes in two countries (NZ, Aus), and they seem simpler than the US.
As a salary/wage earner there is a national (progressive) PAYG income tax rate and you can claim credit for working from home.
In Aus last year there was a flat rate for working from home, if you couldn't be arsed figuring out the actual cost you can just claim a couple of bucks a day off your tax (haven't actually done my taxes for 19-20 yet, so pinch of salt here)
Taxes are fairly high, but then free healthcare etc (I know, I know - evil socialism for you Americans, but I think most of the rest of the world views the US health system as complete fucking madness. I don't understand how (well armed!) folk are so intent on defending a system that charges (a lot) more for worse outcomes. I mean, I admire your passion, but mock your priorities!)
NZ is super simple, pretty much all automated from memory - I don't think I even had to fill out a form in my last few years there.
Trickier when you have a business (GST is the biggest pain), but not much - and when I had (small!) businesses active in both countries managing tax was a little time consuming. However the tax depts are actually pretty helpful if you can live with the long wait before you get to talk to someone.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2021, @01:35PM
It's all the crazy religious nuts we have. They think suffering and dying are good for you, builds character or something. Old people and extremely poor can get socialized healthcare that's not bad though (if you report your income, you probably won't qualify, even at minimum wage).