Archive for the ‘New York’ Category

New York Tries to Tax the Internet

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

Governor Eliot Spitzer (D-NY) is leading the way. But it’s a taxing way. The New York Department of Taxation and Finance says that any company that has an affiliate program that has any affiliates in New York must charge sales tax on sales shipped to New York.

Currently, companies must charge sales tax when a business has a “nexus” in the state. That’s usually caused by having a physical presence (an office) or employees in that state. Amazon.com doesn’t have an office or employees in New York. Thus, they haven’t charged New Yorkers sales tax.

However, New York now says that having an affiliate in the state is enough to give a company a nexus in New York. This is an interesting theory, but it could run into difficulties. Glenn Reynolds, the Instanpundit, thinks it wouldn’t stand up in court.

In any case, Governor Spitzer is looking at a $4 billion deficit for next year and has pledged not to increase taxes. The Department of Taxation and Finance calls this a policy clarification. I hope they have a big budget for legal fees as that’s likely where this is headed.

Snipes Moves for a Change of Venue…Again

Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Back in September, Wesley Snipes, accused of filing a false claim for an income tax refund, asked for a change of venue for his trial. He preferred Manhattan to Ocala, Florida. He asked for the change because of travel time from nearby airports to Ocala and because he has a home in New York. Judge William Terrell Hodges denied the motion. Snipes had also earlier charged that his prosecution was racially motivated; the judge denied that and told snipes that it wasn’t racial. Rather, he’s being prosecuted because he’s famous.

Since then, Snipes has gotten a new attorney. But it’s back to the same old arguments; Snipes’ new attorney, Robert Bernhoft has asked for a change of venue (or alternatively, dismissal of the charges). Mr. Bernhoft complains that Ocala was selected because “…[prosecutors] deliberately chose the most racially discriminatory venue available to the government with the best possibility of an all-white southern jury where Snipes has never resided.”

Mr. Bernhoft’s charge of inherent racism in Ocala was met by skepticism by both a local prosecutor and a public defender. “That’s perhaps the most outrageous claim I’ve ever heard made in open court,” said Chief Assistant State Attorney Ric Ridgway. Chief Assistant Public Defender Bill Miller echoed Mr. Ridgway’s views, telling the Associated Press, “I’ve never filed such a motion in any of my cases. If I felt I needed to, I would have.”

Mr. Bernhoft hired a public relations firm to survey citizens in New York and Ocala. The AP noted that one of the questions asked was the views on the confederate flag. Not surprisingly, people in Ocala viewed the flag with more pride than people in New York. Given that Florida was part of the Confederacy, that shouldn’t be a shock.

Judge Hodges will eventually rule on the motion. Based on his previous decisions, I expect that the trial will open as scheduled early next year in Ocala.

AP story here

A Bad Story with (Hopefully) a Good Ending

Wednesday, May 9th, 2007

In February, Steven Green pleaded guilty to not filing tax returns from 2001 to 2003 and to using a fake social security number when applying for a loan. He was sentenced to 2 years and nine months in prison, with the sentence to commence in June.

Normally, it would be just another story of tax fraud that I’d highlight—a real estate mogul who made some mistakes.

However, last night Mr. Green was walking out of Club Posh in midtown Manhattan when he was hit by a hit and run driver. His attorney, Louis Cherico, told the Associated Press that the prognosis for recovery is good (he had surgery earlier today).

Hopefully, the NYPD will catch what the New York Daily News calls “the cowardly driver.”

Associated Press Story

New York Loves Gamblers

Sunday, April 8th, 2007

New York is known as a high-tax state. Those who live in New York City or Yonkers must pay state and city income tax. That’s bad. The amateur gambler is in for a surprise, too. While New York allows itemized deductions for gambling losses, New York’s tax rules give a very rude surprise for the gambler.

Let’s take a typical case. John Smith makes $90,000 working in New York City. He also gambles, and nets $50,000. As I’ve written before, the amateur gambler cannot net his wins and losses. Wins are other income (line 21) while losses are an itemized deduction that is not subject to the 2% AGI restriction on miscellaneous itemized deductions.

Joe won $500,000 and lost $450,000. Those kinds of totals aren’t atypical for the successful amateur. Joe discovers that when he substitutes his true totals for his net number, his federal tax has increased by $2600. He’s shocked to find that his state tax jumps by $27,000!

If your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) is over $500,000, you lose 50% of your itemized deductions on your New York tax return. You keep all of your itemized deductions when your AGI is $100,000 or less. There’s a sliding scale between $100,000 and $500,000.

So New York joins my list of states for gamblers to avoid. For the record, here’s the complete list:

Connecticut
Illinois
Indiana
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota (because of its AMT)
Mississippi (Only MS gambling deductions are allowed)
New York
Ohio
West Virginia
Wisconsin

So New York may be the city that never sleeps, but New Jersey never looked so good for the amateur gambler.

Supreme Court: NY Can Tax Worker in TN

Tuesday, November 1st, 2005

Suppose you work as a telecommuter in one state, but your corporate headquarters is in another state. To which state must you pay state income taxes? The obvious answer is the state you live in. Of course, if you visit your corporate headquarters, you will owe state taxes to that state based on the number of days you are at the corporate headquarters.

However, in a case decided earlier this year, the New York Court of Appeals (the highest state court in New York) ruled that a telecommuter who works outside of New York State but works for a New York based company must pay New York state income taxes. The 4-3 decision in Huckaby v. New York State Division of Tax Appeals may have aided New York’s coffers, but it certainly made New York less attractive to corporations that encourage telecommuting. New York has a rule that allows the state to tax out-of-state employees if they work out of state “for the convenience of the employer.” Luckily, California doesn’t have that rule—yet.

The Supreme Court yesterday refused to review the case. This means that if you work for a New York based employer but telecommute, you owe New York state income tax.