BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
_____________________________________
XXXXX
XXXXX
:
Petitioners, : ORDER
:
v. :
:
AUDITING
DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 92-1231
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :
: Account
No. XXXXX
Respondent. :
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF CASE
This
matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission upon a Petition for
Reconsideration, dated XXXXX, filed by the Petitioner as a result of the
Commission's final decision dated XXXXX.
FINDINGS
1.
Utah Administrative Rule R861-1A-5(P) provides that a Petition for
Reconsideration "will allege as grounds for reconsideration either a
mistake in law or fact, or the discovery of new evidence." Under this
rule, the Tax Commission may exercise its discretion in granting or denying a
Petition for Reconsideration.
2.
Petitioners offer further comment and emphasis on certain findings of fact
already determined by the Commission.
3.
Petitioners argue that the Commission's final decision is founded upon an
incorrect interpretation of current case law.
Petitioners contend that a person can move to another place for an
indefinite period of time and entertain a floating intention to return and
still be found to have changed domiciles. (Gilbert v. Davies, 235 U.S.
561, 569 (1915).)
DECISION AND ORDER
Based
upon the foregoing, it is the decision and order of the Utah State Tax
Commission that the Petition for Reconsideration is denied.
The
Commission finds the Gilbert case not controlling for several reasons. First, the Gilbert court was deciding an
issue of federal diversity jurisdiction.
Secondly, the facts in Gilbert are significantly different than the
facts of the present case. Third,
Gilbert is a 1915 decision. Many more
cases have been decided on the issue of domicile since then, propounding a more
definitive analysis of how to determine domicile.
DATED
this 22nd day of April, 1993.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger
O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco S.
Blaine Willes
Commissioner Commissioner