96-2233

INCOME

Signed 5/30/97

 

 

BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

____________________________________

 

PETITIONERS, )

:

Petitioners, ) ORDER

:

v. ) Appeal No. 96-2233

:

AUDITING DIVISION OF THE ) Account No. #####

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, )

:

Respondent. ) Tax Type: Income Tax

_____________________________________

 

STATEMENT OF CASE

This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for an Initial Hearing pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code Ann. '59-1-502.5, on April 21, 1997. Jane Phan, Administrative Law Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing Petitioner was PETITIONERS REP., POA. Present and representing Respondent were Gale K. Francis, Assistant Attorney General, along with Frank Hales and Dan Engh of the Auditing Division.

Petitioners are appealing the assessment of Utah individual income tax and interest for the year 1993. The assessment was set out in the Statutory Notice dated March 6, 1996. Respondent made the assessment based on the assertion that both Petitioners were residents of Utah during this period. Petitioners filed a joint federal return for 1993. Petitioner PETITIONER did file a Utah individual return for 1993. However, Petitioner PETITIONER did not file a Utah resident individual income tax return for 1993 based on the assertion that she was a resident of STATE. She did file an STATE income tax return for this year.


The assessment as set out in the Statutory Notice does not allow a credit for the taxes PETITIONER paid to STATE. Respondent agreed that if PETITIONER was found to be a Utah resident for 1993 the assessment would be revised so that credit would be allowed for taxes paid to STATE. Although not yet subject to assessment, the parties anticipate that the decision for the 1993 tax year will be followed for the years 1994 and 1995.

APPLICABLE LAW

A tax is imposed on the state taxable income of every resident individual for each taxable year. (Utah Code Ann. '59-10-104).

Resident individual is defined in Utah Code Ann. '59-10-103(1)(j) as follows:

 

A "resident individual" is either:

(I) an individual who is domiciled in this state for any period of time during the taxable year; or

(ii) an individual who is not domiciled in this state but maintains a permanent place of abode in this state and spends in the aggregate 183 or more days of the taxable year in this state.

 

For purposes of determining whether an individual is domiciled in this state the Commission has defined "domicile" in Utah Administrative Rule R865-9I-2(D) as follows:

the place where an individual has a true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, and to which place he has (whenever he is absent) the intention of returning. It is the place in which a person has voluntarily fixed the habitation of himself or herself and family, not for a mere special or temporary purpose, but with the present intention of making a permanent home.


After domicile has been established, two things are necessary to create a new domicile: first, an abandonment of the old domicile; and second, the intention and establishment of a new domicile. The mere intention to abandon a domicile once established is not of itself sufficient to create a new domicile; for before a person can be said to have changed his or her domicile, a new domicile must be shown.

 

ANALYSIS

The issue in this appeal is whether PETITIONER was a "resident individual" in the State of Utah for the purposes of Utah Code Ann. '59-10-103(1)(j) for the year 1993. From the information presented she did not spend in the aggregate more than 183 days in the State of Utah during the period in question. A resident individual, in the alternative, is one who is "domiciled" in the State of Utah.

Petitioners were both clearly residents and domiciled in the State of Utah prior to 1987. In approximately 1981 Petitioners married and PETITIONER moved to Utah from STATE. Sometime in 1987 Petitioners moved to STATE where PETITIONER took a position managing a horse farm. They owned no real property in Utah at that time. PETITIONER had been working for COMPANY A in Utah and was able to transfer her employment to the Company=s STATE offices. They rented an apartment in STATE. They filed a part year Utah return and a part year STATE return for 1987. For 1988 they filed an STATE return.


Then in 1988 or 1989 PETITIONER moved back to Utah.PETITIONER remained in STATE where she continued her employment with the COMPANY A. Petitioners= representative pointed out that she could have transfered her position back to her employer=s Utah office but she chose instead to stay in STATE. She would visit PETITIONER in Utah during vacations about two weeks per year and he visited her in STATE from time to time. The representation from Petitioner=s representative was that for the period in issue, 1993, PETITIONER had an STATE drivers license, registered her vehicles in STATE, obtained insurance in STATE, maintained bank accounts in STATE, and did not have any bank accounts individually or jointly in Utah. Petitioner provided documentation of these activities but for the most part the documentation reflected dates after the audit period. However, these representations were unrefuted by Respondent

PETITIONER Utah driver=s license record indicates that she changed her address in June of 1988 to ADDRESS, CITY, Utah. However, Respondent reports that it looks like the Utah license was surrendered in August of 1988. Also, as Respondent pointed out, Petitioners filed joint federal returns and Utah returns for the years 1989 through 1992 using the address at ADDRESS. For 1993 their joint federal return was filed with the Utah address. Respondent pointed out that there was no change in their circumstances between 1992 and 1993 to establish a change of domicile. It was the representative for Petitioners= opinion that the reason they had filed in Utah was that they followed incorrect advice of their prior tax preparer. For the 1993 year they became her clients and she determined that PETITIONER was a resident of STATE.


The Commission needs to first consider whether Petitioners abandoned their Utah domicile in 1987 when the moved to STATE. The representation which was largely unrefuted by Respondent is that Petitioners had no real property in Utah. They both moved to STATE in 1987. They rented a place and started employment in STATE. They filed a part year STATE return as well as a part year Utah return for 1987. In 1988 they filed an STATE resident return. Based on these representations, Petitioners abandoned their Utah domicile at that point in 1987 when they moved to STATE.

Since the Commission finds that STATE domicile was established in 1987, it must consider whether PETITIONER later abandoned her STATE domicile. In order to show a change of domicile back to Utah the facts must indicate that PETITIONER: 1) abandoned her STATE domicile; and 2) that she intended to and did in fact establish a new domicile in Utah. The facts do not support abandonment of her domicile in STATE. She continued to live and work there full time even though she could have transferred her employment back to Salt Lake. She even filed and paid STATE resident income taxes in 1993.

DECISION AND ORDER

Based upon the information and representations presented at the hearing, and the records of the Tax Commission, the Commission finds that PETITIONER was a resident of STATE in 1993. The assessment of income tax and interest for the 1993 tax year should be adjusted accordingly.


This decision does not limit a party's right to a Formal Hearing. However, this Decision and Order will become the Final Decision and Order of the Commission unless any party to this case files a written request within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision to proceed to a Formal Hearing. Such a request shall be mailed to the address listed below and must include the Petitioner's name, address, and appeal number:

Utah State Tax Commission

Appeals Division

210 North 1950 West

Salt Lake City, Utah 84134

 

Failure to request a Formal Hearing will preclude any further administrative action or appeal rights in this matter.

DATED this 30 day of MAY, 1997.

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.

 

W. Val Oveson Richard B. McKeown

Chairman Commissioner

 

Joe B. Pacheco Alice Shearer

Commissioner Commissioner

^^