Publication Date
Winter 2017
Journal
Michigan Journal of International Law
Abstract
The states' income tax systems are important repositories of experience which confirm the administrative benefits of citizenship-based taxation. Domicile today plays an important role in state tax systems as a gap-filler when more objective statutory residence laws fail to assign any state of residence to the taxpayer. Citizenship is an administrable proxy for domicile and serves a similar gap-filling role in the federal taxation of individuals whose income and activities straddle across national boundaries.
The states' difficulties enforcing domicile-based taxation highlight the administrative benefits of citizenship-based taxation. As long as residence is understood for tax purposes in terms of domicile, citizenship is an efficient proxy for such domicile. The states' experience defining residence supports the United States' citizenship-based approach to federal income taxation. Under the Internal Revenue Code, citizenship serves as an administrable proxy for domicile and fulfills the same gap-filling function played by domicile under the states' income taxes.
Volume
38
First Page
271
Publisher
University of Michigan Law School
Keywords
income tax, state income tax, citizenship, domicile
Disciplines
Jurisdiction | Law | Taxation-State and Local | Taxation-Transnational
Recommended Citation
Edward A. Zelinsky,
Defining Residence for Income Tax Purposes: Domicile as Gap-Filler, Citizenship as Proxy and Gap-Filler,
38
Mich. J. Int'l L.
271
(2017).
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/446
Comments
Special Feature: Tax Symposium