Posts by Emma M. SavinoSenior Associate
Yes, you read that right! The first employee win we have seen on the COVID-related telecommuting cases recently came out of Ohio. During the pandemic, many states came out with guidance on how to treat the income employees earned while working remotely, some of which was contrary to their existing rules. Ohio was one of those states that acted quickly, with HB 197 taking effect March 27, 2020. Backdating to March 9, 2020, and lasting until 30 days after the state of emergency ended, Section 29 of HB 197 stated, for municipal income tax purposes, employees were deemed to be performing services at the employee’s principal place of work, rather than where the employee was physically working. This notably applied to both resident and nonresident employees. The alleged intention of the bill was to lessen the burden on employers by not requiring them to change the municipal withholding of their employees. This rule looks a lot like the “convenience of the employer" rule that a few states, including New York, applied before Covid, and that many states migrated to during the pandemic.
For the last year, we've been tracking the guidance that states have issued related to how state personal income taxes will be handled during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a specific focus on telecommuting employees. At this point, most states have issued some guidance on this. Connecticut, on the other hand, has stayed silent, until now.
UPDATED OCTOBER 25, 2021
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of people have been telecommuting for over a year, either from their home state or elsewhere. Even as some states open their economies back up, it does not change the fact that companies have been allowing employees to telecommute for a significant amount of time. And many companies are allowing employees to telecommute on a more indefinite basis. Allowing employees to telecommute from states in which they do not normally work can create a host of issues for employers, but the two big tax issues relate to nexus and income tax.
On March 31st an agreement was announced on the FY 2020 Budget. We wrote about the tax related highlights of the budget proposal when it was released back in January. We also recently commented here about the mismatch between the treatment of itemized deductions for individuals versus trusts. Recent guidance from the Tax Department clarified that individuals could itemize deductions at the state level even if they took the standard deduction on their federal return and could take deductions for items disallowed at the federal level. Initially, this seemed to only apply to only individuals, and not trusts and estates.
A few months ago, we wrote about the recent guidance that the Tax Department issued about itemized deduction decoupling (TSB-M-18(6)). The guidance addresses New York State’s decoupling from the federal treatment of deductions for individuals, but it was not initially clear whether these changes also apply to trusts and estates.