Chris Corry addresses one of the biggest questions that has arisen from the new rules for the Washington capital gains income tax
Chris Corry
Washington Policy Center
As the state begins developing new rules for the Washington capital gains income tax, various questions are being raised on the details of this new tax and how to apply the domicile rules correctly.
One of the biggest questions that has arisen is how Washington defines domicile. While the rules are still being drafted, tax attorneys at Lane Powell have created an eight-page checklist of factors related a taxpayer’s domicile.
While it would seem excessive to need an eight-page list, the domicile rules by the Department of Revenue are very presumptive of Washington domicile and require significant proof on the taxpayer’s part to prove they are no longer domiciled in the state. This creates complex scenarios for taxpayers.
As noted in the article:
“With respect to gains from the sale of tangible personal property, if the property is moved out of Washington at least two years prior to the sale of the property, the gains will not be allocated to Washington. In this case, the two years include the current taxable year and the immediately preceding taxable year.”
The example cited in the initial rulemaking was a Washington-domiciled resident selling coins in Nevada.
For the above example, to not incur the capital gains tax, the coins must be moved out of the state for two years before being sold. How Washington can apply an “excise tax” on a transaction outside its borders remains to be answered.
The guidance for clearing this domicile hurdle is complex. Per the authors:
“The key to an easy/favorable resolution in allocating long-term gains from intangible property is clear and convincing evidence that you have abandoned your Washington domicile with the burden on the party asserting the change, which is usually the taxpayer. To change domicile, a taxpayer not only needs to leave Washington but also must establish a new domicile. Completing this checklist and maintaining (in readily accessible files) evidence of all actions taken, including printouts of computer pages and emails, can help with both the assessment of the taxpayer’s domicile and carrying the burden of proof if there is a dispute with the tax authorities.”
The article and checklist can be found here.
Chris Corry is the director of the Center for Government Reform at the Washington Policy Center. He is also a member of the Washington State House of Representatives.
Also read:
- Opinion: ‘Seeking might over right destroys representative government’
Retired judge Dave Larson argues that prioritizing political power over constitutional principles has undermined representative government and calls for renewed civic responsibility. - Letter: ‘Immigration’ resolution scheduled for this Wednesday at Clark County Council Meeting
Rob Anderson urges residents to closely watch an upcoming Clark County Council meeting where an immigration-related resolution and proposed rule changes are expected to be discussed. - Opinion: The 1700-square-foot solution to Washington’s housing crisis
An opinion column arguing that Washington’s energy code has driven up housing costs and outlining how HB 2486 aims to limit those impacts for smaller, more affordable homes. - Letter: Public school vision
Clark County resident Larry Roe urges a deeper community discussion about public school priorities, levy funding, and the long-term affordability of education for local families. - Opinion: House Bill 1834 would create a regulatory nightmare and restricts parental control on social media
Mark Harmsworth argues that House Bill 1834 would undermine parental authority and create sweeping regulatory and legal risks under the guise of protecting minors online.
