Kpdemello wrote:That's a nice discussion you're having. Here's the actual law, which is 5 pages long and is clearly not that simple. Time is one element the state considers when it comes to domicile, but apparently not conclusive.
f.a.s.t. wins again, just like Trump-winning-winning-winning-winning. It takes about two minutes to see that, as always, f.a.s.t. is right. How bout that reference "what is near and dear to a resident", exactly what I meant by "roots".
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
Section 2 Definition of Domicile
(a) Domicile means the place where an individual has a true, fixed permanent
home, and to which place, whenever the person is absent, he or she has the intention of
returning. An individual may have several places of abode in a year, but at no time can
he or she have more than one domicile. Domicile is not limited to a specific structure,
but refers rather to a place or an area to which the individual expects to return.
(b) Domicile is established by birth, operation of law, or choice.
(c) Once established, domicile is never lost, changed or destroyed unless
there is an actual change in the residence, together with steps manifesting an intention
to abandon the former residence and acquire a new one. A mere intent or desire to
make a change in domicile is not sufficient to effectuate a change; voluntary and
positive steps must be taken.
(d) Domicile does not change if an individual leaves his or her place of
domicile:
1. for a period of rest or vacation;
2. to complete a particular transaction, perform a particular contract, or
fulfill a particular engagement, but intends to return to the state
whether or not the transaction, contract or engagement is completed;
or
3. to accomplish a particular purpose, but does not intend to remain in
the new place once the purpose is accomplished.
(e) An individual who is in transit between old and new domiciles is domiciled in
the old domicile until the new one is established.
(c) Items Near and Dear. The Department will consider where items or
possessions that the individual considers “near and dear” to his or her heart are located,
e.g. items of significant sentimental value, family heirlooms, collections of valuables or
possessions that enhance the quality of the individual’s life.
Domicile is not a simple question and people try to game it all the time. One way to try to game it is to spend a bunch of time in a place (or say you do), and change your drivers license and mailing addresses etc. But a state can take you to court and challenge your domicile, as DeadHead suggested, to try to force you to pay income taxes in their state. For some states like Florida it doesn't matter because there's no income tax, but places like VT take it seriously because it means money to them.
Kpdemello wrote:Meh you're both kind of right and kind of wrong.
Domicile is not a simple question and people try to game it all the time. One way to try to game it is to spend a bunch of time in a place (or say you do), and change your drivers license and mailing addresses etc. But a state can take you to court and challenge your domicile, as DeadHead suggested, to try to force you to pay income taxes in their state. For some states like Florida it doesn't matter because there's no income tax, but places like VT take it seriously because it means money to them.
Its funny how two people can be so adamantly and undeniably correct but yet neither is truly correct! Seems so common in the political forum.
f.a.s.t. wrote:
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
So i guess you can sympathize with many Vermonters on how they feel about being represented by Gump / Putin.
Kpdemello wrote:Meh you're both kind of right and kind of wrong.
Domicile is not a simple question and people try to game it all the time. One way to try to game it is to spend a bunch of time in a place (or say you do), and change your drivers license and mailing addresses etc. But a state can take you to court and challenge your domicile, as DeadHead suggested, to try to force you to pay income taxes in their state. For some states like Florida it doesn't matter because there's no income tax, but places like VT take it seriously because it means money to them.
Florida does take is seriously because of homestead exemption. That caps raising the rate on real estate tax along with a whole host of benefits when transferring the property in estate planning.
You are probably right, and I probably shouldn't be giving out what might be construed as legal advice... disclaimer, this is not legal advice, consult your attorney, anything I say is probably BS.
There may be a small minority of retirees or vacation home owners impacted but debate mostly involves students in the handful of college towns. Fortunately the university system has a process in place to distinguish between in state and out of state residents. Simple solution: if a student pays out of state tuition they are not eligible to vote, those who pay in state are eligible to vote.
Determination of Domicile
No person shall be eligible for in-state status unless s/he is domiciled within New Hampshire. For University System purposes, a person does not acquire a domicile in New Hampshire until s/he has been a resident of the state for 12 consecutive months immediately preceding registration for the term for which in-state status is claimed and meets all other requirements for domicile.
In accordance with RSA 187-A:20-c, any veteran of the armed forces who establishes a residence in New Hampshire is eligible immediately for the in-state rate, and the twelve-month waiting period for establishing domicile shall not apply.
No unemancipated person shall be eligible for in-state tuition status unless his/her parent(s), as defined in BOT IV.E.2.1, shall have established domicile in this state.
f.a.s.t. wrote:
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
So i guess you can sympathize with many Vermonters on how they feel about being represented by Gump / Putin.
Big, big, big difference. Trump is good for me, you and America. Bernie is bad for me, you and America. Socialism doesn't work, just ask anyone from Venezuela or any other 3rd world socialist country. Why do you think they all want to come here, because socialism has failed them.
f.a.s.t. wrote:
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
So i guess you can sympathize with many Vermonters on how they feel about being represented by Gump / Putin.
Big, big, big difference. Trump is good for me, you and America. Bernie is bad for me, you and America. Socialism doesn't work, just ask anyone from Venezuela or any other 3rd world socialist country. Why do you think they all want to come here, because socialism has failed them.
The fact that you even believe the Venezuelan non-sense and some how try and relate Bernie's positions to it tells me all I need to know about your intellect.
Your guy just signed off on the largest spending bill in US history. The reallocation of private resources for public purposes is socialism. Trump now holds the title of the biggest socialist president in US history.
f.a.s.t. wrote:
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
So i guess you can sympathize with many Vermonters on how they feel about being represented by Gump / Putin.
Big, big, big difference. Trump is good for me, you and America. Bernie is bad for me, you and America. Socialism doesn't work, just ask anyone from Venezuela or any other 3rd world socialist country. Why do you think they all want to come here, because socialism has failed them.
The fact that you even believe the Venezuelan non-sense and some how try and relate Bernie's positions to it tells me all I need to know about your intellect.
Your guy just signed off on the largest spending bill in US history. The reallocation of private resources for public purposes is socialism. Trump now holds the title of the biggest socialist president in US history.
yep it shows his is far superior to yours...thanks for proving it time and again....
In an essay lamenting what he described as the intractable income inequality of the American economy, Senator Sanders declared: “These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger.”
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
f.a.s.t. wrote:
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
So i guess you can sympathize with many Vermonters on how they feel about being represented by Gump / Putin.
Big, big, big difference. Trump is good for me, you and America. Bernie is bad for me, you and America. Socialism doesn't work, just ask anyone from Venezuela or any other 3rd world socialist country. Why do you think they all want to come here, because socialism has failed them.
Bernie is a Democratic Socialist and advocates for the economic system practiced in Scandinavian countries, you know, like Norway, so coveted by Gump. But Norwegians generally don’t want to live here because they enjoy more political freedom, more freedom of the press and more prosperity than us. And besides, no Norwegian wants to immigrate to a country with a shithole president.
f.a.s.t. wrote:
By the way, I would give up my beloved NH residency if I was lucky enough to ski-hike-bike-in Killington 183 days a year. I would just have to bite my lip whenever thinking that I am being represented by Bernie.
So i guess you can sympathize with many Vermonters on how they feel about being represented by Gump / Putin.
Big, big, big difference. Trump is good for me, you and America. Bernie is bad for me, you and America. Socialism doesn't work, just ask anyone from Venezuela or any other 3rd world socialist country. Why do you think they all want to come here, because socialism has failed them.
Bernie is a Democratic Socialist and advocates for the economic system practiced in Scandinavian countries, you know, like Norway, so coveted by Gump. But Norwegians generally don’t want to live here because they enjoy more political freedom, more freedom of the press and more prosperity than us. And besides, no Norwegian wants to immigrate to a country with a shithole president.
In an essay lamenting what he described as the intractable income inequality of the American economy, Senator Sanders declared: “These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina,where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger.”
that's not how you spell norway....
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
Bernie Sanders wrote:
We should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people.
Bernie Sanders wrote:
We should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people.
The big difference between any type of socialism in the U.S. and in Europe is that Europe doesn't have 50 million legal and illegal immigrants. Almost all of them living off U.S. taxpayers in one form or another; getting paid to vote for Democrats. The U.S. has spent trillions of dollars as a result of legal and illegal immigration, Europe has not. If the 50 million legal and illegal immigrants had arrived in Europe instead of the U.S., Europe would be a third world hell hole.
