++Working remotely can be a boon or a bust for your taxes, depending on where you live. +
++The pandemic has accelerated the move to remote work and with it the possibility that those employees can live anywhere they please. That could mean a higher standard of living and a lower income tax rate for the growing number of remote workers. But in some instances it could mean having to pay taxes for a place where they now neither live nor work â or even being taxed on the same income twice. +
++It can be a very complicated situation, and the internet abounds with people trying to figure out whatâs going on. Reddit, specifically, is full of questions about where remote workers should file their taxes this year: If you quarantined with family for a couple months in a different state than where you work but didnât update your tax withholdings, do you have to file two state tax returns? If you worked remotely in a state without income tax but your job is in a state that has income tax, do you have to pay it? What do you do if youâre being taxed by a state you havenât set foot in? +
++The answers, unsatisfyingly, depend on a number of factors, including which states and how long you were there, according to tax experts we spoke with. Ahead of tax season, hereâs what to look out for when filing your taxes on remote work. +
++The convenience rule conundrum +
++Generally, your income tax is based on where youâre physically located when earning the income. So, if your jobâs office is in state A, but because of the pandemic youâre living and working full time in state B, youâd pay income and all other taxes to state B. If state B has lower income taxes than state A, that would be a boon for remote workers who moved. It could also be a reason for more people to pull up stakes now that theyâre less tethered to the office. +
++Taxes are, of course, more complicated than that, especially if your job happens to be based in one of seven convenience of the employer, or âconvenience rule,â states â Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Nebraska, New York, Pennsylvania and, since the pandemic, Massachusetts â while youâre living and working elsewhere. +
++The convenience rule can obligate employees to pay income tax to states they might now never step foot in, since it taxes income based on the location of the employerâs office. Typically, when this happens, the state where the person lives would award a tax credit to offset taxes in the state where that person works. But in some cases, when the worker is totally living and working in a state, that state might rightfully want to tax that income and not offset taxes for the non-living, non-working state, leading to cases of double taxation, according to tax policy nonprofit Tax Foundation. +
++To avoid this, itâs important to notify your job where youâre living so it can withhold tax from the correct state. Itâs also important to consult a tax professional, since the tax situation â as well as what it takes to be a resident of that particular state â varies drastically by state and is far from intuitive. +
++If your job is in California but youâre living full-time and working remotely in Texas, for example, you wouldnât have to pay taxes on your wages, since Texas doesnât have income tax. If your job is in New York, a convenience rule state, but you lived and worked in Texas, you would have to pay New York income tax. If your job is in New York but you lived and worked in Virginia, itâs possible youâd have to pay income tax in both states. Even when states provide a credit, workers will have to shoulder that double tax burden until their tax returns come. +
++So the convenience rule can feel very inequitable. +
++âIf youâre not doing anything to avail yourself of that statesâ government services or resources, not only does it seem unfair but it creates conflicts with every other stateâs income tax code,â Jared Walczak, vice president of state projects at Tax Foundation, told Recode. +
++Pay extra-close attention this tax season +
++As with many things that happened during the pandemic, decisions about remote work often happened swiftly and without much planning. As a result, the majority of Americans who worked remotely during the pandemic werenât aware of the possible tax consequences of working remotely and werenât aware they had to change state tax withholding to match where they were actually living, according to a Harris Poll on behalf of the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA). Nearly half didnât know each state has different laws related to remote work. +
++Itâs also not clear how many people are moving to different states to work remotely, since thereâs a lag in IRS data. But moving data from United Van Lines last year suggests people are increasingly moving from states with high taxes to states with lower or no income taxes. A McKinsey Global Institute analysis of 800 jobs found that the ability to work remotely is highly concentrated in a handful of high-skill occupations and industries, including finance, management, professional services, and information technology. +
++Catherine Stanton, vice-chair of the AICPAâs state and local tax committee, says sheâs fielded an increasing number of questions about out-of-state remote situations from clients, both employees and employers. +
++âI think itâs happening a lot, for sure,â Stanton said. And depending on where your job is and where you live, it can be financially beneficial. âI think itâs a great strategy,â she added, âbut you have to make sure youâre not working for those employers that have convenience of the employer rules and then maybe you pressure those employers to set up an office somewhere else.â +
++If you work at a larger company, for example, they can assign you to an office outside of convenience rule states so you can avoid being taxed by a state you arenât in, Stanton said. The Tax Foundationâs Walczak said that by looking for short-term tax windfalls, convenience rule states might lose long-term tax gains by driving businesses elsewhere. +
++One should also note that states without income tax often make up for it with higher sales, property, and other taxes. There are trade-offs between what those states buy with that tax (think schools and roads). +
++For now, some governments are trying to alleviate the situation. A number of states have allowed people currently telecommuting to be taxed in the state where their job is located. New Hampshire, where many people who work for firms in Massachusetts currently live and work, filed suit in the Supreme Court over Massachusetts continuing to collect income tax on people working remotely in New Hampshire, which doesnât collect income tax. A number of other states, including New Jersey, Connecticut, and Iowa, have filed amicus briefs in the case. Thereâs also bipartisan interest at the federal level to stop the practice, including proposed legislation called the Multi-State Worker Tax Fairness Act of 2020 that would tax remote workers by residence only. +
++For now, though, remote employees â and tax professionals â are going to have to navigate labyrinthine state tax laws one by one. +
++Sure, there are some similarities. But Bidenâs foreign policy is very, very different from Trumpâs. +
++Thereâs a growing argument, coming mostly from the left, that President Joe Bidenâs foreign policy is essentially the same as former President Donald Trumpâs. +
++It goes something like this: Two months into his administration, Biden is pursuing many of the same objectives as his predecessor. Sure, the tone has changed â namely, talk of rebuilding alliances and defending democracy and human rights â but much of the substance remains the same. +
++For example, Biden has taken an adversarial stance toward China and Russia; sold billions in weapons to a dictator in Egypt; kept the economic sanctions Trump imposed on Iran and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in place; declined to sanction Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for his role in ordering the killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi; and is unlikely to drastically slash the Pentagon budget. +
++In effect, they argue that US foreign policy right now is Trumpâs with Bidenesque characteristics. +
++That critique is coming from a small but vocal chorus of analysts, activists, and noted commentators like Noam Chomsky. Stephen Miles, executive director of the progressive foreign policy group Win Without War, recently told Politico that âThereâs this fear of being attacked on the right of not being tough enough on China or Iran or other issues.â The problem, he adds, is âthere doesnât seem to be as much concern about the overwhelming majority of the Democratic Party.â +
++Itâs a provocative case, but itâs not very convincing. While there are some similarities between the two presidents, Biden and Trump have extremely different foreign policies. Any claims that theyâre the same are incomplete at best. +
++The case for Bidenâs foreign policy as the same as Trumpâs, briefly explained +
++In December, I wrote a story about how Biden wanted the US to pursue a traditional, post-World War II foreign policy to defend the âliberal international orderâ â essentially the diplomatic and economic rules and norms that run the world. As Biden formed a team to do just that, progressives I interviewed couldnât mask their displeasure. +
++âAmericans are looking for a complete, fundamental shift in US foreign policy,â Yasmine Taeb, a senior fellow at the progressive Center for International Policy whoâs leading the leftâs critique of Bidenâs team, told me at the time. âI hope they recognize that the vast majority of the American people have rejected establishment foreign policy and the trajectory that weâve been on for decades.â +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22380507/1231623494.jpg)
James Devaney/GC Images
++Now, Taeb and others are essentially saying, âI told you so.â They argue that two months into Bidenâs presidency, itâs clear that âcomplete, fundamental shift in US foreign policyâ hasnât happened yet. What Americans have gotten instead is a Biden foreign policy that echoes Trumpâs more than progressive critics like. +
++Take Biden selling $200 million in missiles to Egypt, a country led by a dictator who has routinely violated human rights, jailing thousands of political dissidents and killing hundreds more. Bidenâs detractors compare that to Trumpâs decision to sell $8 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia, even after Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the 2018 murder of US resident Jamal Khashoggi. +
++They also point out that Bidenâs team hasnât lifted sanctions the Trump administration placed on the ICC. Trump took that action because the ICC was considering opening two investigations: one into alleged war crimes committed by US troops during the Afghanistan war, and one into alleged war crimes committed by Israelis and Palestinians during the 2014 Gaza War; the court was also considering making a determination on whether Israeli settlements in the West Bank constitute a war crime. +
++Two months in, Bidenâs team has kept those sanctions in place. Itâs not exactly clear why; when asked by reporters, the administration usually declines to comment. But Axios and the Guardian last month noted that Jerusalem is lobbying allies, including the US, to keep the financial pressure on the court in hopes that it will drop the case. +
++That rationale â that the Biden administration is keeping Trumpâs sanctions on partly at Israelâs behest â tracks with comments some US officials have made. +
++âWe have serious concerns about the ICCâs attempts to exercise its jurisdiction over Israeli personnel,â State Department spokesperson Ned Price said in a February statement. âThe United States has always taken the position that the courtâs jurisdiction should be reserved for countries that consent to it, or that are referred by the UN Security Council.â +
++For these and the other reasons cited above, critics say Bidenâs foreign policy represents more continuity than change from the Trump years. That seems fair on the surface, but the truth is Bidenâs foreign policy is nothing like Trumpâs. Not even close. +
++Biden and Trump are âa bit differentâ on foreign policy +
++Consider either what Biden has done or has said he wants to do on foreign policy: +
+-
+
- +He rejoined the Paris climate agreement after Trump pulled the US out of it, and has made tackling climate change a top priority. + +
- +He made the US a member of Covax, the global effort to fund and deliver Covid-19 vaccines around the world, which Trump didnât do. + +
- +He ended the âMuslim banâ that Trump put in place. + +
- +He reversed Trumpâs decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO). + +
- +He ordered the US to rejoin the United Nations Human Rights Council after Trump took America out of it. + +
- +He immediately extended the New START arms control pact with Russia for the maximum of five years, which the Trump administration didnât want to do outright. + +
- +He lifted the âforeign terrorist organizationâ designation off Yemenâs Houthis that the Trump administration imposed. + +
- +He ended Americaâs support for offensive operations in the Saudi-led war in Yemen. + +
- +He declined to make summitry with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un the centerpiece of his diplomatic strategy; Trump met with the dictator three times. + +
- +He repeatedly expressed a desire to get the US back into the Iran nuclear deal after Trump withdrew the US from the pact. + +
+Thereâs more, but itâs already notable that Biden and Trump just donât see the world the same way. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22411540/1232007099.jpg)
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
++Whatâs more, Bidenâs different tone â defending democracy and supporting human rights, among other things â is in itself a substantive policy change from the Trump years. +
++âI made it clear that no American president [should] ever back down from speaking out of whatâs happening to the Uyghurs, whatâs happening in Hong Kong, whatâs happening in-country,â Biden said during a press conference last week about his conversations with Chinese President Xi Jinping. +
++âThe moment a president walks away from that, as the last one did, is the moment we begin to lose our legitimacy around the world,â he continued. âItâs who we are.â +
++Biden has followed through on his rhetoric by sanctioning Chinese officials for human rights abuses against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang and for cracking down on Hong Kongâs democracy. +
++But donât take it from me or Biden. Trump administration officials also note the wide gap between the current presidentâs positions and the old oneâs. +
++Indeed, the list above didnât just come from my head. It came from conversations with Trump-era staff who said US foreign policy would be âa bit different,â according to one, if the Republican had won a second term. +
++Among other things, they said the US wouldnât have extended New START for five years, rejoined the WHO, lifted the terrorist label on the Houthis, or pushed for a return to the UN Human Rights Council. +
++And already former Trump administration officials, like then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Elbridge Colby, are blasting Biden for pursuing a foreign policy built around defending democracy and human rights instead of pure national interests. +
++âThe central theme of President Bidenâs foreign policy is a global, muscular liberalism,â he wrote in the Washington Post last week. âBut it is not a sensible policy today,â he wrote, partly because the US is no longer the unquestioned global power. +
++While he didnât specifically mention Trump in the piece, he argued the more economic-focused course Trump took â âmaking sure we can determine our future free of external coercion and being able to trade and invest overseas on terms that promote a broad-based national prosperityâ â would be better. +
++So no, Bidenâs foreign policy isnât nearly the same as Trumpâs. But the meme persists, it seems, mostly because Biden has yet to return the US to the Iran nuclear deal. +
++How the Iran nuclear deal keeps the myth of Biden-as-Trump alive +
++Those who argue Biden is pursuing a Trump-like foreign policy have one overriding complaint: that Biden hasnât lifted Trump-imposed sanctions on Iran as a way to return swiftly to the nuclear pact â a decision praised by Jared Kushner, Trumpâs senior adviser and son in law. +
++But Bidenâs team says the situation isnât as simple as progressives and Iran doves make it out to be. Tehran is in violation of the agreement, namely by enriching uranium at levels beyond caps outlined in the deal. Until the US can verify Iran has come back into compliance, thereâs no reason to remove the economic leverage America has. +
+/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22411553/464050403.jpg)
Kazem Ghane/IRNA/AFP/Getty Images
++Indeed, Bidenâs team feels they inherited a bad situation. After Trump withdrew the US from the pact in 2018, Iran decided to violate the deal as a way to pressure the US back into the accord. Dropping the sanctions now, some in the new administration would say, rewards Tehran for no longer abiding by the nuclear dealâs terms. +
++Hence the delay. The US would âhave to evaluate whether they were actually making good if they say they are coming back into compliance with their obligations, and then we would take it from there,â Secretary of State Tony Blinken said in his January confirmation hearing. +
++But even here thereâs a yawning gap between how Trump and Biden handle the issue. The Trump administration wanted Iran to change nearly every aspect of its foreign policy before winning sanctions relief. Biden just wants Iran to abide by the nuclear pact again, and has even proposed partial sanctions removal for partial compliance. +
++Ryan Tully, who served as a top official on Trumpâs National Security Council, confirmed his team wouldâve pursued a different course. âWe wouldnât give sanctions relief to get to the negotiating table with Iran,â he told me. +
++The US may not be back in the nuclear deal, then, but itâs at least trying to get there. âBiden is offering Tehran a way out that doesnât involve either its capitulation or collapse,â said Henry Rome, an expert on US policy toward Iran at the Eurasia Group consulting firm. âItâs a very different ballgame.â +
++âA very different ballgameâ goes not only for Bidenâs Iran policy, but his entire foreign policy. There are clearly some similarities between the last two administrations â itâs been only two months, after all â but overall, they are vastly different. +
++The network will soon feature multiple shows hosted by former Trump administration officials. +
++Fox News fancies itself, at least outside of its Hannity-style programming, as a journalistic outlet. But its recent string of hires tells a different story. +
++Despite the Trump administrationâs legacy of unrelenting dishonesty and Trumpâs recent turn against Fox, the network has hired several former Trump officials of late, basically becoming a jobs program for any former Trump aide who desires gainful employment â and ensuring that Trumpâs brand of politics will have a regular, prominent place on national television. +
++On Tuesday, the network announced that former Trump administration press secretary Kayleigh McEnany will be co-hosting the weekday afternoon Outnumbered talk show starting April 6. That announcement came just a few weeks after Fox News first hired McEnany as a contributor. As press secretary, McEnany is perhaps best remembered for castigating reporters and providing misleading spin â such as making a mockery of the Hatch Act by working for the White House and Trump campaign at the same time, and insisting that Trumpâs loss to Joe Biden was tainted by fraud when she couldnât produce a single example of an illegal ballot being cast. +
+++McEnany canât cite a single specific example of an âillegal voteâ being cast pic.twitter.com/H6ul298p1K +
+â Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 9, 2020 +