Taxpayers protest the denial of their refund and argue that
they became residents of Washington on February 1, 2010, when they began living
there. The Department determined that Taxpayers were Indiana residents for all
of 2010 because they maintained Indiana driver's licenses, had both of their
cars registered in Indiana, and owned a home in Indiana. Taxpayers argue that
they never changed their licenses, reregistered their cars, or sold their home
because they were intending on returning to Indiana and that they were only in
Washington for a temporary job assignment.
Pursuant to IC § 6-3-1-12, a resident is defined as ... (a) any individual
who was domiciled in this state during the taxable year, or (b) any individual
who maintains a permanent place of residence in this state and spends more than
one hundred eighty-three (183) days of the taxable year within this state, or
(c) any estate of a deceased person defined in (a) or (b), or (d) any trust
which has a situs within this state.
…
Taxpayers argue that they were not Indiana residents because
they only spent thirty-four days in Indiana in 2010. Taxpayers' argument
satisfies IC § 6-3-1-12(b), but their argument does not address the issue of
their domicile (IC § 6-3-1-12(a)).
Domicile is defined by 45 IAC
3.1-1-22, which states: "Domicile" Defined. For the purposes of this Act,
a person has only one domicile at a given time even though that person
maintains more than one residence at that time. Once a domicile has been
established, it remains until the conditions necessary for a change of domicile
occur.
In order to establish a new domicile, the person must be
physically present at a place, and must have the simultaneous intent of
establishing a home at that place. It is not necessary that the person intend
to remain there until death; however, if the person, at the time of moving to
the new location, has definite plans to leave that new location, then no new
domicile has been established.
…
In other words, a new domicile is not necessarily created
when an individual moves to a new state. Instead, the individual must move to a
new state and have intent to remain in that state.
In this case, Taxpayers moved to Washington for a temporary
job assignment. Taxpayers stated that they always intended to return to Indiana
once the job was completed. This statement alone is enough to show that
Taxpayers were domiciled in Indiana. However, when applying the factors to
determine domicile, Taxpayers' actions demonstrate further their intent to
return to Indiana. In 2010, Taxpayers held Indiana driver's licenses,
maintained a home in Indiana, had their cars registered in Indiana, and were
registered to vote in Indiana. Furthermore, Taxpayers maintained homestead tax
benefits for their home in Indiana.
…
Accordingly, by accepting the homestead tax benefits for
their Indiana home, Taxpayers' stated that their "principal place of
residence" was located in Indiana for 2010. From all these facts, it is
clear that Taxpayers were domiciled in Indiana in 2010. Therefore, regardless
of the number of days Taxpayers were in Indiana for 2010, the Taxpayers were
still Indiana residents. Therefore, Taxpayers were residents of Indiana for
2010 and their refund denial was proper.
