Get documents about "Affidavit of Facr for Sworn Statement - PDF
W
Description
Affidavit of Facr for Sworn Statement document sample
Document Sample
STATEOF NEIdYORK
STATETAX COMMISSION
In the Matter of the Petition
of
Robert Shorin
AFFIDAVITOF MAITING
for Redetermination of a Deficiency or a Revision
of a Deternination or a Refund of
Personal Income Tax
under Article 22 of the Tax Law
for the Year 1971.
State of New York
County of Albany
Jay Vredenburg, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is an employee
of the Department of Taxation and Finance, over 18 years of age, and that on the
1.9th day of October, 7979, he served the within notice of Decision by certified
mail upon Robert Shorin, the petitioner in the within proceeding, by enclosing a
true copy thereof in a securely sealed postpaid wrapper addressed as follows:
Robert Shorin
1111 Crandon Blvd.
M i a mi B e a ch , F L 3 3 1 49
and by depositing same enclosed in a postpaid properly addressed wrapper in a
(post office or official depository) under the exclusive care and custodv of the
United States Postal Service within the State of New York.
That deponent further says that the said addressee is the petitioner herein
and that the address set forth on said wrapper is the last known address of the
pet.itioner.
Sworn to before me this
(--l reun dq.Y
19th da_yof October, 1979.
/r@
STATE OF NEhI YORK
STATE TAX COMMISSION
fn the Matter of the Petition
of
Robert Shorin
AT'FIDAVIT IIAIIING
OF
for Redetermination of a Deficiency or a Revision
of a Determination or a Refund of
Personal Income Tax
under Article 22 of the Tax Law
for the Year 1971.
State of New York
County of Albany
Jay Vredenburg, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is an employee
of the Department of Taxation and Finance, over 18 years of age, and that on the
19th day of October, L979, he served the within notice of Decision by certified
mail upon Stephen J. Krass the representative of the petitioner in the within
proceeding, by enclosing a true copy thereof in a securely sealed postpaid
vrapper addressed as follows:
Mr. Stephen J. Krass
562 Fifth Ave.
New York, l{Y 10036
and by depositing sameenclosed in a postpaid properly addressed wrapper in a
(post office or official depository) under the exclusive care and custody of the
United States Postal Service within the State of Newyork.
That deponent further says that the said addressee is the representative of
the petitioner herein and that the address set forth on said lrrapper is the last
known address of the representative o
Sworn to before me this
S T A T E O F N E WY O R K
STATE TAX COMMISSION
A L B A N Y , N E WY O R K 1 2 2 2 7
0ctober 19, I979
Robert Shorin
1111 Crandon Blvd.
Miami Beach, FL 33L49
Dear Mr. Shorin:
Please take notice of the Decision of the State Tax Commission enclosed
herewith.
You have now exhausted your right of review at the administrative level.
Pursuant to section(s) IZZ of the Tax Law, any proceeding in court to review
an adverse decision by the State Tax Commission can only be instituted under
Article 78 of the Civil Practice laws and Rules, and rnust be comrnencedin the
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Albany County, within 4 months from
the date of this notice.
Inquiries concerning the computation of tax due or refund allowed in
accordance with this decision may be addressed to:
NYS Dept. Taxation and Finance
Deputy Commissioner and Counsel
Albany, New York 12227
Phone # (518) 457-6?40
Very truly yours,
STATETAX COMMISSION
Petitioner' s Representative
Stephen J. Krass
562 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10036
Taxing Bureau' s Representative
STATE OF NEW YORK
STATE TAX COMMISSION
In the llatter of the Petition
of
ROBERT SHORIN DECISION
for Redetermination of a Deficiency or for
Refund of Personal Income Tax under A r t i c l e
23 of the Tax Law for the Year L97L
Petitioner, Robert Shorin, l1l1 Crandon Boulevard, Miami
Beach, Florida 33L49, filed a petition for redetermination of a
deficiency or for refund of personal income tax under Article 23
of tlre Tax Law for the vear L97L (File No. L2389).
A formal hearing was held before George F. Murphy, Hearing
Officer, dt the offices of the State Tax Conrnission, Two Inlorld
Trade Center, New York, New York, oD March 9, L977 at 10:45 A.M.
Petitioner appeared by Stephen J. Krass, Esq. The Income Tax
Bureau appeared by Peler Crotty, Esq. (Richard Kaufman, Esq., of
counsel) .
ISSUE
lfhether petitioner was a resident of New York State during
all of L97I.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On September 20, L972, petitioner, Robert Shorin, and h i s
wife Arlene Shorin, filed a New York State Combined Income Tax
-2
Return for L97L. 0n said return, petitioner indicated a period
of New York residence from January l, through July 31, L97L, and
reported income taxable to New York State for said period only.
2. On September 5, L975, the Income Tax Bureau issued a
Statement of Audit Changes against petitioner and his wife,
asserting additional personal income tax for L97L of $3,678.42,
plus interest of $748.37, for a toLal of $4,426.79. This was
done on the grounds that they were both "taxable as resident tax-
payers of l{ew York for the entire year." Since Arlene Shorin's
recomputed itrse111s
r,rrastoo small to yield an additional tax due,
her name was subsequently stricken from said Statement of Audit
Changes. Accordingly, a Notice of Deficiency was issued aginst
petitioner, Robert Shorin, oo September 5, L975.
3. On or about July l, L97L, petitioner, (who was a long-
time employee of Topps Chewing Gum, Incorporated ("Topps"), a
l{ew York based corporation) was assigned to Europe by his employer,
for the purpose of investigating the potential market there. The
record is void of any information concerning where he resided for
the three-month period comrnencing with his arrival in Europe;
however, from October l, L97L through SepLember 30, L972, peti-
tioner leased a furnished apartment in Brussels, Belgium. I,trhile
petitioner was in Europe, his wife and children remained in New
York, residing in their house in Syosset, New York.
4. On December 1, L97I, petitioner's wife leased their
Syosset house for a nineteen-month period ending June 30, Lg73.
At this time, she and her children joined petitioner in Brussels.
-3
All of petitioner's furniture remained in the Syosset house. Sub-
sequent to the expiration of said lease, petitioner leased the
Syosset house again Lo different individuals, as a furnished
dwelling for the period July 15, L973 through July 31, L975.
Under the terms of this lease, the landlord (petitioner herein)
was responsible for the maintenance of all equipment, including
the central air conditioner, washer, drier, oil burner, etc.
5. Sometime in L972, petitioner ended his employment with
Topps and returned to the United States, whereupon he set up
residence in a leased apartment in the State of Florida.
6. Petitioner, Robert Shorin, contends that his intention
at the Lime of his removal from New York was to remain permanently
in Brussels, Belgium. He purports that his wife's closing all
charge accounts prior to joining him supports such a contention.
CONCLUSIONSOF LAW
A. That section 605(a) of the Tax Law provides, in part:
(a) Resident individual. A resident individual
means an individualt (1) who is domiciled in this
state, unless he maintains no permanent place of
abode in this state, maintains a permanent place of
abode elsewhere, and spends in the aggregate not more
than thirty days of the taxable year in this state...
The regulations contain similar provisions ( 2 0 N Y C R RL 0 2 . 2 ( b ) ) .
B. That "a domicile once established continues until the
person in question moves to a new location with the bona fide inten-
tion of making his fixed and permanent home there." (20 NYCRR
I02.2(d) 2). Petitioner, Robert Shorin, has not sustained the
burden of proof imposed by section 689 (e) of the Tax Law, which
requires him to show that he changed his domicile from New York to
-4
Belgium during L97L; accordingly, he is deemed to have been
domiciled in New York for all of L97L.
C. That since petitioner, Robert Shorin, was domiciled in
New York and did not meet the criteria for exeeption set forth
in section 605(a)(1) of t h e T a x L a w a n d 2 0 N Y C R RL 0 2 . 2 ( b ) , he was
a resident of New York for tax purposes for al1 of L97L.
D. Thar the petition of Robert Shorin is hereby denied and
the Notice of Deficiencv issued September 5, L975 is sustained'
DATED: Albany, New York STATE TAX COMMISSION
00T1 e 1979
tf,!| I\bwlbrk State Eleear+rnent of
f ilf TA;q4tlCtN and FINANGE
1|gl ux r
r o . . . . , . . . P . a u lC . e b u r n
.
Please fi1e.
ST]ORT\T
uf , I v I LI l \ t
RORF'.RT
r LV!!f L-
October 20, I9T9
M-75(s/76) F r o mR o b e r tF . M u l l i g o n
ffi.
I
A
; \:.-------__
-':
t'a)
g
o
c
E;E-N
i.gag'
HE36z
E!IIH;
$H€T i
ix*
S T A T E O F N E WY O R K
STATE TAX COMMISSION
A L B A N Y , N E WY O R K 1 2 2 2 7
October 19, 1979
Robert. Shorin
1111 Crandon Blvd.
Miami Beach, FL 33149
Dear Mr. Shorin:
P1ease take notice of the Decision of the State Tax Commission enclosed
herewith.
You have now exhausted your right of review at the administrative level.
Pursuant to section(s) IZZ of the Tax Lawr atry proceeding in court to review
an adverse decision by the State Tax Comrnission can only be instituted under
Article 78 of the Civil Practice Laws and Ru1es, and must be conmenced in the
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Albany County, within 4 months from
the date of this notice.
Inquiries concerning the computation of tax due or refund allowed in
accordance with this decision may be addressed to:
NYS Dept. Taxation and Finance
D e p u t y C o m m i s s i o n e ra n d C o u n s e l
Albany, New York 12227
Phone # (518) 457-624A
Very truly yours,
STATETAX COMMISSION
Petitioner' s Representative
Stephen J. Krass
562 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10036
Taxing Bureau' s Representative
,l
STATE OF I{EW YORK
STATE TA,\ CCi,C.TISSIOI.I
In the l{atter of the Petition
or
ROBERT SHORIN DECISIOT{
for Redeternination of a Deficiency or for
Refund of Personal Income Tax under Article
2 3 o f t h e T a c L a r ^ rf o r t h e Y e a r L 9 7 L .
Petitioner, Robert Shorin, 1l1l Crandon Boulevard, l'liarqi
Beach, Florida 33L49, filed a petition for redetermination of a
deficienc! or r-"or refund of personal income tax under Article 23
o f t h e ? a : . .L a r . r f o r the ;rear L97L (File No. 12339).
A formal hearing was held before George F. l{urph'r, liearing
Officer, &t the offices of the StaLe Tax Conrnission, Two l'Jorld
Trad.e Center, i d e w Y o r i t , I ' I e r "Y o r l t ,
* on liarch 9, Lg77 at l0:45 A.ll.
Petitioner appeared by Stephen J. Krass, Esq. The Incorne Tax
Bureau appeared b.v Peter Crott-7, Esq. (Richard Kaufnan, Esq., of
counsel).
ISSUE
Inlhether petitioner r,ras a resident of l{evr York State during
all of L97L
Fr*DTNGS oF FAcr
l. Cn Septenber 20, L972, petitioner, Robert Shorin, and his
wife Arlene Shorin, filed a llew York State Conbined Income Tax
-2
R.eturn for Lg7L. On said return, petitioner indicated a period
of i'ieviYork residence frorn Januarlr l, through July 31, L97L, and
reported income taxable to l'trew ork State
Y for said period only.
2. On September 5, L975, the Income Tax Bureau issued a
Statement of Audit Changes against petitioner and his wife,
asserting additional personal incone tax for L97L of $3,678-42,
plus interest of $748.37, f.or a total cf $4,425.79. This rvas
d.one on the grounds that they were both "ta:<able as resident tax-
palrers of l{ew York for the entire year." Since Arlene Shorin's
recomputed income was too smal1 to yield an additional tax due,
her name was subsequently stricken from said Statenent of Auoit
Ciranges. Accordingly, a l{otice of Deficiency lvas issued aginsL
petitioner, Robert Shorin, on September 5, L975.
3' on or about July l' L97L' petition'er' (t'rho was a long-
tine ernployee of Tolps Cher,;ing Gr:rn, Incorporated ("Topos"), a
i{ew York based corporation) was assigned to Europe by his eniployer,
for the puroose of investigating the potential rnarket there. The
record is void of any information coneerning '.chere he resided for
the three-month period conrnencing r.rith his arrival in Europe;
however, from October 1, L97L through Septemi:er 30, L972, peti-
tioner leased a furnished apartment in Brussels, Belgium. I^Ihile
petitioner r"ras in Europe, hisl^riie and children rernained in |Teqr
York, residing in their house in Syosset, New York.
4. On Decernber 1, L97L, petitioner's rvife leased their
Syosset house for a nineteen-nonth period ending June 30, L973.
At this time, she and her children joined petitioner in Brussels.
-3
All of petitioner's furniture remained in rhe Slrosset hcuse. Sub-
sequent to Che expiration of saiC lease, petitioner leased the
Syosset house again to different individuals, as a furnished
dwelling for the period July 15, L973 through July 31, L975.
Under the terms of this lease, the landlord (petitioner herein)
was responsible for the maintenance of all equipment, including
the central air conditioner, rnrasher, drier, oil burner' etc.
5. Sometime in L972, petitioner ended his employment with
Topps and returned to the United States, whereupon he set up
residence in a leased apartment in the State of Florida.
6. Petitioner, Robert Shorin, contends that his intention
at the time of his removal from New York was to remain permanently
in Brussels, Belgium. He purports that his wife's closing all
charge accounLs prior to joining him supports such a contention.
C0NCLUSIOI{S OF L.{Ini
That section 605(a) of the Tax Law provides, in part:
(a) Resident individual. A resident individual
means an individual ' (1) who is <ioniciled in this
state, unless he maintains no permanent place of
abode in this state, maintains-a permanent place of
abode elsewhere, and spends in the aggregate not more
than thirty days of the taxable year in this state-..
The regulations contain similar provisions ( 2 0 N Y C R R1 0 2 . 2 ( b ) ) .
B. That "a domicile once established continues until the
person in question noves to a new location rvith the bona fide inten-
Lion of making iris fixed and permanent home there." (20 I{YCRR
102.2(d) 2). Petitioner, Robert Shorin, has not sustained the
burden of proof imposed by section 689 (e) of the Tax Law, which
requires him to show that he changed his domiciLe from New York to
ar
-lL
Belgium d,uring L97L; accordingly, he is deemed to have been
domiciled York for
in l'trer,i all of 1971.
c. That since petitioner, Robert Shorin, \ , t r a sd o m i c i l e d in
i'iew York and did not r.ieet the criteria for exception set forth
in secrion 505(a)(1) o f t h e T a x L a r , r a n d 2 0 i l Y C r . PL 0 2 . 2 ( b ) ,
. he was
a resiCent of litrerYork for
v tax purposes for all of L97L.
D. That the petition of F,oberL Shorin is hereby denied and
the I'lotice of Deficiency issued September 5, L975 is sustained'
DA.TED: Albany, llew Yorlc STATE TAX CCI'$llSSIOii
00T1 I 1979 l\ /
ifue" \Yr:il-;ul-^-
PRXSIDEI'JT '
Related docs
