Dual Residents: A Sur-Reply to Zelinsky

7 Pages Posted: 14 Feb 2018 Last revised: 20 Feb 2018

See all articles by Michael S. Knoll

Michael S. Knoll

University of Pennsylvania Law School; University of Pennsylvania Wharton School -- Real Estate Department

Ruth Mason

University of Virginia School of Law

Date Written: January 15, 2018

Abstract

In this article, we respond to Professor Zelinsky’s criticism of our arguments regarding the constitutionality of New York’s tax residence rule. We argue that the Supreme Court’s decision in Wynne requires reconsideration of the New York Court of Appeal’s decision in Tamagni.

Keywords: Constitutional law, state income taxation, dormant commerce clause, Comptroller of the Treasury v. Wynne, internal consistency test, subsidies, residence rules, double taxation, discriminatory taxation

JEL Classification: H20, H71, K34

Suggested Citation

Knoll, Michael S. and Mason, Ruth, Dual Residents: A Sur-Reply to Zelinsky (January 15, 2018). State Tax Notes, P. 269, January 15, 2018; U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 18-4; Virginia Law and Economics Research Paper No. 2018-01. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3082430

Michael S. Knoll (Contact Author)

University of Pennsylvania Law School ( email )

3501 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States
215-898-6190 (Phone)
215-573-2025 (Fax)

University of Pennsylvania Wharton School -- Real Estate Department ( email )

Philadelphia, PA 19104-6330
United States

Ruth Mason

University of Virginia School of Law ( email )

580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
46
Abstract Views
494
PlumX Metrics