3 Big Questions After High Court Punts In Remote Worker Row

David Nagle and Caroline Kupiec were quoted in the article, "3 Big Questions After High Court Punts In Remote Worker Row," which was published by Law360 [sub. req.] on July 1, 2021.

The article discusses issues raised after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review New Hampshire v. Massachusetts, New Hampshire's tax complaint against neighboring Massachusetts for its regulation that imposes income tax on workers who have worked remotely as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

If the complaint were to continue, New Hampshire residents might still have some options via action before the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board or Massachusetts Superior Court, which Caroline notes may carry some risks for residents. "They would be bringing a broad facial claim and there's a higher hurdle," she says. "You have to exhaust your administrative remedies, present an issue of law without pending questions of fact, have [a case of] great public significance."

David suggests that workers filing suit in Massachusetts courts could file a tax complaint that the tax agency has overstepped, citing Massachusetts' nonresident income statute. "If I'm an employee, and I'm working from my home in New Hampshire, can I really be treated as carrying out my business as an employee in the commonwealth," he says. "And so the question is whether or not the regulation the DOR issued goes beyond the scope of what's permitted under the statute."