New Hampshire Files Reply Brief Before US Supreme Court
Concord, NH — New Hampshire filed a reply brief in the United States Supreme Court which pushes back on Massachusetts’ position that the Supreme Court should not hear this case. However, New Hampshire remains steadfast in its fight against Massachusetts for illegally taxing New Hampshire residents who work remotely for Massachusetts companies.
“Massachusetts’ current position is a far cry from our country’s rallying call of ‘no taxation without representation,’ – which they seem to have forgotten originated in their state,” said Governor Chris Sununu. “We remain confident that the Supreme Court of the United States will take up this case of national importance and that the State of New Hampshire will prevail.”
The reply brief responds to three ways in which Massachusetts attempts to downplay the seriousness of New Hampshire’s claim.
- First, Massachusetts contends that the Tax Rule does not impede any tax policy New Hampshire desires to implement. It is perhaps unsurprising that a State that has taken a fundamentally different fiscal approach would fail to appreciate that New Hampshire’s rejection of broad-based taxation is central to its sovereign identity. But New Hampshire’s sovereign interests are no less serious merely because Massachusetts may think its own policies are preferable.
- Second, Massachusetts contends that the Tax Rule merely maintains the status quo because Massachusetts continues to impose an income tax on nonresidents solely for Massachusetts-sourced income. In fact, Massachusetts has radically redefined what constitutes Massachusetts-sourced income in order to tax earnings for work performed entirely outside its borders. This does not maintain the status quo. It upends it.
- Third, Massachusetts insists that the Tax Rule addresses a temporary problem. Yet even in the short time New Hampshire’s motion has been pending, Massachusetts has extended the Tax Rule indefinitely. And, as amici demonstrate, this is an issue of national importance certain to survive the current pandemic.
Note: A full copy of the reply brief can be found here.
Note: In addition, two groups of states, several taxpayer organizations and a legal expert have filed “amicus” -- a friend-of-the court briefs in support of New Hampshire’s position. They can be found here