The auditor's protest resulted in the resignation of the taxpayer's membership. Auditors have also questioned why taxpayers continue to use their previous CPAs and doctors in New York if they have moved to another state. While these visits should count as days in and out of New York, they should not be considered as evidence for or against New York domicile since these aid the New York economy. While the guidelines indicate that New York should encourage former New York domiciliaries to return for visits, shopping trips, ect. For example, if the taxpayer retains his New York place of abode, visits his children or grandchildren, and keeps one bank account or brokerage account in New York, the agent contends the taxpayer is still domiciled in New York although he has 30 or 40 different connections to Florida.
Auditors automatically request all documentation to develop a case.
They seemingly presume in advance that taxpayers have not changed their domicile and abandomed New York. Unlike the IRS whose goal is to settle cases, New York's objective seems to be take cases to court. For example, there was a matter with a New York State attorney who wanted to settle a case but the agent would not agree to a settlement. It took many months for the practitioner to convince the New York State attorney that it was in the best interests of the taxpayer and New York State to settle the case. The experience of practitioners is that agents frequently take unyielding positionf no matter how much documentation indicating the taxpayer's domicile is in Florida, is furnished them because the taxpayer retains a New York residence and maintains a few minor contacts with New York.