Where do Austinites fed up with Austin move? (Houston, Dallas: HOA, crime)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by tom331

If you don't want to pay California state income tax because your income is higher than most of retirees, you could keep a small condo at Texas. A Texas resident does not need to pay California Income Tax.

Not true. California taxes part year residents for all income earned while resident in California, and for all income from California sources no matter where resident. If you own property in California, you ARE a resident every day you occupy it.

If you haven't dealt with the FTB, you are in for a rude awakening about aggressive enforcement.

[G Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by scm53

Not true. California taxes part year residents for all income earned while resident in California, and for all income from California sources no matter where resident. If you own property in California, you ARE a resident every day you occupy it.

If you haven't dealt with the FTB, you are in for a rude awakening about aggressive enforcement.

True. We left CA with our house still unsold. We were residents of Texas for 9 months before it did, and it was only after the sale that we could withdraw from CA income taxes being witheld and paid.

[tom331]

Originally Posted by scm53

Not true. California taxes part year residents for all income earned while resident in California, and for all income from California sources no matter where resident. If you own property in California, you ARE a resident every day you occupy it.

If you haven't dealt with the FTB, you are in for a rude awakening about aggressive enforcement.

This apply to California resident who bought a property at another state and spend part time at another state. For someone never claim as California resident, living part time in California does not pay California state income tax if they keep their original state as home state.

[centralaustinite]

Originally Posted by tom331

This apply to California resident who bought a property at another state and spend part time at another state. For someone never claim as California resident, living part time in California does not pay California state income tax if they keep their original state as home state.

My spouse is a Texas resident who spends more than 90 working days a year in CA, he has to pay CA state tax on that income!! Not fun.

[tom331]

Originally Posted by centralaustinite

My spouse is a Texas resident who spends more than 90 working days a year in CA, he has to pay CA state tax on that income!! Not fun.

Yes, if you work at California, you need to pay California state income tax. However, if you don't work there and you don't such as travelling in California.

[Aquitaine]

All I'd add here is to take with a grain of salt statements like 'prices in Austin are inflated' or 'yes the housing index is inaccurate.'

A housing index is never going to be perfect, but you can look at the methodology. You can identify exceptions and areas where the index isn't going to apply as well by looking at how they weight different things (or whether they weight them at at all). They are, at least, putting a system out there that you can criticize and adjust for its imperfections.

"IMO San Diego is cheaper" is not a system. It's a statement supported by somebody's gut feeling. Doesn't mean it isn't right, but without an actual analysis - you know, evidence - it's just talk.

Same thing with "Austin prices are inflated." What people really mean here is "they are higher than I want them to be," or, alternatively, "they are higher than they were X number of years ago." In a very obvious, literal sense, they have been "inflated" from previous years, but they are not inflated in the sense that they are higher than they should be.

Prices are what they are, and the only way they're inflated is if some governing entity makes it possible to bite off more than you chew by providing over-easy access to money. If I can suddenly borrow half a million bucks on an income of $50k, that will inflate prices, because the supply of people with $500k to buy a house has just been artificially raised - and not actually raised, so that you're laying track for things to explode down the line.

People moving to Austin by the bucketload and paying cash for houses increases demand but it doesn't inflate anything artificially; that's real money that's being paid, not an empty promise on a government-insured loan.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by tom331

This apply to California resident who bought a property at another state and spend part time at another state. For someone never claim as California resident, living part time in California does not pay California state income tax if they keep their original state as home state.

Have you ever lived in California? Had any dealings with the FTB? Ever tried your strategy of avoiding California part year resident taxes -- because I promise you, that position will be their entering argument. That you are a tax avoider, with penalties and interest to show for it. They are THE most aggressive state tax entity in the country. I have the legal fees, and a paid bill to show for it -- not because I was avoiding anything, but because they simply wouldn't give.

The only "home state" exemption is that offered to military members assigned to California who maintain their home of record exclusion under the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act. Doesn't apply here.

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

//www.city-data.com/forum/seatt...t-seattle.html

I visited Seattle for a week one summer and thought it was an amazingly beautiful city. The sun shone almost every day all day while I was there. Unfortunatly, I was told by the locals that rarely happens.

The biggest thing that I do not like about Seattle is that the sun rarely shines:

I know Austin COL has gone up, but it probably is still not anywhere close to San Diego.

Mar. 2012 cost of living index in San Diego: 131.3
Mar. 2012 cost of living index in Seattle: 116.6
Mar. 2012 cost of living index in Austin: 95.8
Mar. 2012 cost of living index in St. Petersburg: 94.1

The cost of living calculator on those City-Data web pages says that if you had an income of $50,000 in Austin, you would need $61,744 to match it in Seattle.

You would need $69,317 in San Diego or $50,419 in St. Pete.

Originally Posted by ctr88

I'm not sure I agree with you on San Diego and housing costs vs. Austin. I lived there for 7 years and rented and owned and still own property there, and moved to Seattle in 2013. I think if you look at the Austin older core areas, it is on par with rents and housing prices in San Diego. And you have a 1% property tax in SD vs. 2.2% in Austin. San Diego has expensive areas like La Jolla, Del Mar that have multi-million dollar houses, but that is not most of San Diego. But in CA you do have a high state income tax which makes CA more expensive. But housing costs are pretty much on par for the most part in Austin vs. SD. Austin you might be able to go far out to the burbs and get cheaper housing than you could far away from SD.

I also don't agree with Seattle being more expensive. That is the trouble with those calculators, they are often not very accurate.

Well... If you look at what I posted, I didn't actually say anything specifically about housing costs. But I am very skeptical of your opinion on that subject since you offer nothing but your own subjective observations. Which for most people are a whole lot less reliable than the hard data that I'm referencing in my posts. I could post lots more showing that you are wrong in regard to housing costs, but that is already pretty obvious to anyone who looks into it.

[tom331]

Originally Posted by scm53

Have you ever lived in California? Had any dealings with the FTB? Ever tried your strategy of avoiding California part year resident taxes -- because I promise you, that position will be their entering argument. That you are a tax avoider, with penalties and interest to show for it. They are THE most aggressive state tax entity in the country. I have the legal fees, and a paid bill to show for it -- not because I was avoiding anything, but because they simply wouldn't give.

The only "home state" exemption is that offered to military members assigned to California who maintain their home of record exclusion under the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act. Doesn't apply here.

Yes. I was living at SCal and moved to Texas in early 80s. When avoiding tax becomes illegal? People exercise their right daily to avoid paying the tax by shopping on line; investing their money in 401K/Roth IRA; donating money to the charities; paying less property tax by downsizing or moving to lower property tax areas. Are they subjected to some sort of penalty from taking these legal activities?

[tom331]

Originally Posted by scm53

Have you ever lived in California? Had any dealings with the FTB? Ever tried your strategy of avoiding California part year resident taxes -- because I promise you, that position will be their entering argument. That you are a tax avoider, with penalties and interest to show for it. They are THE most aggressive state tax entity in the country. I have the legal fees, and a paid bill to show for it -- not because I was avoiding anything, but because they simply wouldn't give.

The only "home state" exemption is that offered to military members assigned to California who maintain their home of record exclusion under the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act. Doesn't apply here.

Here is what I found from other in the forum:

"You are required to file a Nonresident or Part-Year Resident Income Tax Return (Long of Short Form 540NR) with California if you have income from California sources, such as, rental income, income from the sale of property, or partnership income in 2008....."

I don't think part time or even full time residents need to pay California state income tax if who do not have income from California source. I believe that this situation would apply to most of the retirees from the outside of California.