move to vancouver to take advantage of no income tax? (money, pay)

[texasdiver]

Originally Posted by diver110

I am not a SALT specialist, but I have been told that .gGenerally, if you live in two states, the state where you spend the most time is where you will be deemed to reside and taxed, especially if you are there over 6 months. If you live in three states, none over 6 months, it is where you are "domiciled" that counts as your residence, i.e. where you pick to be your primary residence. If your employer is located exclusively in Portland, based on what I have been told, your income will be subject to OR taxes.

I don't know how it works for everyone, but I can tell you how it works for my wife.

She works for large regional medical group that has hospitals and clinics on both sides of the river. Her main place of employment is a clinic in Vancouver and since we live in Camas there is no income tax owed to Oregon, even though the Headquarters of my wife's organization in in central Portland and her paychecks and W2s come with a Portland address on them.

However, from time to time she has occasional meetings and trainings on the OR side of the river for which she gets paid. It might be a medical training conference of some type, or it might just be an all-hands staff meeting or in-house training. Sometimes she gets on leadership committees and such that meet on the OR side of the river. Her employer keeps track of every single hour that they they pay her for work on the OR side of the river, even if it is just some sort of long lunch-meeting. And they report all of those hours to the OR department of Revenue with tax withholding to OR out of those portions of her paycheck. Over the course of the year she has been averaging about 30 hours per year of income from OR. I have just let it slide and haven't filed in OR (you aren't required to under a certain income limit) even though filing would probably get her a few $ back. Maybe about $50 when last checked. If she gets promoted and spends more time in OR then we will have to start filing in OR for real. It's like the Feds. They take the tax out of your paycheck and you have to file to get it back.

Bottom line? You only get charged OR income tax for work that you physically do in OR, regardless of where your employer's address is. At least big employers with work locations on both sides of the river are long accustomed to keeping it all straight. A smaller employer maybe not so much.

[diver110]

I mostly agree with the last two posts. The key is not having to work from OR. But if you live in WA and commute for work in Portland, you will pay OR taxes.

[gstead245]

If I do make the decision the employer would be in vancouver washington. I will find housing in vancouver washington and if I want to buy anything I will travel to portland for my spending habits. I was looking at my tax savings alone on a calculator it would be 6600 I would save a year. This is alot when housing prices are pretty similar and you add this in the course of multiple years. I don't see much of a disadvantage as I live in the southern part of oregon. I will be closer to a bigger city, i will save lots in taxes, I don't know much about the vancouver area tho.

[texasdiver]

Originally Posted by gstead245

If I do make the decision the employer would be in vancouver washington. I will find housing in vancouver washington and if I want to buy anything I will travel to portland for my spending habits. I was looking at my tax savings alone on a calculator it would be 6600 I would save a year. This is alot when housing prices are pretty similar and you add this in the course of multiple years. I don't see much of a disadvantage as I live in the southern part of oregon. I will be closer to a bigger city, i will save lots in taxes, I don't know much about the vancouver area tho.

You will quickly get sick of braving the traffic and driving across the river for every little thing. No one does that when there are Wal-Marts, Costcos, Targets, and Fred Meyers conveniently located across Vancouver. It isn't worth crossing the river for ordinary shopping.

But when it comes to big ticket items like a new flat screen or new appliances, or a new iPhone then yes, people drive across the river to OR to shop. There is a reason why Ikea, Best Buy, and the Apple Store are on the OR side of the river.

[SusVelo]

Originally Posted by texasdiver

You will quickly get sick of braving the traffic and driving across the river for every little thing. No one does that when there are Wal-Marts, Costcos, Targets, and Fred Meyers conveniently located across Vancouver. It isn't worth crossing the river for ordinary shopping.

But when it comes to big ticket items like a new flat screen or new appliances, or a new iPhone then yes, people drive across the river to OR to shop. There is a reason why Ikea, Best Buy, and the Apple Store are on the OR side of the river.

I mostly agree with this, but hitting Cascade Station up on a weekday evening isn't really a bother traffic wise.

[Procyon73]

Originally Posted by TheOrca

Washington has no income tax

Incorrect. Starting in 2019, Washingtonians started paying into the Family and Medical Leave stuff. This is .4% of one's income. It's "sold" as employee pays 2/3 of that and employer 1/3, but in reality the employee pays it all as it is part of the cost to the employer of the employee.

Starting in 2022, Washingtonians will start paying a .58% tax for Long Term Care, unless one obtains long term care on their own and requests to be exempted. The problem is, .58% is likely far cheaper than any private offering can deliver. Still, for an individual earning $50,000 income, that is $290/year. If you earn a lot more, naturally, you pay a lot more, there is no cap as there is with Social Security.

This is a terrible scam for younger people as the chances of them needing long term care are almost 0. The MAXIMUM "benefit" payout for WA LTC legislation is $36,500. If one were to invest that .58% on their own in the S&P500 (assume 10% yearly gains), they would blow that $36,500 away, easily. This is assuming they don't invest more as their income grows. (https://www.investor.gov/financial-t...est-calculator)

Sure it might sound like a great idea, but young people will be paying into an "insurance" that they really don't need to buy into until their late 50s or early 60s (Dave Ramsey recommends looking into LTC insurance around age 60). It's heavily fleecing younger people.

In essence, WA has managed to take Social Security and make it much, much worse for anyone that works and earns an income.

So, while WA is still better than OR from an income tax standpoint, you still will be paying about 1% of your income in income taxes in WA, except WA just calls it a "payroll tax".

WA has gone bluer and bluer with each election, so expect taxation on "payroll" to continue and expand.

[izzy2017]

Originally Posted by Procyon73

Incorrect. Starting in 2019, Washingtonians started paying into the Family and Medical Leave stuff. This is .4% of one's income. It's "sold" as employee pays 2/3 of that and employer 1/3, but in reality the employee pays it all as it is part of the cost to the employer of the employee.

Starting in 2022, Washingtonians will start paying a .58% tax for Long Term Care, unless one obtains long term care on their own and requests to be exempted. The problem is, .58% is likely far cheaper than any private offering can deliver. Still, for an individual earning $50,000 income, that is $290/year. If you earn a lot more, naturally, you pay a lot more, there is no cap as there is with Social Security.

This is a terrible scam for younger people as the chances of them needing long term care are almost 0. The MAXIMUM "benefit" payout for WA LTC legislation is $36,500. If one were to invest that .58% on their own in the S&P500 (assume 10% yearly gains), they would blow that $36,500 away, easily. This is assuming they don't invest more as their income grows. (https://www.investor.gov/financial-t...est-calculator)

Sure it might sound like a great idea, but young people will be paying into an "insurance" that they really don't need to buy into until their late 50s or early 60s (Dave Ramsey recommends looking into LTC insurance around age 60). It's heavily fleecing younger people.

In essence, WA has managed to take Social Security and make it much, much worse for anyone that works and earns an income.

So, while WA is still better than OR from an income tax standpoint, you still will be paying about 1% of your income in income taxes in WA, except WA just calls it a "payroll tax".

WA has gone bluer and bluer with each election, so expect taxation on "payroll" to continue and expand.

We were just able to secure a LTC policy to avoid the new WA tax. Bankers Trust at $27 a month. Depending on your income, it makes sense and at least you can take it with you should you leave the state.

[Procyon73]

Originally Posted by izzy2017

We were just able to secure a LTC policy to avoid the new WA tax. Bankers Trust at $27 a month. Depending on your income, it makes sense and at least you can take it with you should you leave the state.

$27/month makes sense for anyone making more than $55,862/year.

What are your ages? Is the $27 per person or for both of you?

[izzy2017]

Just for my husband because I’m self employed and don’t have to pay the new tax. He’s 44 and healthy.

ETA there is a discount for spouses, I think our quote was around $56 for both of us, women are generally more expensive because we live longer.

[SusVelo]

Originally Posted by izzy2017

We were just able to secure a LTC policy to avoid the new WA tax. Bankers Trust at $27 a month. Depending on your income, it makes sense and at least you can take it with you should you leave the state.

Bankers Trust, the bank in Iowa?