DOMICILE SWEET DOMICILE

A recent Superior Court decision to toss out charges against former Maine Maritime Academy graduates over whether their domiciles were here or elsewhere should be enough evidence to move lawmakers to pass a pending bill on the issue. The state has known for years that it needed work in this area; the ruling makes it clear that lawmakers owe it to taxpayers to act.

Justice Roland Cole dismissed charges by the state that Michael Falcone and James Jannetti, both MMA graduates, failed to file Maine income taxes between 1997 and 2002 by falsely claiming to live elsewhere. Maine statutes require tax filings from residents who are defined as being “domiciled in Maine” or, if not domiciled, has a home here and is here at least 183 days a year here, unless in the armed forces. The issue in doubt

is what “domiciled” means.

A domicile, it seems agreed, is both a permanent home and a place the taxpayer intends to return to after any period away. But from there, things get vague. Especially during the period in question, according to Justice Cole, taxpayers were asked, “to make a legal determination that courts of law found elusive, intensely circumstantial and fact-specific.” The absence or inadequacy of instruction from Maine Revenue Services made it difficult for anyone to know whether they were in compliance.

Since then, the revenue service has produced an eight-page book detailing 25 factors that must be weighed in determining whether a person’s domicile is in Maine. Rep. Glenn Cummings of Portland would make things simpler with LD 325, which instructs the state tax assessor to come up with a clear, straightforward definition to eliminate uncertainty in how the law should be applied and sets out limitations on who may be domiciled in Maine.

The bill passed in the Legislature last spring but because it includes a fiscal note of $2 million, it awaits a means to pay for it. The presence of the fiscal note, however, should tell lawmakers that the law as currently being applied is significantly harsher than desired as well as being unconstitutionally vague. Since 2000, Maine Revenue Services has aggressively targeted people it claimed were income-tax evaders, at one point asking for the records of the MMA alumni association. According to news reports, since 2003, 27 merchant marines have paid more than $1.38 million to MRS.

The revenue service has tried to explain what counts as being domiciled in Maine. But a stronger law that tells taxpayers clearly who must pay and who is exempt would avoid a lot of confrontation.

Bringing criminal charges against people to try to force them to admit they live here should not be a goal of the state.