In a New York personal income tax case involving an individual whose parents lived in a New York apartment building that he owned, the Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s judgment and held that, in order for an individual to qualify as a statutory resident, there must be some basis to conclude that the dwelling was used as the taxpayer’s residence. The Court of Appeals noted that the tax tribunal has interpreted "maintains a permanent place of abode" to mean that a taxpayer need not reside in the dwelling, but only maintain it, to qualify as a statutory resident. However, there was no rational basis for that interpretation. The legislative history of the statute, as well as the regulations, supported the view that in order for a taxpayer to have maintained a permanent place of abode in New York, the taxpayer must have a residential interest in the property.
Gaied v. New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal, New York Court of Appeals, No. 26, February 18, 2014,