I know NY if you land on a plane at 2355 they consider that 1 day in the state.
I worked for a company out of New York for a few years & never paid the state of New York a penny.
For people living in non-state-income tax states like myself, perhaps it’s a good idea to put 3-5% of your income from each day while in state waters away in a separate investment account? If a state says that you owe them money then you have the funds earmarked, if not, you’ll have more money for retirement.
Also, I worked with a guy once who kept track of where he was each day for tax reasons. That’s probably not a bad idea either in case a state does want to hunt down mariners travelling through their waters. When the state of Louisiana went after me it was impossible for my ex-employer & myself to say what days I was in port or offshore because so much time had passed.
The primary factor is where you live. If the state you live in has an income tax, they want your money.
The next most important factor is where your employer processes it’s payroll. If your company processes its payroll in a state like California, you’ve got a big problem. California does not care about federal laws, they just want your money. If the employer processes its payroll in a state like Washington or Florida, you have no problem.
Some may find this helpful. The case is “Treasury of Maryland vs. Wynne.
“On May 18, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court answered this question in Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne et ux[575 U. S. __ (2015)], ruling in a 5-to-4 decision that two states cannot tax the same income.”
I’m sure you would pay in the State you work but get a tax deduction/credit where you live, or vice versa.
That’s not very helpful for those of us that live in no tax states, like NH, DE, FL, TX, Wa, AK, etc.
For example, nothing in the holding of this case would prevent California from Taxing the wages of a seaman living in Washington.
Nor does this case discuss or apply the federal statutes applicable to seamen, or those engaged in interstate commerce.
It was posted for those who live in states with income tax.
However the decision has implications for the collection of state revenue. A number of my family lives in a no tax state but work states that collect them, so they are watching this carefully. The decision may be applied to total tax burden in your resident state. From the linked article below:
“__For example, based on this principle, a taxpayer who resides in Florida (a state with no income tax) but works in Georgia would still have an effective 0% state income tax rate based on his resident state’s taxation rules. This result would potentially require Florida to grant a fully refundable credit for the taxes paid by the Florida resident to Georgia, effectively subsidizing Georgia’s higher income tax rate. There is no indication in the opinion, other than this sentence, that a credit for taxes paid to other states would also now need to be fully refundable to avoid violating the dormant Commerce Clause. Even states that currently grant a full credit restrict that credit to the amount of taxes otherwise owed to the resident state. This last sentence of Alito’s example could more plausibly be read to say, “But Bob’s tax burden to State A after application of the nonrefundable credit is irrelevant; his total tax burden to State A before applying the nonrefundable credit is what matters.”