Dual Residency Ruling (College Students) by BATFE

[Len-2A Training]

I just found this accidentally and this deserves to be a Sticky here!

Found on Page 127-128 of the following document:
http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf

27 CFR 178.11: MEANING OF TERMS

An out-of-State college student may establish residence in a State by residing and maintaining a home in a college dormitory or in a location off-campus during the school term.

ATF Rul. 80-21

"State of residence" is defined by regulation in 27 CFR 178.11 as the State in which an individual regularly resides or maintains a home. The regulation also provides an example
of an individual who maintains a home in State X and a home in State Y. The individual regularly resides in State X except for the summer months and in State Y for the summer
months of the year. The regulation states that during the time the individual actually resides in State X he is a resident of State X, and during the time he actually resides in State Y he is a resident of State Y.

Applying the above example to out-of-State college students it is held, that during the time the students actually reside in a college dormitory or at an off-campus location they are considered residents of the State where the dormitory or off-campus home is located. During the time out-of-State college students actually reside in their home State they are considered residents of their home State.

[ATFB 1980-4 25]

I guarantee you that 90% of MA COPs will NOT abide by this for any unfortunates who are going to school in MA, but if you are attending school in a state that believes in the Constitution and US Law, you might have some luck with this.

 

[RKG]

I just found this accidentally and this deserves to be a Sticky here!

Found on Page 127-128 of the following document:
http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf



I guarantee you that 90% of MA COPs will NOT abide by this for any unfortunates who are going to school in MA, but if you are attending school in a state that believes in the Constitution and US Law, you might have some luck with this.

Len: While we've batted this one about during some prior innings, I'd like to reiterate that this BATF ruling applies only to the meaning of "resident" for purposes of the federal regulations. It does not have any application to how a state determines one's residence (or domicile) for state law purposes. So it is quite conceivable (and, indeed, even logical) that Student X could be a resident of School State for federal purpose (and thus not precluded from purchasing a handgun in School State) while at the same time he might not be a resident of School State for the purpose of the law of School State (and, therefore, not permitted to purchase a handgun there by state law).

 

[Len-2A Training]

Len: While we've batted this one about during some prior innings, I'd like to reiterate that this BATF ruling applies only to the meaning of "resident" for purposes of the federal regulations. It does not have any application to how a state determines one's residence (or domicile) for state law purposes. So it is quite conceivable (and, indeed, even logical) that Student X could be a resident of School State for federal purpose (and thus not precluded from purchasing a handgun in School State) while at the same time he might not be a resident of School State for the purpose of the law of School State (and, therefore, not permitted to purchase a handgun there by state law).

Bob, did you see my comment below the quote? We agree, that some states (MA in particular) won't go along with this Fed Ruling. Some are worried that it would affect revenue from NR tuition if they allow any resident privileges to NR students and I understand that.

All I can say is that the BATFE is clear on this. How each state rules on it is a horse of a different color . . . I expect most Free States won't have a problem with it where more up-tight states will disavow it.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I had a student very recently who went to college in FL. Although he never changed his official state of♠ residency by getting a DL or registering to vote, he was able to buy handguns in FL by obtaining a fishing license as a FL resident.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I do NOT know if this is under the purview of the AG, but when we get Jim McKenna elected, perhaps a ruling that the BATFE ruling holds for issuance of RESIDENT LTCs is worth looking into. If MGLs aren't specifically in conflict, perhaps he can hang his hat on that BATFE ruling and issue a favorable ruling (or CMR)?

 

[RKG]

I do NOT know if this is under the purview of the AG, but when we get Jim McKenna elected, perhaps a ruling that the BATFE ruling holds for issuance of RESIDENT LTCs is worth looking into. If MGLs aren't specifically in conflict, perhaps he can hang his hat on that BATFE ruling and issue a favorable ruling (or CMR)?

The reason that Massachusetts does not, and will not, recognize "dual residency" has nothing to do with guns, the Attorney General, or hot button politics. Residency is clearly defined in the Massachusetts common law and statutes, and does not accommodate someone being a "resident" (or "domiciliary") of more than one location at one time. Nor is Massachusetts out of line on this; the notion of "dual residency" is a legal contortion at best and few jurisdictions recognize it.

 

[PatrickxJonathan]

I can appreciate as a college student "duel residency" but it makes very little sense, and has very little purpose.

 

[robmcd]

I just noticed this thread. I live in Berkshire County where we have a high percentage of second home owners (50% in my town). Several of the towns here will issue resident licenses to second home owners, even if they hold a driver's license or file tax returns in a different state. The FRB has told these issuing Chiefs that it is OK to do so because MA has relatively loose residency requirements. Many people that I know have resident licenses from two states, and have purchased handguns in both states. Of course, license issuance is at the discretion of the Chief.

 

[rawlus]

I just noticed this thread. I live in Berkshire County where we have a high percentage of second home owners (50% in my town). Several of the towns here will issue resident licenses to second home owners, even if they hold a driver's license or file tax returns in a different state. The FRB has told these issuing Chiefs that it is OK to do so because MA has relatively loose residency requirements. Many people that I know have resident licenses from two states, and have purchased handguns in both states. Of course, license issuance is at the discretion of the Chief.

this is very interesting!

 

[flotter390]

I just noticed this thread. I live in Berkshire County where we have a high percentage of second home owners (50% in my town). Several of the towns here will issue resident licenses to second home owners, even if they hold a driver's license or file tax returns in a different state. The FRB has told these issuing Chiefs that it is OK to do so because MA has relatively loose residency requirements. Many people that I know have resident licenses from two states, and have purchased handguns in both states. Of course, license issuance is at the discretion of the Chief.

Most of the Towns on the Cape do the same thing.

Fred

 

[Len-2A Training]

I just noticed this thread. I live in Berkshire County where we have a high percentage of second home owners (50% in my town). Several of the towns here will issue resident licenses to second home owners, even if they hold a driver's license or file tax returns in a different state. The FRB has told these issuing Chiefs that it is OK to do so because MA has relatively loose residency requirements. Many people that I know have resident licenses from two states, and have purchased handguns in both states. Of course, license issuance is at the discretion of the Chief.

Most of the Towns on the Cape do the same thing.

Fred

Glidden has been advising chiefs to do this for well over 10 years now. Some do and some don't. The Feds have made it clear that this is acceptable to them as well.

And I don't know anyone that has been asked/told that they must produce a tax return in order to get a LTC.

 

[Garys]

I know that this is Thread Resurrection, but I have a similar question. Actually, I want to confirm what I think is the answer.

Here is the situation. A friend of mine owns houses in both MA and NH. He lives mostly in MA, but vacations often in his NH place. He has an LTC in MA, I don't know if he has a P&R license in NH.

It seems from the information in this thread that if the chief in his NH town wanted to, he could issue my friend a NH resident P&R. Is that correct?
It also seems that as long as he lives in MA part or most of the year, he can retain his MA LTC and does not have to notify his MA chief? Is that correct?
Is is likely that the NH chief will contact MA and let them know that my friend is applying in NH?

On a related note, if he has an AR or other "high capacity" weapon, it seems to me that he can take it to NH, buy all the post ban 30 round magazines he wants and use them in NH. He just can't bring the magazines back into MA. Is that correct.

Finally, it seems that if a NH FFL will sell him a non MA compliant pistol, he CAN bring that back with him, even if it is high capacity. Or is that incorrect?

Thanks,

Gary

 

[JRT]

I'm sure others more adept at the laws will chime in but I have this exact situation. I can buy a handgun in three states, I own a home in PA, VT and MA. You can buy any handgun you want in NH and bring it to MA (except AR pistols I think) but you can't bring standard cap mags to MA unless they are under 10 rounds. The comment about a post ban gun confuses me though, it's the mags not the gun as far as I know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Garys]

Bad wording on my part, I changed it. What I meant was if the gun is non compliant and if it has so called high capacity magazines. So guns not on the EOPS roster would be okay to bring into MA, but not magazines with more than 10 rounds? That's the part that fuzzy to me.

I'm sure others more adept at the laws will chime in but I have this exact situation. I can buy a handgun in three states, I own a home in PA, VT and MA. You can buy any handgun you want in NH and bring it to MA (except AR pistols I think) but you can't bring standard cap mags to MA unless they are under 10 rounds. The comment about a post ban gun confuses me though, it's the mags not the gun as far as I know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[usp45ct]

Ok on the handguns not on the roster, no post ban Mags over 10 rds in Ma and post ban ARs/AKs etc have to be Massified.

 

[Garys]

Got it, thanks.

Ok on the handguns not on the roster, no post ban Mags over 10 rds in Ma and post ban ARs/AKs etc have to be Massified.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Residency is clearly defined in the Massachusetts common law and statutes, and does not accommodate someone being a "resident" (or "domiciliary") of more than one location at one time. Nor is Massachusetts out of line on this; the notion of "dual residency" is a legal contortion at best and few jurisdictions recognize it.

The BATFE ruling does NOT state that one is a resident of more than one location at a time.

It states that a persons residence may switch back and forth between two locations when they live in both locations for a portion of the year.

I can appreciate as a college student "duel residency" but it makes very little sense, and has very little purpose.

Unless .....

You are a 21+ college student whose parents still life in MA, and you want to buy a free state handgun in your college state.

or

You want to vote in your college town without having to prove you have cut all ties to your parents address for the months of year school is out of session.

Far more "residency" battles have been fought over college students voting than over where one can buy a gun. People paying $10K+ a year in protection money to keep their house tend not to be amused when liberal college students who have never had to write out a quarterly tax payment check suddenly are voting on taxation and spending policies in towns to which they make no financial contribution.

 

[Keyman1808]

So A quick question then. My father just purchased a home in FL. They will be living there 6 months out of the year and 6 months here in MA. So he can obtain a FL residence LTC and buy handguns no on the roster and the bring them back as long as the magazines don't violate the 10 round rule. Is that correct.

 

[knfmn]

So A quick question then. My father just purchased a home in FL. They will be living there 6 months out of the year and 6 months here in MA. So he can obtain a FL residence LTC and buy handguns no on the roster and the bring them back as long as the magazines don't violate the 10 round rule. Is that correct.

Not sure about the Florida resident LTC, but if you are in a state with the intention of maintaining a residence there, you are legally able to purchase handguns there. You just have to find a dealer willing to accept a tax bill or something along those lines as proof of residence.

 

[yanici]

The BATFE ruling does NOT state that one is a resident of more than one location at a time.It states that a persons residence may switch back and forth between two locations when they live in both locations for a portion of the year.



Unless .....

You are a 21+ college student whose parents still life in MA, and you want to buy a free state handgun in your college state.

or

You want to vote in your college town without having to prove you have cut all ties to your parents address for the months of year school is out of session.

Far more "residency" battles have been fought over college students voting than over where one can buy a gun. People paying $10K+ a year in protection money to keep their house tend not to be amused when liberal college students who have never had to write out a quarterly tax payment check suddenly are voting on taxation and spending policies in towns to which they make no financial contribution.

So, if a person's actual residence is changing, wouldn't he/she need to send in a change of address letter to the State, etc.? That would cancel their current LTC and wouldn't they need to reapply when they move back?

 

[Len-2A Training]

So, if a person's actual residence is changing, wouldn't he/she need to send in a change of address letter to the State, etc.? That would cancel their current LTC and wouldn't they need to reapply when they move back?

Not if they maintain 2 residences. Many snowbirds do that. What keyman1808 proposed is perfectly legal.

 

[yanici]

Not if they maintain 2 residences. Many snowbirds do that. What keyman1808 proposed is perfectly legal.

Quoting Bob Boudrie:
The BATFE ruling does NOT state that one is a resident of more than one location at a time.It states that a persons residence may switch back and forth between two locations when they live in both locations for a portion of the year.

I'm not getting it. It appears that a person is actually switching residence. If the quote above is correct, then you cannot be a resident at both places at the same time. So, your LTC should expire when you move.

Just can't get this through my head.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I'm not getting it. It appears that a person is actually switching residence. If the quote above is correct, then you cannot be a resident at both places at the same time. So, your LTC should expire when you move.

Just can't get this through my head.

Sounds like a person problem!

One thing I'm not is a mental health counselor!

 

[yanici]

Sounds like a person problem!

One thing I'm not is a mental health counselor!

Yeah, when I turn my head sideways I can hear rocks banging around.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Texas allows for multiple residency status. In Texas to claim resident status, you need to have an actual Texas address, and a state issued ID for at least 1 year.
If you own real estate, simply paying your property taxes can be enough.

Many states will recognize multiple residency status.

New York and New Jersey were forced to accept dual residency status and allow the individual to file for a resident LTC from both states. The federal courts mandated this if both states wanted to claim that the individual was required to pay state income tax in both states, and owned real estate in both states.

Not all states will recognize multiple residency status. However, IMHO, if you have an address and obtain in the least a state issued ID card, and even have some form of employment in the state, or own land. The state would be hard pressed to say your not a resident.

I have my Texas LTC, as well as a Utah Non-resident LTC. I own real estate in Utah, as well as keep a vehicle registered in Utah. I could have easily gotten a resident Utah LTC. However if I did, It would then open me up to having to pay Utah State Income tax. Not something I was willing to do or pay. Texas has no state income tax.

So be very careful, when you claim multiple resident status. It could open you up to having to pay both states income tax, or even other taxes.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

So be very careful, when you claim multiple resident status. It could open you up to having to pay both states income tax, or even other taxes.

Quite a few years ago, there was a rich guy in NY undergoing a contentious divorce and had multiple residences. He argued the case should be held in one of the states where he spent more time, but his wife's attorney countered with "He has a NY pistol permit; NY does not issue non-resident pistol permits; therefore he is a NY resident". In other words "Wood floats; witches are made of wood; he floats; therefore he is a witch".

There is also the issue of NY (CA is getting in on the game now as well) having "residency audits" for anyone who ever lived in their state. Move from NY to PA? Better move your gun collection, Renoirs, change to doctors not in NY; close your NY country club membership and open one up in PA; bring your lover from NY to PA for fantasy nights rather than going to NY; etc. or you risk being called a "NY tax resident". Ditto if you move to PA for one year than on to New Mexico to hang out with that Kim character, NY can declare you never really moved to PA but stayed there temporarily while still a NY resident preparing for your NY to NM residency change. And CA now has proposed a 10 year lookback period on a new asset tax they are proposing since it is "California's money" since you earned it or gained it in the market while living in CA. NY tried this with retirement accounts years ago but got slapped down by congress.

The coming battle with states is appreciated stocks/pms/etc. The CA position (and NY before congress intervened) is that the state has the right to tax the appreciation in asset value that occurred while you lived in the state, and you are cheating the system if you move to a no-tax or lower tax state before you sell.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Quite a few years ago, there was a rich guy in NY undergoing a contentious divorce and had multiple residences. He argued the case should be held in one of the states where he spent more time, but his wife's attorney countered with "He has a NY pistol permit; NY does not issue non-resident pistol permits; therefore he is a NY resident". In other words "Wood floats; witches are made of wood; he floats; therefore he is a witch".

There is also the issue of NY (CA is getting in on the game now as well) having "residency audits" for anyone who ever lived in their state. Move from NY to PA? Better move your gun collection, Renoirs, change to doctors not in NY; close your NY country club membership and open one up in PA; bring your lover from NY to PA for fantasy nights rather than going to NY; etc. or you risk being called a "NY tax resident". Ditto if you move to PA for one year than on to New Mexico to hang out with that Kim character, NY can declare you never really moved to PA but stayed there temporarily while still a NY resident preparing for your NY to NM residency change. And CA now has proposed a 10 year lookback period on a new asset tax they are proposing since it is "California's money" since you earned it or gained it in the market while living in CA. NY tried this with retirement accounts years ago but got slapped down by congress.

The coming battle with states is appreciated stocks/pms/etc. The CA position (and NY before congress intervened) is that the state has the right to tax the appreciation in asset value that occurred while you lived in the state, and you are cheating the system if you move to a no-tax or lower tax state before you sell.

Which is exactly why you have to be careful about claiming any form residency status. I claim both properties I own outside of Texas as vacation homes. Don’t claim homestead exemption for purposes of property taxes, don’t have state ids, and don’t get resident LTC’s either. Start claiming residency status, opens you up to state income taxes and other taxes.

Now if I owned houses in two non state income tax states, thatmight be a different story. Each person needs to weigh their options.

I will never voluntarily own property in California or New York, not will I ever move there either. Will only visit! LoL