PDF(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)Tip?
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-245
======================================================================
MILITARY RESIDENCY CHOICE ACT
_______
July 24, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Roe of Tennessee, from the Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 282]
The Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 282) to amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief
Act to authorize spouses of servicemembers to elect to use the
same residences as the servicemembers, having considered the
same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend
that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 2
Hearings......................................................... 4
Subcommittee Consideration....................................... 4
Committee Consideration.......................................... 4
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 5
Earmarks and Tax and Tariff Benefits............................. 5
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 5
Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Estimate........ 5
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 6
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 6
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 6
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 6
Statement on Duplication of Federal Programs..................... 6
Disclosure of Directed Rulemaking................................ 6
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 6
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill as Reported............. 7
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 282, the ``Military Residency Choice Act,'' was
introduced by Representative Elise Stefanik of New York on
January 4, 2017. H.R. 282 would amend the Servicemember Civil
Relief Act (SCRA) to allow a servicemember's spouse to claim
the same state of residency as the servicemember for voting and
tax purposes regardless of whether the spouse has lived in that
state.
Background and Need for Legislation
Section 2. Residence of spouses of servicemembers for tax purposes
Since the codification of the SCRA in title 50, United
States Code (U.S.C.) in 1942, Congress has recognized that
active duty servicemembers should be afforded certain legal
protections during periods of military service. Among other
provisions, the SCRA allows servicemembers to maintain their
place of residency in a State for certain purposes, such as
voting and State and local income taxes, regardless of whether
the servicemember is currently residing in that State or is
absent from that State due to active duty military service.
These protections are in place due to the transient nature of
military service and they allow servicemembers to avoid the
burdens of reestablishing a place of residence for tax purposes
after each permanent change of duty station.
In November of 2009, Congress passed the Military Spouse
Civil Relief Act (Public Law (P.L.) 111-970, which amended the
SCRA to extend these same protections to certain spouses of
servicemembers. The law only applies to spouses of
servicemembers who actually lived in the same State in which
the servicemember established residency prior to a permanent
change of duty station. Therefore, under current law, spouses
who marry a servicemember, after the servicemember has already
been transferred from the State where they established their
residency, cannot claim that same State as their place of
residence. This leaves that spouse having to legally change his
or her State of residency for State and local income tax
purposes after each move, whereas the servicemember and other
spouses do not have to. Mr. Gabriel Stultz, Legislative Counsel
for Paralyzed Veterans of America, testified at a June 29, 2017
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity hearing and outlined an
example of how the current law is negatively affecting some
military spouses:
``The caveat in the law requiring the couple to share
the same state unfortunately excludes from the benefit
a number of military spouses who marry after the
service member established domicile or residency
elsewhere. For example, if the service member
maintained his home state domicile of Florida while
stationed in Georgia, and then he marries his spouse
who is a resident of Georgia, the spouse is unable to
maintain her Georgia residency for tax purposes when
the service member subsequently gets stationed in
Kentucky. While she can feasibly maintain domicile in
Georgia, current law does not protect her from
statutory residency laws in Kentucky. If she was able
to independently establish domicile in Florida, she
would be eligible for this benefit upon moving to
Kentucky. Similarly, if the service member changed his
domicile to Georgia, she would be eligible. But it is
unlikely the spouse can meet the requirements for
Florida, and because Florida has no state income tax,
few service members would abandon that state as their
domicile.''
The Committee believes that this discrepancy was not the
intention of P.L. 111-97 and that it can put an unfair burden
on some military spouses despite the fact that these military
families are facing the same transient lifestyle and undergoing
the same stress as other military families. Therefore, section
2 of H.R. 282 would amend section 511(a)(2) of title 50,
U.S.C., to allow the spouse of a servicemember to elect to use
the same State of residence as the servicemember for State or
local tax purposes regardless of when or where the two
individuals were married. These changes would apply with
respect to any return of State or local income tax filed for
any taxable year beginning with the taxable year that includes
enactment. While this provision would not require the spouse to
claim the same residence as the servicemember, the Committee
believes that this change in the law would better fulfill the
intent of the SCRA and the protections that are extended to our
servicemembers and their families while they are serving on
active duty.
Section 3. Residence of spouses of servicemembers for voting
The SCRA also protects servicemembers by allowing them to
maintain a certain State of residency or domicile, despite
absence from that State due to military orders, for voting
purposes in Federal, State, or local elections. Allowing them
to continue voting in the State that they consider home
regardless of where the military moves them, benefits the
servicemember similarly as allowing them to maintain the same
State of residence for tax purposes, and alleviates arduous
voter registration requirements on our military men and woman
after each move.
Public Law 111-97 also extended these voting protections to
military spouses after concern that ``[spouses] are
disenfranchised from voting; often times not arriving to a new
state in time to vote in primaries and do not have ample
opportunity to get to know the Federal, state or local
candidates or adequate time to learn their policies and
legislative agendas. It is confusing when one state allows a
military spouse to vote via absentee ballot, yet the state
where the spouse is physically located does not.''\1\ As was
the case with maintaining a certain residence for tax purposes,
this law did not extend these same voting protections to
spouses who marry the servicemember after the active duty
member has already moved from the State in which they are
claiming residence. The Committee believes that comparable to
updating tax forms after each move, updating voter registration
paperwork after each permanent change in duty station puts an
unfair and complicated burden on some military spouses that is
not required for other spouses just due to when they married
the servicemember. The Committee also believes that spouses and
servicemembers should be able to vote in the same area for
which they pay taxes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Senate Report 111-046--MILITARY SPOUSES RESIDENCY RELIEF ACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3 of H.R. 282 would amend Section 705(b) title 50,
U.S.C., by allowing the spouse of a servicemember to elect to
use the same residence as the servicemember for State and local
voting purposes, even if they are absent from that State due to
military orders and regardless of when or where they got
married. The Committee believes that this will fulfill the
intent of SCRA and P.L. 111-97 and lessen the confusion and
burdens of being a military spouse.
Hearings
On June 29, 2017, the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
held a legislative hearing on several bill pending before the
subcommittee including H.R. 282. The following witnesses
testified:
The Honorable Elise Stefanik, U.S. House of
Representatives, 21st district of New York; The
Honorable Robert Wittman, U.S House of Representatives,
1st district of Virginia; The Honorable Claudia Tenney,
U.S. House of Representatives, 22nd district of New
York; The Honorable David Cicilline, U.S. House of
Representatives, 1st district of Rhode Island; The
Honorable Scott Taylor, U.S. House of Representatives,
2nd district of Virginia; Mr. Curtis L. Coy, Deputy
Under Secretary for Economic Opportunity, Veterans
Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs, who was accompanied by Ms. Tia Butler,
Executive Director, Corporate Senior Executive
Management Office, Human Resources and Administration,
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and Mr. Jeffrey
London, Director, Loan Guaranty Service, Veterans
Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs; Maj. Gen. Jeffrey E. Phillips, USAR (Ret.),
Executive Director, Reserve Officers Association; and
Mr. Gabriel Stultz, Legislative Counsel, Paralyzed
Veterans of America.
The following organizations submitted statements for the
record:
U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Chamber of
Commerce.
Subcommittee Consideration
On July 12, 2017 the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
met in an open markup session, a quorum being present, and
ordered H.R. 282 favorably forwarded to the Full Committee by
voice vote.
Committee Consideration
On July 19, 2017, the full Committee met in open markup
session, a quorum being present, and ordered H.R. 282 be
reported favorably to the House of Representatives by voice
vote.
Committee Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, no recorded votes were taken on
amendments or in connection with ordering H.R. 282 favorably
reported to the House.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the descriptive portions of
this report.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee's performance
goals and objectives are to ensure that spouses of
servicemembers are able to claim the same state of residence as
the servicemember even if the spouse has not lived in that
state to ensure that, for tax purposes and voting purposes, the
spouse is not negatively impacted by the mobility of active
duty service.
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its
own the estimate of new budget authority, entitlement
authority, or tax expenditures or revenues contained in the
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974.
Earmarks and Tax and Tariff Benefits
H.R. 282 does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
Committee Cost Estimate
Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
Committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out
this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that Rule provides
that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has
included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the
bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974. The Committee has requested but not received a cost
estimate for this bill from the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office. The Committee believes that enactment of this
bill would result in no direct spending.
Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested
but not received a cost estimate for this bill from the
Director of Congressional Budget Office. The Committee has
requested did not receive at the time of the filing of the bill
report, from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office a
statement as to whether this bill contains any new budget
authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase
or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. The Committee
believes and CBO has preliminarily estimated that there are no
effects on direct spending or revenues.
Federal Mandates Statement
With respect to the requirements of Section 423 of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act (as amended by
Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act, P.L. 104-
4), the Committee has requested but not received from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office a statement as to
whether the provisions of the reported bill include unfunded
mandates. The Committee believes, and the Congressional Budget
Office has preliminarily estimated that legislation does not
contain any unfunded mandates.
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act would be created by H.R.
282.
Statement of Constitutional Authority
Pursuant to Article I, section 8 of the United States
Constitution, H.R. 282 is authorized by Congress' power to
``provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the
United States.''
Applicability to Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that H.R. 282 does not relate to the
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of
the Congressional Accountability Act.
Statement on Duplication of Federal Programs
Pursuant to section 3(g) of H. Res. 5, 114th Cong. (2015),
the Committee finds that no provision of H.R. 282 establishes
or reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government known to be
duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was
included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-
139, or a program related to a program identified in the most
recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.
Disclosure of Directed Rulemaking
Pursuant to section 3(i) of H. Res. 5, 115th Cong. (2017),
H.R. 282 would not prescribe the Secretary to create any new
regulations.
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 cites the short title of H.R. 282 to be the
``Military Residency Choice Act.''
Section 2. Residence of spouses of servicemembers for tax purposes
Section 2(a) would amend Section 511(a)(2) of the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (title 50, U.S.C. 4001(a)(2))
by adding at the end of the section a new sentence to allow the
spouse of a servicemember to elect to use the same residence as
the servicemember for tax purposes, regardless of the date of
when or where the spouse and the servicemember got married.
Section 2(b) would make the changes made in Section 2(a)
applicable for any return of State or local income tax filed
for any taxable year beginning with the taxable year that
includes the date of enactment.
Section. 3. Residence of spouses of servicemembers for voting
Section 3(a) would amend Section 705(b) of the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (title 50, U.S.C.) by striking
``State or local office'' and all that follows through the
period and inserting a new paragraph which would allow a person
who is absent from a State because the person is accompanying
their spouse who is also absent from that same State due to
military or naval orders shall not, solely by reason of that
absence be deemed to have lost residence or domicile in that
state regardless of whether that person intends to return to
that state or gained residency in any other State. Section 3(a)
would also allow for the spouse of a servicemember to elect to
use the same State of residence as the servicemember regardless
of the day on which they got married.
Section 3(b) would make the changes made in Section 3(a)
effective 90 days following enactment.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--TAXES AND PUBLIC LANDS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 511. RESIDENCE FOR TAX PURPOSES.
(a) Residence or Domicile.--
(1) In general.--A servicemember shall neither lose
nor acquire a residence or domicile for purposes of
taxation with respect to the person, personal property,
or income of the servicemember by reason of being
absent or present in any tax jurisdiction of the United
States solely in compliance with military orders.
(2) Spouses.--A spouse of a servicemember shall
neither lose nor acquire a residence or domicile for
purposes of taxation with respect to the person,
personal property, or income of the spouse by reason of
being absent or present in any tax jurisdiction of the
United States solely to be with the servicemember in
compliance with the servicemember's military orders if
the residence or domicile, as the case may be, is the
same for the servicemember and the spouse. The spouse
of a servicemember may elect to use the same residence
for purposes of taxation as the servicemember
regardless of the date on which the marriage of the
spouse and the servicemember occurred.
(b) Military Service Compensation.--Compensation of a
servicemember for military service shall not be deemed to be
income for services performed or from sources within a tax
jurisdiction of the United States if the servicemember is not a
resident or domiciliary of the jurisdiction in which the
servicemember is serving in compliance with military orders.
(c) Income of a Military Spouse.--Income for services
performed by the spouse of a servicemember shall not be deemed
to be income for services performed or from sources within a
tax jurisdiction of the United States if the spouse is not a
resident or domiciliary of the jurisdiction in which the income
is earned because the spouse is in the jurisdiction solely to
be with the servicemember serving in compliance with military
orders.
(d) Personal Property.--
(1) Relief from personal property taxes.--The
personal property of a servicemember or the spouse of a
servicemember shall not be deemed to be located or
present in, or to have a situs for taxation in, the tax
jurisdiction in which the servicemember is serving in
compliance with military orders.
(2) Exception for property within member's domicile
or residence.--This subsection applies to personal
property or its use within any tax jurisdiction other
than the servicemember's or the spouse's domicile or
residence.
(3) Exception for property used in trade or
business.--This section does not prevent taxation by a
tax jurisdiction with respect to personal property used
in or arising from a trade or business, if it has
jurisdiction.
(4) Relationship to law of state of domicile.--
Eligibility for relief from personal property taxes
under this subsection is not contingent on whether or
not such taxes are paid to the State of domicile.
(e) Increase of Tax Liability.--A tax jurisdiction may not
use the military compensation of a nonresident servicemember to
increase the tax liability imposed on other income earned by
the nonresident servicemember or spouse subject to tax by the
jurisdiction.
(f) Federal Indian Reservations.--An Indian servicemember
whose legal residence or domicile is a Federal Indian
reservation shall be taxed by the laws applicable to Federal
Indian reservations and not the State where the reservation is
located.
(g) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) Personal property.--The term ``personal
property'' means intangible and tangible property
(including motor vehicles).
(2) Taxation.--The term ``taxation'' includes
licenses, fees, or excises imposed with respect to
motor vehicles and their use, if the license, fee, or
excise is paid by the servicemember in the
servicemember's State of domicile or residence.
(3) Tax jurisdiction.--The term ``tax jurisdiction''
means a State or a political subdivision of a State.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VII--FURTHER RELIEF
* * * * * * *
SEC. 705. GUARANTEE OF RESIDENCY FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL AND SPOUSES OF
MILITARY PERSONNEL.
(a) In General.--For the purposes of voting for any Federal
office (as defined in section 301 of the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431)) or a State or local
office, a person who is absent from a State in compliance with
military or naval orders shall not, solely by reason of that
absence--
(1) be deemed to have lost a residence or domicile in
that State, without regard to whether or not the person
intends to return to that State;
(2) be deemed to have acquired a residence or
domicile in any other State; or
(3) be deemed to have become a resident in or a
resident of any other State.
(b) Spouses.--For the purposes of voting for any Federal
office (as defined in section 301 of the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431)) or a [State or local
office, a person who is absent from a State because the person
is accompanying the person's spouse who is absent from that
same State in compliance with military or naval orders shall
not, solely by reason of that absence--
[(1) be deemed to have lost a residence or domicile
in that State, without regard to whether or not the
person intends to return to that State;
[(2) be deemed to have acquired a residence or
domicile in any other State; or
[(3) be deemed to have become a resident in or a
resident of any other State.] State or local office--
(1) a person who is absent from a State because the
person is accompanying the person's spouse who is
absent from that same State in compliance with military
or naval orders shall not, solely by reason of that
absence--
(A) be deemed to have lost a residence or
domicile in that State, without regard to
whether or not the person intends to return to
that State;
(B) be deemed to have acquired a residence or
domicile in any other State; or
(C) be deemed to have become a resident in or
a resident of any other State; and
(2) the spouse of a servicemember may elect to use
the same residence as the servicemember regardless of
the date on which the marriage of the spouse and the
servicemember occurred.
* * * * * * *
[all]