In 2012, I took a "non-qualified" premature distribution from a retirement plan. I realize that this is taxable on the federal level, and I have paid the federal taxes on it.

I received the funds from the distribution in March 2012 - at this time I was a resident of South Dakota (no state income tax.) All of those funds were earned while I was working living and working in SD.

I moved to and established residence in the state of California at the beginning of May 2012. This qualifies me as a part-year California resident. I did file the part-year resident version of the California tax return for 2012.

Today, I received a Proposed Assessment from the CA Franchise Tax Board claiming that I owe taxes on the premature distribution. Considering that the funds were paid to me while I was a resident of SD, doesn't that mean that I don't owe any CA taxes on that money? I do have copies of documentation showing my lease in CA starting in May of 2012 and can provide this in my protest.

  • But can you provide proof that you were still a resident of South Dakota in March of 2012? Sep 19, 2015 at 23:16
  • I do have proof of it through my employer.
    – Krondorian
    Sep 19, 2015 at 23:25
  • But can you prove that you still lived in South Dakota in March? Giving them a document that doesn't cover the date in question doesn't prove anything. Sep 19, 2015 at 23:27
  • The paystubs I have from my employer show that I was living and working in South Dakota on the date that the distribution was made.
    – Krondorian
    Sep 19, 2015 at 23:38
  • Than that's what you need to use. Sep 19, 2015 at 23:45

1 Answer 1


California is very aggressive when it comes to determining residency. While you have a legitimate defense, I suggest talking with a California-licensed CPA or EA practicing in California, which are experienced in dealing with the FTB residency audits.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .