View this post on the web at [link removed]

As Passover approaches, Connecticut should ask a simple question: why are our workers still stuck in tax bondage to New York?
The Exodus story is about labor, burden, and a ruler who would not let go. In a modern and obviously non-literal sense, that is the tension here. Connecticut residents live here, raise families here, pay property taxes here, and increasingly work here from home.
Yet, under New York’s convenience of the employer rule [ [link removed] ], normal workdays spent at home can still be treated as New York workdays when the assigned office is in New York, unless the home office qualifies as a bona fide employer office. Connecticut House Republicans [ [link removed] ] argued this week that the result costs Connecticut more than $340 million a year.
What About No Tax on Tips and Overtime?
Connecticut had a chance to respond on the worker side too. HB 5010 [ [link removed] ] would exempt tips, gratuities, and overtime pay from the Connecticut personal income tax. At the federal level, the IRS says workers may claim temporary deductions for qualified tips and qualified overtime for tax years 2025 through 2028, subject to limits and eligibility rules. Connecticut could have matched that pro-work direction at the state level and did not under the one-party rule of Hartford.
A Win Win for the CT Democrats
And here is the sharper political contrast: Connecticut Democrats should, at least in theory, love the enforcement side of this idea. Connecticut already requires employers that maintain an office or transact business here to register for withholding, and wages paid for services rendered in Connecticut are already subject to Connecticut withholding rules. So if an employer from any state regularly uses remote labor physically performed in Connecticut, the state could require that employer to register [ [link removed] ], report Connecticut-based employees, count Connecticut workdays, and withhold accordingly. In other words: more registration, more reporting, more bureaucracy, and more protection for Connecticut’s tax base.
If New York can tax your kitchen table, Connecticut can license your employer.
The economic case is straightforward. Connecticut’s economy is heavily service-based and increasingly dependent on professional, business, and other knowledge-sector work that can be performed from anywhere. That makes the state especially vulnerable when another jurisdiction claims tax rights over labor physically performed here. A registration-and-reporting rule would not necessarily raise conservatives’ own tax bills; for many Connecticut residents, the main issue is which state gets the revenue, because Connecticut already has rules dealing with withholding on in-state work and credits for taxes paid elsewhere. The bigger point is that Connecticut should stop passively exporting its tax base and $340 million comes back in to be put into the Budget.
This Policy is Good for the Environment - Everyone Wins
There is also an environmental and public-health argument. The whole policy push in recent years has been less commuting, less congestion, fewer emissions, and more work where people actually live. EPA says air pollution can worsen asthma symptoms and that traffic-related pollution is linked to childhood asthma harms. EPA also says asthma disproportionately impacts minority children, especially in urban communities with high levels of air pollution. [ [link removed] ] So a tax rule that preserves incentives for unnecessary commuting is not just a tax issue. It is also a congestion issue, an emissions issue, and an asthma issue.
Connecticut loves to regulate. Fine. Then regulate where it matters. Regulate the tax rolls.
Require out-of-state employers using Connecticut remote labor to register here, report here, and withhold here. That would protect Connecticut revenue, align tax policy with the remote-work economy, and reinforce the broader public goal of reducing unnecessary commuting and pollution.
And the political irony is obvious: Democrats get more registration, more bureaucracy, and more income-tax enforcement, while conservatives do not need to pay more just to prove a point. The state gets to defend its own tax base, and the economy, the environment and the children ALL come out ahead. There just has to be a provision against retaliation by the employer to suddenly force a remote worker to start commuting.
Thoughts Going Into Holy Week and Passover
New York should stop collecting free tax money from Connecticut workers whose labor is physically performed in Connecticut.
From Pharaoh Hochul to payroll, enough is enough. Let CT people go from Tax On Labor Performed Here in the Constitution State. This would be a bi-partisan piece of legislation that Hartford can embrace.
If you like this post - please share it - Sharing is free unlike your commute to New York

Unsubscribe [link removed]?