
Originally Posted by
Super_BQ
From the view of tax authorities, the facts speak more than 'intentions'. Many non-residents have bought houses in NZ with no intention of living in them. I am quite certain that your residency doesn't start until you actually relocate over and establish a factual adobe. That is having opened bank accounts, local clubs / discount cards, NZ driver's license, having a family doctor, a permanent job, etc. Saying that you "intend" to have these to establish a case that you're a resident doesn't hold any water.
Well it's quite the opposite--I'm trying to avoid becoming "tax resident" prematurely. My understanding of the law is that someone is tax resident if they're in the country for more than 184 days in the year, or if they've established a "permanent place of abode." IRD published a paper with some explanation and examples (don't have the reference just now, but can post it later), and the spirit of them seems to be rooted in if you own property that you could conceivably live in. This included examples of those who live overseas but own and maintain a property that they could show up and live in at any time, and I even recall one example of a student with a room at their parents home that was still considered tax resident. I think it even extends to those who rent out a residential property for some or part of the year, but could come back to it.
(But, I don't recall reading there anything about having a drivers licence or bank account coming into the consideration. Certainly my citizen partner [and now myself!] have both of these items, but neither of us are currently NZ tax residents: we don't own a home, and we don't have any physical possessions or property in NZ--yet.)
Based on my interpretation of the law, it does seem certain that if we were living in the country, owned a personal home, then left and rented it out--we'd remain tax residents for as long as we owned the house. The question really is, as neither of us are currently tax resident and outside the country, would buying the house now, and renting it out until we do arrive permanently, make us tax resident from the time we buy the home? Certainly our intention would be to live in it, it's most certainly not as an investment property, and I'm more than happy to pay taxes where they're due, but let's face it, this is a financial decision, and I'm trying to understand what would make the most sense. The 49-month exemption from worldwide taxation is a valuable benefit. It might make more sense to defer buying the house and accepting some risk with respect to the property market.