SDGFP cracking down on non-resident resident licensing?

Chestle

Well-known member

PIERRE — A legislative committee in Pierre recommended the adoption of a bill Tuesday that would impose stricter criteria for resident hunting and fishing licenses.

To qualify as a “resident” under existing state law, hunters and anglers must live in South Dakota for at least 90 consecutive days before applying. Additionally, they must not claim residency in another state and are required to have their driver’s license and vehicle registrations in South Dakota.

Resident hunters are prioritized over non-residents in the awarding of some limited big-game licenses. Resident licenses are also less expensive and, for some game species, are awarded in greater numbers.

The bill would add clarifications and further stipulations. The bill says people would lose their resident status if they apply for a resident license, register to vote or become a resident in another state, or if they reside outside of South Dakota for a total of 180 days in a year.

Plus, the bill would put into statute that possessing a mailing address in South Dakota, owning property or a business, or being employed in the state is not adequate proof of residency.
 
Right now I am traveling the southwest. The campgrounds have many South Dakota plates. One camper said all SD requires is for you to spend one night every 5 years in SD to be a resident. Now these people are full time RVers and are not real residents of any state. I met one couple who have lived in an RV for 14 years and have SD plates, but have never owned property in SD. So sounds like they need to address the issue.
 
Right now I am traveling the southwest. The campgrounds have many South Dakota plates. One camper said all SD requires is for you to spend one night every 5 years in SD to be a resident. Now these people are full time RVers and are not real residents of any state. I met one couple who have lived in an RV for 14 years and have SD plates, but have never owned property in SD. So sounds like they need to address the issue.
I think the law they are discussing doesn't handle being a resident, just the ability to purchase resident hunting or fishing licenses.
 
Right now I am traveling the southwest. The campgrounds have many South Dakota plates. One camper said all SD requires is for you to spend one night every 5 years in SD to be a resident. Now these people are full time RVers and are not real residents of any state. I met one couple who have lived in an RV for 14 years and have SD plates, but have never owned property in SD. So sounds like they need to address the issue.
I am thinking that person gave you false information.
 
Right now I am traveling the southwest. The campgrounds have many South Dakota plates. One camper said all SD requires is for you to spend one night every 5 years in SD to be a resident. Now these people are full time RVers and are not real residents of any state. I met one couple who have lived in an RV for 14 years and have SD plates, but have never owned property in SD. So sounds like they need to address the issue.
This is false information. They certainly are not a SD resident by spending 1 night every 5 years in the state. However, SD is quite liberal in letting people from out of state license their RV's in SD. I'm not sure what the requirements are for that but I know there are many RV'ers that license their vehicle in SD because of the lower cost.
 
This is false information. They certainly are not a SD resident by spending 1 night every 5 years in the state. However, SD is quite liberal in letting people from out of state license their RV's in SD. I'm not sure what the requirements are for that but I know there are many RV'ers that license their vehicle in SD because of the lower cost.
What are the residency requirements for SD? I thought that statement was false as well but looking online, sounds like it's accurate to a point. Certainly a grey area/almost fraud like tho.

 
Theres no state income tax in SD either so that may entice many seniors who travel to AZfor several monhs a year to claim SD as a resident along with licensing vehicles and of course we have a lot of pheasants too:)
 
Theres no state income tax in SD either so that may entice many seniors who travel to AZfor several monhs a year to claim SD as a resident along with licensing vehicles and of course we have a lot of pheasants too:)
Sounds like a perfect retirement plan to me!
 
I’ve read about airline pilots from MN that changed residency to SD; MN came after them, and threw the book at them if they didn’t meet all the criteria.
 
What are the residency requirements for SD? I thought that statement was false as well but looking online, sounds like it's accurate to a point. Certainly a grey area/almost fraud like tho.

You should have noticed that the information provided in the above link is not from the State of SD. It's a private company trying to make a buck. Maybe it's stuff like this that has prompted the state to propose a bill to tighten residency requirements, at least for a hunting license. I know people that have permanently moved from South Dakota to Arizona at least 15 years ago but still claim residency in SD. They still have SD plates on their vehicles. Is this legal? No! But SD probably doesn't care as they are money from them. But what about Arizona. I imagine if they found out they would be in big trouble. Arizona would want back vehicle license fees and state income tax plus penalties.
 
You should have noticed that the information provided in the above link is not from the State of SD. It's a private company trying to make a buck. Maybe it's stuff like this that has prompted the state to propose a bill to tighten residency requirements, at least for a hunting license. I know people that have permanently moved from South Dakota to Arizona at least 15 years ago but still claim residency in SD. They still have SD plates on their vehicles. Is this legal? No! But SD probably doesn't care as they are money from them. But what about Arizona. I imagine if they found out they would be in big trouble. Arizona would want back vehicle license fees and state income tax plus penalties.
Yeah I'm aware it's not as Government website. Just showing where that info may have came from. The government website for SoDak doesn't say much either really. Mentions a residency affidavit for those without a fixed residency.

Agree it's likely these little loop holes that are the cause of the legislation
 
I've heard of retired people doing the SD residency thing. They go there, get a P.O. box, spend one night and claim residency. It's all for the tax benefits. It does seem scetchy to me.
 
I'm no expert, but it's certainly possible that "residency" can mean different things for different purposes. IE, being a resident for hunting/fishing licenses is different than being a resident for tagging your car/RV/boat/etc/ and also different than for income tax purposes. Those RVers COULD be 100% correct about qualifying to tag their vehicle in SD. Those airline pilots could be 100% correct about claiming to be SD residents for income tax purposes. And qualifying for either or both of those things might still not qualify you to buy a resident hunting/fishing license.

Finally, I'd wonder how Minnesota has jurisdiction over whether someone qualifies as SD resident. In other words, it's not MN's business whether you qualify as a South Dakotan. It's their only interest is whether you qualify as a a Minnesotan based on Minnesota laws.
 
I'm no expert, but it's certainly possible that "residency" can mean different things for different purposes. IE, being a resident for hunting/fishing licenses is different than being a resident for tagging your car/RV/boat/etc/ and also different than for income tax purposes. Those RVers COULD be 100% correct about qualifying to tag their vehicle in SD. Those airline pilots could be 100% correct about claiming to be SD residents for income tax purposes. And qualifying for either or both of those things might still not qualify you to buy a resident hunting/fishing license.

Finally, I'd wonder how Minnesota has jurisdiction over whether someone qualifies as SD resident. In other words, it's not MN's business whether you qualify as a South Dakotan. It's their only interest is whether you qualify as a a Minnesotan based on Minnesota laws.
I agree with what you are saying. What about someone that has a residence in Minnesota and spends 99% of the year in Minnesota yet through some SD loop hole claims SD for income tax purpose? Don't you think Minnesota, or any other state, would have a problem with that?
 
I agree with what you are saying. What about someone that has a residence in Minnesota and spends 99% of the year in Minnesota yet through some SD loop hole claims SD for income tax purpose? Don't you think Minnesota, or any other state, would have a problem with that?
Like I said, they come after you…
 
I guessing a quick google search will tell you how (or at least offer you a lawyer contact) that could give you a loophole to escape or work around from what you are saying. I’m 100% in agreement with everyone but I also know there is 101 ways/loopholes to skirt by laws if one is so inclined to do so.
 
If 10,000 people skipped out of $10,000 in annual income tax to the great state of XXX, that’d be $100,000,000 in lost revenue annually. I had lots of clients defect to Florida, another no income tax state.,.they were quite conscientious about following the rules. Proving # of days in your new home state is one of the requirements. Even doing everything right still has its issues, because putting $ away in pre-tax retirement plans allowed the sidestepping of paying income tax to your state of residence, then retiring to SD and withdrawing it at that point creates an interesting tax arbitrage of sorts…I think states like MN have gone after that tax revenue.
 
MN residents with cabins in WI used to register their cars in that state to save money on registration tax. It was fairly popular. MN and WI worked together and most were identified and told to register in MN.

On the residency issue ... similar issues with MN and retirement tax free states such as FL.

If you are pulling these shenanigans refrain from bragging or yapping to the world or even those you may think are friends. People call in other people all the time.
 
Even doing everything right still has its issues, because putting $ away in pre-tax retirement plans allowed the sidestepping of paying income tax to your state of residence, then retiring to SD and withdrawing it at that point creates an interesting tax arbitrage of sorts…I think states like MN have gone after that tax revenue.

I do not buy that one. I would like real proof; newspaper article, state publication, etc...
 
I know multiple people that chose to move to WI in retirement because SS is not taxed. MN is slowly moving in that direction ... well sort of.
 
Back
Top