Acklie v. Nebraska Dept. of Rev.
313 Neb. 28
Neb.2022Background
- Duane and Phyllis Acklie (married) claimed Florida residency for tax years 2008–2014; Nebraska audited tax years 2010–2014 and assessed deficiencies treating them as Nebraska residents.
- In 2008 the Acklies took several steps indicating Florida ties: moved some personal property, obtained Florida driver’s licenses, registered vehicles, registered and voted in Florida, obtained a Florida homestead exemption, joined Florida organizations, and later renewed passports listing Florida.
- The Acklies nonetheless maintained substantial Nebraska ties during the audit period: two Lincoln residences (one used as their home), extensive Nebraska real-estate holdings generating rental income, vehicles and watercraft registered in Nebraska, board/director positions and political contributions tied to Nebraska, and frequent travel to and from Lincoln (Lincoln functioned as a “home base”).
- The Department’s hearing officer and the Tax Commissioner found the Acklies were Nebraska residents; the district court affirmed, concluding the Acklies failed to show they abandoned Nebraska domicile and, alternatively, that they maintained a permanent place of abode and spent >183 days in Nebraska in 2010–2013.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed: the district court’s findings were supported by competent evidence and not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable; penalties were remanded to the Department for determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Acklies changed domicile to Florida | Acklie: they acquired Florida domicile in 2008 (licenses, voter registration, homestead exemption, passports, moved property, Florida ties). | Dept./Tax Commissioner: substantial Nebraska contacts and conduct during audit period showed continued Nebraska domicile (residences, business roles, property, registrations, time spent in Nebraska). | Court: Plaintiff failed to prove abandonment of Nebraska domicile; affirmed district court. |
| Whether they were statutory residents by maintaining a permanent place of abode and spending >6 months in Nebraska | Acklie: disputed Dept’s day-count method; argued fractional-month approach and that they did not spend >6 months in Nebraska. | Dept: counted any part of a day in Nebraska as a full day (183-day standard); location summaries show >183 days in 2010–2013. | Court: alternative finding unnecessary to resolve after domicile ruling, but agreed Dept’s interpretation reasonable; >183 days in 2010–2013. |
| Whether the Department’s and district court’s factual findings met Administrative Procedure Act standards | Acklie: urged that certain facts (voter registration, sworn statements) carry decisive weight. | Dept: overall facts and inferences support residency finding; presumption favors original domicile when facts conflict. | Court: reviewed for competent evidence and deference to factfinder; did not reweigh facts and affirmed. |
| Whether tax deficiencies and penalties should be upheld | Acklie: challenged determination of residency and resulting tax liability; contested penalties. | Dept: assessed tax deficiencies based on residency determinations and sought penalties. | Court: affirmed deficiencies (taxes owed); remanded penalties to Department for resolution. |
Key Cases Cited
- Houghton v. Nebraska Dept. of Rev., 308 Neb. 188, 953 N.W.2d 237 (2021) (standard of review and domicile principles under Nebraska tax law)
- Gelco Fleet Trust v. Nebraska Dept. of Rev., 312 Neb. 49, 978 N.W.2d 12 (2022) (clarifies arbitrary/capricious/unreasonable review language)
- State v. Jensen, 269 Neb. 213, 691 N.W.2d 139 (2005) (voting/registration is significant but not conclusive on domicile)
- State v. Jones, 202 Neb. 488, 275 N.W.2d 851 (1979) (consideration of relative time spent and other circumstances in domicile disputes)
- In re Estate of Meyers, 137 Neb. 60, 288 N.W. 35 (1939) (older authority on significance of voting and domicile considerations)