


Ask the community...
One thing no one's mentioned yet - don't forget about your business licenses and permits! Moving states means you'll need new ones specific to Colorado requirements. For a photography business, check if Colorado or your specific city/county requires: 1. General business license 2. Home occupation permit (if working from home) 3. Sales tax license (if you sell physical products like prints) 4. Professional licenses (some places require them for photographers) Even if you keep your NM LLC as a foreign entity, you'll still need Colorado-specific licenses to operate legally there.
Great question! I recently went through a similar move with my small marketing consultancy from Texas to Florida. Here are a few additional considerations that helped me make the decision: **Tax implications beyond just annual fees:** Look into Colorado's income tax rates vs. New Mexico's. Colorado has a flat 4.4% state income tax, while New Mexico has graduated rates up to 5.9%. Depending on your LLC's income level, this could influence your decision. **Banking relationships:** If you have established business credit lines or relationships with your current bank, ask them about transferring accounts vs. opening new ones. Some banks make it easier to update an existing LLC's address rather than closing and reopening everything. **Client contracts:** Review your existing photography contracts - some may have specific language about jurisdiction or governing state law. If you dissolve and recreate, you might need to execute new agreements with existing clients. **Timeline considerations:** The foreign LLC registration is typically faster (2-3 weeks) compared to dissolving one LLC and creating another (4-8 weeks total). If you need to maintain business operations without interruption, this might be the deciding factor. I ended up going the foreign registration route and it's worked well for me. The dual compliance is manageable, and keeping my established business identity was worth the extra annual fees.
This is incredibly thorough advice, thank you! The point about client contracts is something I hadn't considered at all. I do have several ongoing contracts with wedding venues and event planners that specify New Mexico jurisdiction. The tax comparison is also really helpful - I'll need to run the numbers on what my actual tax savings would be. At my current income level, that 1.5% difference could add up over time. One follow-up question: when you did the foreign registration route, did you run into any issues with business banking? I'm wondering if banks get confused when your LLC is registered in one state but you're operating in another, especially for things like merchant services for client payments.
i think ur overthinking this tbh. i did travel nursing during covid and got reimbursed for mileage and the company never included it in my taxes. if the company paid u using the irs mileage rate and u submitted all ur trips through their system ur probably fine. did they give u a w-2 that looks way bigger than what u actually made? if not dont worry abt it
I went through this exact situation when I worked as a traveling medical technician for COVID testing sites. The fact that you were reimbursed at the standard IRS mileage rate and had to submit documentation through their system is a very good sign that it was handled properly. Here's what I learned: Since you didn't have a regular, permanent workplace and were assigned to different temporary locations, your travel qualifies as business travel rather than commuting. The IRS considers any work assignment expected to last less than one year as "temporary," so even locations you visited regularly would still count. For the Accountable Plan question - if your reimbursements were processed separately from your regular pay (like separate deposits or checks) and you had to document business purpose, dates, and mileage, that strongly suggests they followed Accountable Plan rules. Most importantly, check your W-2 Box 1. If it only shows your actual wages and doesn't include the reimbursement amounts, then your employer correctly treated them as non-taxable. The biggest red flag would be if your W-2 Box 1 amount is significantly higher than what you remember earning in actual wages - that would mean they incorrectly included reimbursements as taxable income and you'd need to address it.
This is really helpful! I'm in a similar situation with contract work where I travel to different client sites. One thing I'm still confused about - if some of my assignments at certain locations ended up lasting longer than originally expected (like what was supposed to be a 2-week project turned into 6 weeks), does that change the "temporary" classification? The original expectation was short-term but it extended due to client needs. Also, when you say check if W-2 Box 1 is "significantly higher" than actual wages - is there a rule of thumb for what counts as significant? Like if my reimbursements were around $3,000 for the year, would that be noticeable enough in the W-2 to clearly tell if they were included or not?
Don't overthink this! Your father-in-law has a HUGE lifetime gift tax exemption (like $13.6 million in 2025). Unless he's already given away millions, he's not going to owe any actual gift tax. He just needs to file a Form 709 if he gives any one person more than $19k in a year. The co-signing trick probably won't work as intended and might actually create more problems. The IRS isn't stupid - they look at intent. If he suddenly becomes a co-signer just to pay off a loan, they'll see right through it.
Another strategy worth considering is making direct payments for qualified expenses that don't count toward gift tax limits at all. Your father-in-law could pay medical expenses or tuition directly to the providers/schools for his children or grandchildren without any gift tax implications whatsoever - these payments are unlimited and don't use up any annual exclusion or lifetime exemption. For example, if any of the children have outstanding medical bills, student loan payments made directly to the lender, or current tuition expenses, he could pay those directly. This could potentially allow him to transfer significantly more than $160k per child without triggering any gift tax reporting requirements. Just make sure the payments go directly to the qualified institution (hospital, school, lender) rather than to the individual first. The IRS is very specific about this - the payment must be made directly to avoid being classified as a gift.
This is really helpful! I had no idea about the direct payment rule. So if one of the kids has medical bills or is currently in school, those payments wouldn't count toward the $19k annual limit at all? That could make a huge difference in how much he can transfer without any tax implications. Do you know if this applies to things like paying off existing student loans directly to the servicer?
Another approach: check with your startup's law firm. Our company uses Wilson Sonsini, and they offered a reduced rate consultation for employees dealing with 83(b) elections and option exercises. Many of the big firms that work with startups (Cooley, Gunderson, etc.) have programs specifically for startup employees. For QSBS specifically, you need someone who really understands the qualified small business stock exclusion rules. That one's trickier since you're looking 5+ years ahead at potential tax savings, and the requirements are super specific about business types, asset limits, and holding periods.
That's a great suggestion! Our company works with Gunderson, actually. Did your company negotiate this service upfront, or is it something the law firms offer to all client companies?
It was something our founders negotiated as part of the overall service package. Definitely worth asking your HR or finance team about. Gunderson definitely offers this service - several of my colleagues used them. The QSBS planning is where they were most helpful. They provided documentation templates to track our QSBS eligibility from day one, which will be crucial evidence if I'm ever audited after claiming the exclusion years from now. They explained that proving QSBS eligibility retroactively can be really difficult without contemporaneous documentation.
Don't forget about specialized accountants too! I found my tax person by looking for CPAs who specifically listed "startup equity" or "stock option planning" on their websites. Ended up finding someone who had been handling 83(b) elections for startup employees for 15+ years. Cost was WAY less than an attorney ($250 for an initial consultation, then about $650 to handle the whole 83(b) filing process including all documentation). He also helped me understand the potential QSBS benefits and what records I needed to maintain.
Do tax accountants actually have the expertise for this? I thought 83(b) elections required legal documents that only attorneys could prepare. Is there a difference in what a CPA vs attorney can do here?
Good question! CPAs can definitely handle the tax aspects of 83(b) elections - the actual filing with the IRS, calculating the tax implications, and ongoing tax planning. The 83(b) election itself is just a tax election form that gets filed with your return. Where you might need an attorney is if there are complex legal issues with your stock option agreement itself, or if you're dealing with unusual equity structures. But for most standard startup option grants, a specialized CPA who regularly handles these situations can take care of everything you need. The key is finding someone with specific experience in startup equity taxation, whether that's a CPA or attorney. I'd actually lean toward starting with a specialized CPA since they're typically more cost-effective and can handle the ongoing tax planning aspects too.
Avery Davis
Also consider HOW you file when married. You can do married filing jointly or married filing separately. Most of the time joint is better but sometimes separate makes sense. Like if one of you has lots of medical expenses or other itemized deductions that have AGI thresholds, sometimes filing separately can help. Just another thing to think about!
0 coins
Lincoln Ramiro
Great question! Based on your situation, getting married in December would very likely benefit you tax-wise. With one income of $95K, three kids, and a new home purchase, you'd probably see significant savings filing jointly vs. separately. A few quick things to consider: You'd get the larger married filing jointly standard deduction ($27,700 vs. $20,800 for head of household), your income would be in lower tax brackets when filing jointly, and you can fully utilize that mortgage interest deduction. The Child Tax Credit would also be more secure at your income level when married. However, definitely run the actual numbers first - either through one of the calculators mentioned here or by speaking with a tax professional. Every situation is unique, and you want to be sure before making such an important decision. The marriage itself should be about more than just taxes, but it sounds like the financial benefits would be a nice bonus to your existing plans!
0 coins