Americans who are leaving California claim that state officials are pressuring them to provide an explanation for their departure or face paying taxes as residents.
Online posts claim that some have received letters requesting different proof of their departure, which has sparked further criticism of the state’s tax laws.
Influencer Mila Joy of MAGA posted on X, “People who have left California are receiving letters telling them that they still need to pay California state taxes.”
“Oh my god, if this doesn’t demonstrate how impoverished California is, I don’t know what will.”
The California Franchise Tax Board sent Joy the notice as part of their regular residency audits, which assist in figuring out when taxpayers formally ceased to be residents.
In addition to supporting paperwork such as moving invoices and job records that demonstrate the precise date of their departure from California, it asks applicants to provide a “brief narrative” outlining their relocation.
Social media users have been outraged by the letter’s demanding tone, stating things like, “Amazingly unbelievable that these vultures have nothing better to do with their time other than chase down inconsequential money!”
Some pointed out that the state collected around $275 billion in corporate, sales, and personal income taxes in 2025, and others blamed Governor Gavin Newsom for the state’s aggressive pursuit of more tax revenue.
Online articles claim that former California taxpayers are being asked to provide an explanation for their departure.
The requests infuriated social media users, who blamed the state and Governor Gavin Newsom.
Letters informing people who have left California that they still owe state taxes are being sent to them.
They want proof of the day they departed.
I’m at a loss for words when it comes to how impoverished California is. pic.twitter.com/dwcB9TA8Wj
Mila Joy, a MAGA influencer
California will even “hunt people down” who left the state years ago, according to a different commentator.
They commented, “They will literally go into your bank account and take every last penny for what they say you owe and then make you prove otherwise.”
Although the requests have caused a stir on the internet, this is not a novel trend.
Similar audits are carried out by states like New York and New Jersey, frequently with even more thorough tracking of a taxpayer’s location.
When residents move to states with low or no income taxes, like Texas and Florida, the scrutiny is particularly prevalent.
But when it comes to residency audits, California is one of the most aggressive states—second only to New York, which is renowned for its forensic approach, where officials thoroughly investigate actions that could drastically lower a taxpayer’s liabilities.
When determining a taxpayer’s domicile, officials consider their “closest connections,” which include where they spend their time, where they own or rent property, and where they have the strongest personal and financial ties.
Bank accounts, company ventures, family locations, voting registration, and even the location of a person’s physician, accountant, or social connections are examples of this.
New York is the only state that is generally seen as being more aggressive than California.
A pied-à-terre tax aimed at affluent homes has also been proposed by New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Even after relocating, keeping substantial connections to California may result in more scrutiny.
Residency audits are a crucial enforcement tool since the state is especially concerned about high incomes moving to low-tax states, where the financial stakes can reach the millions.
The domicile test and the statutory residency test are the two stringent criteria used by New York to evaluate a person’s eligibility as a taxpayer, making it the only state generally regarded as being more severe than California.
Officials evaluate the location of a person’s closest personal and professional connections under the domicile test.
Even if a person claims to live out of state or has a primary residence elsewhere, the state may nevertheless classify them as residents if those ties are still present in New York.
Regardless of ownership, the residency criteria is applicable to people who keep a “permanent place of abode” in New York but are not residents of the state.
In order to enforce this, auditors can trace how many days an individual spends in the state by looking through calendars, expense reports, credit card bills, passports, cell phone data, and even E-ZPass records.
With the exception of certain situations like medical travel, anyone who stays in New York for more than 183 days is regarded as a statutory resident. Even partial days are usually recognised as full days.
A pied-à-terre tax, which would impose a wave of taxes on second residences, has also been proposed by New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Mayor Zohran Mamdani. This could drive wealthy homeowners to flee.
The penalty would apply to secondary houses worth $5 million or more. Those who own opulent residences in any of the five boroughs but live outside the city or do not pay municipal taxes would be the ones targeted.
