Moving from South Dakota to New Hampshire: Residency, Taxes, and What to Prove

In South Dakota

South Dakota is a genuine, common tax-home domicile choice for travel nurses because it imposes no income tax and its driver's license rule (one overnight stay plus a mailing address) is achievable even for someone who is only in the state briefly between assignments. As with any tax-home claim, the IRS still requires the nurse to actually maintain and periodically return to a real home base, not just a mailing address, or the tax-free housing stipend can be reclassified as taxable wages; a South Dakota mail-forwarding address with no genuine pattern of returning to the state is a weaker tax-home claim than one paired with real, if infrequent, physical presence.

In New Hampshire

New Hampshire has no state income tax to complicate a travel nurse's tax-home analysis, which makes it an attractive tax-home state to claim, similar to Florida or Texas, provided the nurse genuinely maintains and returns to a New Hampshire home between assignments under the general IRS tax-home rules (Publication 463). New Hampshire itself publishes no nurse-specific guidance because it has no individual filing requirement to trigger one.

In South Dakota

South Dakota has no major professional sports franchise. South Dakota itself never taxes any athlete's income regardless of domicile, but a South Dakota-domiciled athlete still owes nonresident jock tax in every state with an income tax where they play, based on duty-day apportionment; South Dakota's appeal as a domicile is that it eliminates the home-state slice of that calculation entirely.

In New Hampshire

New Hampshire has no major professional sports franchises, so it runs no state jock-tax regime of its own, and because it has no income tax, a New Hampshire-domiciled athlete owes zero state tax on the share of income attributable to New Hampshire duty days, unlike a player based in a state that both taxes and credits.

In South Dakota

South Dakota is less commonly the destination for classic snowbird arrangements (that role is dominated by Florida, Arizona, and Texas) and more commonly the domicile-of-record for people who are mobile year-round, especially full-time RVers who don't have a fixed second home anywhere. Because South Dakota imposes no exit test of its own on people leaving and no entry test creating South Dakota tax liability, the entire audit risk in a South Dakota domicile arrangement sits with whatever state the person actually spends significant time in, most often assessed under that state's own statutory residency or day-count rules.

In New Hampshire

New Hampshire places no day-count cap on long visitors of its own, since it has no statutory residency test. The exposure runs entirely the other way: someone who claims New Hampshire domicile to escape a high-tax origin state (most commonly Massachusetts) but still spends significant time and keeps a home in that origin state can be taxed there as a statutory resident regardless of the New Hampshire claim.

In South Dakota

There is no convenience-of-the-employer rule to worry about because South Dakota has no income tax to apply one under. A remote worker who establishes genuine South Dakota domicile, meaning an actual driver's license, mailing address, and a credible pattern of connection to the state, owes $0 South Dakota tax regardless of where their employer is headquartered, which has made South Dakota a popular domicile choice for remote workers leaving California, New York, and other high-tax states, alongside Texas and Florida.

In New Hampshire

New Hampshire has no convenience-of-the-employer rule (it has nothing to source, having no income tax). The real friction runs the other direction: a remote worker who moves to New Hampshire but keeps a Massachusetts-based employer needs to confirm Massachusetts is not still asserting Massachusetts-source treatment of the wages under its own COVID-era sourcing rules, which New Hampshire itself challenged (unsuccessfully, at the Supreme Court) on behalf of its residents in 2020-2021.

In South Dakota

South Dakota follows the federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and Military Spouses Residency Relief Act. Because South Dakota has no income tax, service members and spouses who elect South Dakota domicile under MSRRA simply owe no state tax on military pay or spousal income. Ellsworth Air Force Base near Rapid City is the state's major installation and a common source of South Dakota domicile elections among service members and their spouses.

In New Hampshire

New Hampshire follows the federal SCRA and MSRRA: a service member's home-of-record does not change solely because military orders station them in New Hampshire, and an accompanying spouse can generally elect the service member's domicile state under MSRRA. Because New Hampshire taxes no individual income, choosing it as home-of-record eliminates state income tax on military pay entirely.

In South Dakota

Federal law (49 U.S.C. §40116) limits taxation of air carrier employees to their state of residence and any state where they earn more than 50% of pay. South Dakota is not a major airline crew base, but since South Dakota itself never taxes income, South Dakota-domiciled crew simply owe $0 South Dakota tax and rely on the federal rule to limit exposure to whichever state actually taxes them.

In New Hampshire

New Hampshire has no major hub airport for airline crew, but the federal carve-out (49 U.S.C. § 40116, taxing crew wages only in the state of residence or a state where over 50% of pay is earned) combined with New Hampshire's lack of any income tax makes it, like Florida and Texas, a common domicile choice for crew based at nearby Boston Logan who want to avoid Massachusetts income tax on their wages.