Andrew’s practice deals with all aspects of state and local tax (SALT).  Though his primary focus is on New York State and New York City matters, Andrew handles multistate SALT matters as well. 

Andrew has in-depth experience in the area of state tax residency and assists clients from the planning stage through the audit and appeal processes.  Andrew counsels clients planning moves out of states like New York on how to accomplish their moves in ways most likely to be accepted by state taxing authorities on audit, while also allowing the clients to maintain some connections to their former home state.  He also counsels clients, often in connection with a change of residence, on structuring transactions and ongoing business relationships to minimize the taxes owed by clients to states in which they are non-residents.

While Andrew prefers to advise clients on the front-end of a move, he also understands that many clients will only seek his counsel after they’ve received an audit notice.  Andrew has extensive experience defending clients’ residency changes in the audit context.  Andrew is a tenacious advocate for his clients.  When audits or administrative tax litigation is involved, Andrew rolls up his sleeves and goes head-to-head with auditors and lawyers representing the state tax departments.  In the residency space, Andrew has successfully represented hundreds of clients in audits and well over 100 clients in appeals of contested residency audits.  

Andrew's experience in residency matters also extends to 548-day rule and 30-day rule planning and audits. He has successfully helped many clients plan for, execute, and defend on audit, 548-day rule and 30-day rule strategies, which resulted in nonresident status in New York. Clients he assists in these matters include:  New Yorkers wishing to minimize state and/or city tax on discrete liquidity events, US expatriates working abroad, and those wishing to change their residency to a foreign country.

Andrew is also involved in a host of other New York tax controversy work.  Recent matters include – audits and appeals dealing with the application of the New York’s MCTMT to limited partner income, Article 9A corporate apportionment audits, and New York sales and use tax audits and appeals. 

Finally, Andrew is heavily involved in the area of multistate tax compliance for cross-border businesses. In conjunction with appropriate federal and international tax planning, Andrew advises on U.S. state and local tax compliance issues to identify tax liability and risk concerns for cross-border businesses. Once the compliance issues are identified, Andrew works with these businesses to resolve past compliance issues and ensure compliance on a go-forward basis.


Allegheny College, B.A., magna cum laude

Syracuse University College of Law, J.D., magna cum laude


  • New York


  • Listed, Upstate New York Super Lawyers Rising Stars (Tax) 2021 - 2023

  • Former executive editor, Syracuse Law Review 
  • Justinian Honor Society
  • Order of the Coif

News & Insights


  • New York State Bar Association

Multimedia & Podcasts

  • The Zelinsky Case – Tax Department Wins Round 1

    The administrative law judge in the Zelinsky case issued a determination in favor of the tax department. Andrew Wright and Brandon Bourg join Joe Tantillo to discuss the analysis in the determination and break down what this means for the case moving forward. For now, the convenience rule remains good law, but will the analysis hold on appeal? Tune in to hear our thoughts.

  • Allocation & Apportionment (Part 3): Business Income

    In the final part of our allocation and apportionment series, Joe, Chris, and Andrew discuss the nuts and bolts of apportioning business income. The apportionment and allocation of business income often varies based on the type of business entity, which can create confusion for business owners. The panel tries to simplify this process by taking a look at New York’s rules for corporate and partnership apportionment.

  • Allocation & Apportionment (Part 2): Wage Allocation

    Joe, Chris, and Drew continue their series on allocation and apportionment. In this episode, the panel breaks down the nuts and bolts of nonresident wage allocation, and the impacts of telecommuting on the workday allocation fraction. The trio also discuss the difference between allocating salary and bonus income.

  • Allocation & Apportionment (Part 1): The Basics

    Joe is joined by Hodgson Russ Attorneys Andrew Wright and Chris Doyle to begin his series on nonresident allocation and apportionment. The group dives into the very basics of the topic, and answers the all-important question of what distinguishes allocation from apportionment.

  • Obus and the Future of Statutory Residency

    A major win for taxpayers, the decision in Matter of Obus v. New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal is final! Joe is joined by guests Tim Noonan, Andrew Wright, and Emma Savino to discuss this landmark tax case, which will dramatically shift the rules for New York’s statutory residency test. We break down the cases that led up to this point, what actually happened in Obus, why the impact of the case is significant, and what the future may hold for legal interpretation of what constitutes a permanent place of abode in New York. A once purely mechanical test, the statutory residency test now looks to have a major subjective component as part of the analysis, as a result of the Obus decision. Joe and his guests also give their thoughts on whether the State will take action in response to this major change.

Jump to Page

Necessary Cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. You may disable these by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Analytical Cookies

Analytical cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.

Andrew W. Wright / News & Insights