Dan is a member of the firm's Tax Practice. Licensed to practice in New York, California and Florida, Dan focuses on a variety of state and local tax matters in jurisdictions across the United States. Dan has assisted clients with over 1,000 tax and other legal matters, regularly advising individuals and businesses on different aspects of personal income tax, sales and use tax, corporate franchise tax, and several other lesser-known taxes. While focused on tax matters, Dan often counsels clients on a wide variety of legal matters, teaming up with his colleagues in different disciplines to deliver effective and efficient solutions.

Dan’s clients frequently rely on his guidance for tax planning around significant liquidity events; changing or establishing state and local tax residency; income, franchise and sales tax substantial nexus issues; complex business income and earnings allocation issues; and related matters. He has extensive experience representing taxpayers in audits conducted by several tax jurisdictions, and also represents taxpayers at various levels of tax controversy dispute resolution and appeal.

Dan enjoys the opportunity to share his views on current state and local tax topics and legislative developments through speeches and in articles published in a variety of state and local tax publications.

Education

Syracuse University, B.A., magna cum laude

University at Buffalo School of Law, J.D., magna cum laude

Admissions

  • New York
  • California
  • Florida

Recognitions

  • Listed, Best Lawyers in America (Tax Law) 2025
  • Listed, Upstate New York Super Lawyers Rising Stars (Tax) 2022 - 2024
  • Former articles editor, Buffalo Law Review

News & Insights

Civic

  • Advisory Board Member, Co-Treasurer: Salvation Army, Buffalo Area Services
  • Board of Directors Member, Secretary: The First Tee of Western New York

Multimedia & Podcasts

  • California Tax Residency Rules (Part 2): Temporary/Transitory Purpose & Closest Connections

    Joe and Dan continue their discussion on California’s tax residency rules, and they delve into the complexity and ambiguity of California’s temporary/transitory purpose test. They highlight the unique rules associated with the test, and they discuss how California leans on the objective factors in its “closest connections test” when the temporary/transitory analysis doesn’t result in a firm domicile determination.

  • California Tax Residency Rules (Part 1): Domicile

    In this episode of State Tax Talks, Joe brings in California tax professional and Hodgson Russ Partner, Daniel Kelly for a nuts and bolts overview of California’s rules on changing your residency for tax purposes. The two start at the top with a discussion on California’s law surrounding domicile as well as a few safe harbor provisions included in the California tax law. California, much like New York, utilizes a complex analysis for making a determination as to whether someone has successfully abandoned their California residency. Dan and Joe look to peel back the layers of the primary test for our listeners.

  • Happy Minute 2 – The Convenience Rule Continued: Matter of Zelinsky

    Joe and guests Chris and Dan continue their conversation about New York State’s Convenience of the Employer Rule. They focus their discussion on one of the most famous court cases to ever challenge the Convenience Rule, Matter of Zelinsky v. Tax Appeals Tribunal of the State of New York. They also discuss Professor Zelinsky’s renewed challenge to the Convenience Rule, the challenge’s chances of success, and the best arguments against upholding the rule as constitutional.

  • Happy Minute 1—The Convenience Rule

    Welcome to the first edition of the Happy Minute: a laid back, round-table style discussion of contemporary tax issues that pique our interest. Joe is joined by guests, Chris Doyle and Dan Kelly, to discuss the Convenience of the Employer Rule used by New York and a handful of other states to tax the wage income of remote employees. This is a nonresident allocation rule that can be confusing to many taxpayers, especially those working remotely for New York employers. Joe, Chris, and Dan talk about how the rule works, why it negatively impacts remote employees, and whether it is fair for states to use a convenience rule.

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.

Daniel P. Kelly / News & Insights