SEE - Special Enrollment Exam Quiz: Residency And Filing Obligations
14 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Residency And Filing ObligationsQuestion 1 of 14

An alien was present in the United States for 140 days in 2025, 150 days in 2024, and 100 days in 2023. During 2025 her tax home was in Mexico, she had a closer connection to Mexico than to the United States, she did not apply for lawful permanent resident status, and she timely filed Form 8840. Her only income for 2025 was $12,000 effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business.

Which of the following is correct regarding her U.S. residency and filing obligation for 2025?

She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because the closer connection exception applies, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040-NR.
She is a resident alien for 2025 because the substantial presence test is met, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040.
She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because her weighted days are less than 183, so she has no U.S. filing obligation.
She is a resident alien for 2025 because the closer connection exception applies only to aliens present 183 days or more, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040.
← Back to quizzes

SEE - Special Enrollment Exam Quiz

SEE - Special Enrollment Exam Quiz: Residency And Filing Obligations

Practice Residency And Filing Obligations in SEE - Special Enrollment Exam with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Residency And Filing Obligations, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for SEE - Special Enrollment Exam.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

An alien was present in the United States for 140 days in 2025, 150 days in 2024, and 100 days in 2023. During 2025 her tax home was in Mexico, she had a closer connection to Mexico than to the United States, she did not apply for lawful permanent resident status, and she timely filed Form 8840. Her only income for 2025 was $12,000 effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business.

Which of the following is correct regarding her U.S. residency and filing obligation for 2025?

  1. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because the closer connection exception applies, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040-NR. (correct answer)
  2. She is a resident alien for 2025 because the substantial presence test is met, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040.
  3. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because her weighted days are less than 183, so she has no U.S. filing obligation.
  4. She is a resident alien for 2025 because the closer connection exception applies only to aliens present 183 days or more, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040.
Explanation: Under IRC § 7701(b)(3)(B), an alien who otherwise meets the substantial presence test is not treated as a U.S. resident if she was present in the United States for fewer than 183 days during the year, maintained a tax home in a foreign country during the year, had a closer connection to a foreign country than to the United States, did not have a pending LPR application, and timely filed Form 8840. Here the weighted count is 140 + 150/3 + 100/6 = 206.67 days, so the substantial presence test is met, but the closer connection exception overrides it and she is a nonresident alien for 2025. A nonresident alien with income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business reports that income on Form 1040-NR. Choice A is therefore correct. Choice B ignores the exception. Choice C miscounts the weighted days and overlooks the filing obligation for effectively connected income. Choice D reverses the 183-day condition: the closer connection exception cannot apply to an individual present in the United States for 183 days or more during the year.

Question 2

Rafael, a citizen of Argentina, was physically present in the United States for 150 days in 2025, 200 days in 2024, and 200 days in 2023, all in B-2 visitor status. He never worked in the United States and maintained his home, family, and tax home in Argentina. In April 2025, he filed Form I-485 to apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident, and the application was still pending on December 31, 2025.

Which of the following is correct regarding Rafael's U.S. tax residency for 2025?

  1. He is a nonresident alien for 2025 under the closer connection exception because he was present in the United States for fewer than 183 days during 2025 and has a closer connection to Argentina.
  2. He is a nonresident alien for 2025 because a B-2 visitor who does not work in the United States is an exempt individual and his days of presence are not counted.
  3. He is a resident alien for 2025 only if his Form I-485 is approved before the due date of his 2025 tax return.
  4. He is a resident alien for 2025 because his weighted days of presence equal 250, and the closer connection exception is unavailable while his application for adjustment of status is pending. (correct answer)
Explanation: IRC § 7701(b)(3)(B) provides the closer connection exception, and IRC § 7701(b)(3)(C) makes it unavailable for any year in which an application for adjustment of status is pending. Rafael's weighted days are 150 + (200 ÷ 3) + (200 ÷ 6) = 250, so he meets the substantial presence test under IRC § 7701(b)(3)(A), and the pending Form I-485 bars the closer connection exception. Choice A ignores the pending application. Choice B mistakes a B-2 visitor for an exempt individual; exempt status is defined in IRC § 7701(b)(5), not by whether the visitor works. Choice C requires approval, but the pendency of the application is itself disqualifying.

Question 3

Naoko, a citizen of Japan, entered the United States in 2022 on a J-1 visa as a research scholar. She was an exempt individual for the first two calendar years of her J-1 program, 2022 and 2023. She continued in J-1 status and was physically present in the United States on every day of 2025. She did not maintain a tax home in Japan or any other foreign country during 2025, and she has no pending green card application.

Which of the following is correct regarding Naoko's U.S. tax residency for 2025?

  1. She is a resident alien for 2025 because her two-year exemption for a J-1 research scholar has been exhausted, and her days of presence in 2025 count toward the substantial presence test. (correct answer)
  2. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because J-1 visa holders are exempt individuals and their days of presence are not counted under the substantial presence test.
  3. She is a resident alien for 2025 only if she elects to waive her exempt individual status and files a statement with her return.
  4. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because she has not applied for lawful permanent residence and her J-1 status remains valid.
Explanation: IRC § 7701(b)(5) defines exempt individuals for the substantial presence test, and a J-1 teacher, trainee, or research scholar is exempt for only two calendar years within the six-year lookback period. Naoko used her two exempt years in 2022 and 2023, so she is not an exempt individual in 2025. Her 365 days of presence in 2025 alone satisfy IRC § 7701(b)(3)(A), making Choice A correct. Choice B states a blanket J-1 exemption and misses the two-year limit. Choice C invents an election to waive exempt status. Choice D treats the lack of a green card as dispositive, but the substantial presence test can create residency without a green card.

Question 4

Lucia, a citizen of Spain, arrived in the United States on November 1, 2025, on an L-1 visa and remained continuously through December 31, 2025. She had not been present in the United States in 2023 or 2024, and she has never been a lawful permanent resident. She will be present in the United States for more than 300 days in 2026 and will meet the substantial presence test for that year.

Which of the following is correct regarding Lucia's 2025 U.S. tax residency if she makes any available election?

  1. She may elect to be treated as a resident alien for the period November 1 through December 31, 2025, by attaching a statement to a timely filed return. (correct answer)
  2. She may elect to be treated as a resident alien for all of 2025 because she is expected to meet the substantial presence test in 2026, and the election is available to any alien with at least 31 days of presence.
  3. She is automatically a resident alien for all of 2025 because she was present for at least 31 consecutive days and met the 75% presence requirement for the period from November 1 through December 31.
  4. She is a nonresident alien for all of 2025 because her total days of presence in the United States during 2025 do not satisfy the substantial presence test.
Explanation: Treas. Reg. § 301.7701(b)-4(c) permits a first-year choice when the alien does not meet the substantial presence test in the election year, is present for at least 31 consecutive days, is present for at least 75% of the period from the first day of that 31-day period through year-end, and meets the substantial presence test in the following year. Lucia satisfies all of these conditions, so Choice A is correct: if she attaches the required statement to a timely filed return, her residency begins November 1, 2025. Choice B wrongly makes the election apply to the entire year. Choice C treats the first-year choice as automatic, but it is an election. Choice D ignores the election entirely.

Question 5

Marcus, age 16, is the son of U.S. citizens and can be claimed as a dependent on their 2025 federal income tax return. He had $2,200 of taxable interest income from a savings account and no earned income during 2025. His parents do not make the Form 8814 election.

Which of the following is correct regarding Marcus's 2025 filing requirement?

  1. Marcus is required to file a return, and his parents must attach Form 8615 because his unearned income exceeds $1,350.
  2. Marcus is required to file a return because his unearned income exceeds $1,350, but Form 8615 is not required because his unearned income does not exceed $2,700. (correct answer)
  3. Marcus is not required to file a return because his unearned income does not exceed $2,700, the threshold for the kiddie tax.
  4. Marcus is not required to file a return because his gross income is below the $15,750 standard deduction that applies to a single taxpayer.
Explanation: IRC § 6012(a)(1)(C) requires a dependent to file when gross income exceeds the dependent standard deduction under IRC § 63(c)(5). For a dependent with no earned income, that standard deduction is $1,350, so Marcus's $2,200 of unearned income requires him to file. Because his unearned income does not exceed $2,700, Form 8615 is not required; the amount above $1,350 is taxed at the child's rate. Choice A uses the correct filing result but incorrectly requires Form 8615. Choice C treats the Form 8615 threshold as an exemption from filing. Choice D uses the basic single standard deduction instead of the smaller dependent standard deduction.

Question 6

Ravi, a citizen of India, entered the United States on an H-1B visa on May 1, 2025, and remained continuously in the United States through December 31, 2025. He had not been present in the United States in 2023 or 2024 and has never been admitted as a lawful permanent resident. His only income in 2025 was $45,000 of wages from his U.S. employer, all earned after May 1.

Which of the following is correct regarding Ravi's 2025 U.S. tax status?

  1. He is a resident alien for all of 2025 because his presence in the United States exceeded 183 days and the substantial presence test treats him as a resident from January 1.
  2. He is a resident alien from May 1 through December 31, 2025, but he may claim the full standard deduction because he was a resident for more than half the year.
  3. He is a resident alien from May 1 through December 31, 2025, and a nonresident alien before that date; as a dual-status taxpayer he must itemize deductions and cannot claim the standard deduction. (correct answer)
  4. He is a nonresident alien for all of 2025 because an H-1B visa holder cannot satisfy the substantial presence test before completing one full calendar year in the United States.
Explanation: IRC § 7701(b)(2)(A) provides that an alien who meets the substantial presence test is a resident from the first day of presence in the calendar year, not from January 1. Ravi was present from May 1 and satisfies the substantial presence test, so he is a resident from May 1 through December 31 and a nonresident before that date, making him a dual-status taxpayer. Under IRC § 63(c) and IRS Pub. 519, a dual-status taxpayer may not take the standard deduction and must itemize; therefore Choice C is correct. Choice A treats the substantial presence test as creating full-year residency from January 1. Choice B correctly identifies the residency period but incorrectly allows the standard deduction. Choice D is wrong because H-1B visa holders can meet the substantial presence test before completing a full calendar year.

Question 7

Leila, a citizen of Egypt and a lawful permanent resident since 2021, moved to the United Arab Emirates on March 1, 2025, to work for a Dubai employer and has not returned. She did not file Form I-407, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not revoked her green card. In 2025 she earned $4,000 from U.S. wages before moving and $95,000 from the Dubai employer for work performed after March 1.

Which of the following is correct regarding Leila's 2025 U.S. tax return?

  1. She must file Form 1040 as a U.S. resident alien for 2025 and report the $95,000 of foreign salary on that return, subject to any applicable foreign earned income exclusion or foreign tax credit. (correct answer)
  2. She must file Form 1040-NR as a nonresident alien for 2025 and report only the $4,000 of U.S. wages, because the $95,000 of foreign salary is not U.S.-source income.
  3. She was a resident alien only through February 28, 2025, and a nonresident alien for the remainder of the year, so she files a dual-status return and reports only U.S.-source income for the nonresident period.
  4. She is not required to file a U.S. return for 2025 because she was present in the United States for only 31 days during the year and her U.S.-source wages were only $4,000.
Explanation: Choice A is correct. Under IRC § 7701(b)(1)(A), an alien who is a lawful permanent resident at any time during the calendar year is a resident alien for that year. Leila's green card remained in effect because she did not file Form I-407 and USCIS did not revoke it; moving abroad by itself does not end green card status for tax purposes. A resident alien files Form 1040 and reports worldwide income. The Dubai salary is therefore reportable, subject to any foreign earned income exclusion or foreign tax credit she may claim. Choice B applies the Form 1040-NR rule for nonresident aliens, but she is not a nonresident. Choice C assumes the move created a mid-year residency termination; without abandonment or revocation, there is no termination. Choice D ignores the green card test and the worldwide filing obligation of a resident alien.

Question 8

Vivian, a citizen of Argentina, is not a lawful permanent resident. She was physically present in the United States for 170 days in 2025, 120 days in 2024, and 60 days in 2023. Her tax home was in Argentina throughout 2025; her family, home, and financial ties are there, and she has not applied for an immigrant visa or green card.

Which of the following is correct regarding Vivian's U.S. residency status for 2025?

  1. She has only 170 actual days of presence in 2025, so she does not meet the substantial presence test; days in earlier years have no effect on her residency status for 2025.
  2. Her weighted days total 210, so she meets the substantial presence test and is a resident alien for 2025 even though she was present in the United States for fewer than 183 days.
  3. Her weighted days total 220, so she meets the substantial presence test; she will be treated as a nonresident for 2025 if she timely files Form 8840 under the closer connection exception. (correct answer)
  4. Because all of her actual days of presence in 2023, 2024, and 2025 are added together, she has 350 days of presence and is a resident alien for 2025.
Explanation: Under IRC § 7701(b)(3), the substantial presence test is met for 2025 only if an individual was present in the United States at least 31 days during 2025 and the weighted three-year total is at least 183 days. Vivian's weighted total is 170 + (120/3) + (60/6) = 220 days, so she satisfies the test. Because she was present fewer than 183 days in 2025, had a tax home in Argentina throughout 2025, and has closer connections to Argentina, she will be treated as a nonresident under the closer connection exception of IRC § 7701(b)(3)(B) if she timely files Form 8840. Thus, Choice C is correct. Choice A uses only her 2025 days and treats prior-year days as irrelevant. Choice B omits the 10 weighted days from 2023, reaching 210 instead of 220. Choice D adds the actual days for all three years without applying the required one-third and one-sixth weights.

Question 9

Camille, a citizen of France, visited the United States on a B-2 visitor visa for 120 days in each of 2025, 2024, and 2023. She never worked in the United States and had no U.S.-source income. She did not apply for a green card and maintained her home, family, and tax home in France.

Under the substantial presence test, which of the following is correct for Camille's 2025 U.S. tax treatment?

  1. She is a resident alien for 2025 because her total physical presence of 360 days over the three-year period exceeds 183 days.
  2. She is a resident alien for 2025 because her weighted days of presence equal 200, and she was present in the United States for at least 31 days during the year.
  3. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because her weighted days of presence equal 180, and she had no U.S.-source income, so she is not required to file a U.S. tax return. (correct answer)
  4. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 but must file Form 1040-NR because her physical presence in the United States exceeded 183 days over the three-year period.
Explanation: IRC § 7701(b)(3)(A) applies the substantial presence test by counting all current-year days, one-third of the first preceding year's days, and one-sixth of the second preceding year's days. Camille's weighted total is 120 + (120 ÷ 3) + (120 ÷ 6) = 180, which is below the 183-day threshold. She is therefore a nonresident alien, and because she had no U.S.-source income and was not engaged in a U.S. trade or business, IRC § 6012 does not require her to file. Choice A incorrectly counts all prior-year days in full. Choice B reaches 200 by applying one-third to both prior years instead of one-sixth to the second preceding year. Choice D incorrectly treats three-year physical presence alone as creating a filing obligation.

Question 10

An alien was a nonresident alien from January 1 through June 30, 2025, and a U.S. resident alien from July 1 through December 31, 2025, under the residency rules. She is single and had $50,000 of income for 2025.

Which of the following is correct regarding her 2025 federal return?

  1. She files Form 1040-NR marked "Dual-Status Return" as her return and attaches Form 1040 as the statement for the resident period.
  2. She files Form 1040 marked "Dual-Status Return," attaches a Form 1040-NR marked "Dual-Status Statement" for the nonresident period, and may not claim the standard deduction. (correct answer)
  3. She may claim the standard deduction because she was a U.S. resident alien on December 31, 2025.
  4. She reports only income received during the resident portion because income received while a nonresident is not taxable in the United States.
Explanation: IRS Pub. 519 (Dual-Status Aliens) and the Form 1040 and Form 1040-NR instructions govern the dual-status return. A dual-status alien who is a resident on the last day of the tax year files Form 1040 marked "Dual-Status Return" and attaches a statement showing the income for the nonresident part of the year; Form 1040-NR may be used as that statement, marked "Dual-Status Statement." A dual-status alien may not claim the standard deduction. She was a resident on December 31, 2025, so Choice B is correct. Choice A states the filing rule for an alien who is a nonresident on the last day of the year, which reverses the return and the statement on these facts. Choice C is wrong because the standard deduction is unavailable to a dual-status alien regardless of residence at year end. Choice D is wrong because income for the nonresident portion is still subject to U.S. tax if it is U.S.-source income or income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business.

Question 11

Miguel, a citizen of Spain, was a nonresident alien throughout 2025. His spouse, Dana, is a U.S. citizen and was a U.S. resident throughout 2025. Miguel had $20,000 of Spanish interest and no U.S.-source income. Dana had $60,000 of U.S. wages. Neither spouse has previously made an election under IRC § 6013(g). They elect to be treated as a U.S. resident alien for 2025 and file a joint return.

Which of the following is correct regarding the 2025 joint return?

  1. Dana reports her worldwide income, but Miguel's $20,000 of Spanish interest is excluded because he remains a nonresident alien for U.S. tax purposes.
  2. Miguel reports only his U.S.-source income on Form 1040-NR, while Dana reports her U.S. wages on Form 1040.
  3. The election is available only if Miguel was physically present in the United States for at least 31 days during 2025 and neither spouse has previously made a § 6013(g) election.
  4. Under the election, both spouses are treated as U.S. residents for the entire year and report their worldwide income on a joint Form 1040. (correct answer)
Explanation: Choice D is correct. Under IRC § 6013(g), a nonresident alien married to a U.S. citizen or resident may elect, with the consent of both spouses and if the election has not previously been made, to be treated as a U.S. resident for the entire taxable year. Thus the couple files a joint Form 1040 and reports combined worldwide income. Choice A states the result if no election were made. Choice B misstates the return: the election produces one joint Form 1040, not a separate Form 1040-NR for Miguel. Choice C adds a substantial-presence requirement that § 6013(g) does not contain.

Question 12

Rosa is a U.S. citizen who has been a bona fide resident of Japan since 2019. Her tax home and abode were in Tokyo throughout 2025. In 2025 her only income was $95,000 of wages from a Japanese employer for services performed in Japan. She wants to claim the foreign earned income exclusion.

Which of the following is correct regarding her 2025 U.S. return?

  1. She may file Form 1040-NR as a nonresident alien because her tax home and abode are outside the United States.
  2. She must file a 2025 Form 1040 to claim the exclusion, and the maximum foreign earned income exclusion for 2025 is $130,000. (correct answer)
  3. She is not required to file a 2025 return because the $95,000 of foreign wages is excluded from gross income.
  4. Her return is due April 15, 2026, because the automatic two-month extension for taxpayers living abroad is available only to resident aliens, not to U.S. citizens.
Explanation: Choice B is correct. Under IRC § 911, a qualified individual may elect to exclude foreign earned income. For 2025 the maximum foreign earned income exclusion is $130,000; Rosa's exclusion is limited to the $95,000 she actually earned. The election is made by filing Form 2555 with Form 1040, so a return is required to claim it. Choice A is wrong because a U.S. citizen cannot use Form 1040-NR merely because her tax home is abroad. Choice C is wrong because the exclusion is not automatic; the taxpayer must file to elect it. Choice D is wrong because, under Treas. Reg. § 1.6081-5(a)(1), a U.S. citizen whose tax home and abode are outside the United States is automatically allowed until June 15 to file; Form 4868 is not needed for that automatic two-month extension.

Question 13

An alien was a lawful permanent resident of the United States for all of 2025 and did not relinquish or have her status revoked. She was outside the United States for the entire year. She is single and her only income was $40,000 of interest from an Australian bank. No income tax treaty provision treats her as a resident of Australia for 2025.

Which of the following is correct regarding her 2025 U.S. tax treatment?

  1. She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because she failed the substantial presence test and reports only U.S.-source income.
  2. She is not a U.S. resident for 2025 because her permanent home and financial ties were in Australia for the entire year.
  3. She is a U.S. resident alien for 2025 and must report the $40,000 of Australian interest on Form 1040. (correct answer)
  4. She may exclude the $40,000 of Australian interest under the foreign earned income exclusion because it is foreign-source income.
Explanation: Choice C is correct. Under IRC § 7701(b)(1)(A)(i), an alien is a U.S. resident for any calendar year in which the alien is a lawful permanent resident at any time during the year. A resident alien is taxed by IRC § 61 on worldwide income. Because she held the green card for all of 2025 and did not relinquish it, she must file Form 1040 and report the Australian interest. Choice A wrongly treats the substantial presence test as the only residency test. Choice B wrongly equates tax residence with physical presence or permanent home; the green card test covers the entire calendar year. Choice D confuses the §911 foreign earned income exclusion, which applies only to earned income, with foreign investment interest.

Question 14

Mateo, a citizen of Colombia, was not a U.S. resident in 2024 and had no days of U.S. presence in 2023 or 2024. He arrived in the United States on November 1, 2025, on an H-1B visa and stayed continuously through December 16, 2025. He had no other days of U.S. presence in 2025. He expects to meet the substantial presence test for 2026.

Can Mateo make the first-year choice for 2025 and, if so, from what date is he treated as a U.S. resident?

  1. No, because he was present in the United States for only 46 days in 2025, and 46 days is less than the 183-day substantial presence threshold for 2025.
  2. Yes; he is treated as a resident from December 1, 2025, because the 31-consecutive-day requirement is satisfied on that date and the period from December 1 through December 16 is 16 days.
  3. Yes; he is treated as a resident from November 1, 2025, but only if he satisfies the substantial presence test for 2026 and makes the election on or with his 2025 return. (correct answer)
  4. Yes; he is treated as a U.S. resident for the entire 2025 tax year because the first-year choice applies to the current year and there is no partial-year limitation.
Explanation: Choice C is correct. Under IRC § 7701(b)(4), an alien who was not a U.S. resident in the preceding year and does not meet the substantial presence test in the election year may elect to be treated as a resident for part of that year if three requirements are met: present in the United States for at least 31 consecutive days, present for at least 75% of the days from the first day of that 31-day period through December 31, and meeting the substantial presence test in the following year. Mateo was present continuously from November 1 through December 16, 2025, so his 31-consecutive-day period began November 1. From November 1 through December 31 there are 61 days, and 0.75 × 61 = 45.75, so 46 days of presence during that period is enough. He was present all 46 days. If he satisfies the substantial presence test for 2026, he may make the election with his 2025 return, and residency begins November 1, 2025. Choice A incorrectly applies the 183-day substantial presence test to the election year itself. Choice B uses the last day of the 31-day period; the statute uses the first day. Choice D ignores the partial-year limitation in the first-year choice.