Why does the author keep hounding on "Again, I have not lived in MA or earned income in that state since 2003"? It sounds like MA isn't after anything to do with residency or wage income.
They see in 2003 they had a return that owed some money, and no return in 2004, so they assume that the same taxes are due from 2003. Then they do it again in 2005...
This is what happens when your state doesn't have official move-out procedures, etc. They don't know, and they don't mail you until 15 months after you move, so your mail is no longer forwarded, and they make no attempt to contact you a lot of the time.
"Again, I hadn't lived there or worked there since 2003, but I did own part of a business that was headquartered in MA, and the state was using this fact to harass me for income tax money."
If you own a business headquarted in MA, aren't you earning income (through the business) in MA?
If you work in a different state (even if you don't live in the state), you still owe income tax for income earned in that state. This is non-resident state income tax.
Pretty sure MA has a reasonable claim here based at least on what the author states.
They see in 2003 they had a return that owed some money, and no return in 2004, so they assume that the same taxes are due from 2003. Then they do it again in 2005...
This is what happens when your state doesn't have official move-out procedures, etc. They don't know, and they don't mail you until 15 months after you move, so your mail is no longer forwarded, and they make no attempt to contact you a lot of the time.