Facts
The complainant, [X.] , registered in [S.] (AG) as a weekly resident in the spring of 2000 and shared a 3 1/2-room apartment with his girlfriend [Y.] . He worked as a heating technician/project manager in the neighboring municipality of [G.] (ZH) and spent his weekends and free time with his parents in [A.] (VS). The tax office of the canton of Aargau determined that [X.] was subject to unlimited tax liability in [S.] with effect from August 1, 2002, due to personal affiliation. [X.] filed a constitutional complaint with the request to eliminate intercantonal double taxation for the period from August 1, 2002, to December 31, 2002.
The parties are: [X.] , the complainant, and the tax office of the canton of Aargau, the tax administration of the canton of Valais, and the tax appeals court of the canton of Aargau. The subject of the proceedings is the constitutional complaint against the decision of the tax appeals court of the canton of Aargau of May 15, 2003.
Considerations
The Federal Court examines questions of fact and law freely in double taxation cases. The constitutional complaint due to intercantonal double taxation must be filed at the latest when the second of the mutually exclusive cantonal tax claims is asserted. The appeals instance must take into account the further, up to their decision, surveyable circumstances.
The Federal Court has assumed that the taxation of income and movable assets of non-self-employed persons is the responsibility of the canton in which they have their domicile. The domicile is to be understood as the civil law domicile, i.e., the place where the person stays with the intention of permanent residence. If a person stays alternately at two places, the determining factor for the tax domicile is the place to which the person has the stronger connections.
The Federal Court…