Updated September 3, 2026. Quick answer: Colorado permits it, in both directions, under C.R.S. § 7-90-201. The mechanism is called conversion, not domestication, and it isn’t LLC-specific: it’s Colorado’s single conversion statute covering every entity type. Filing is a Statement of Conversion with the Colorado Secretary of State; the outbound-only fee is $50.
The statute, and why Colorado gets miscounted
§7-90-201(1)(b): ‘A domestic entity may convert into any form of foreign entity recognized in the jurisdiction under the law of which the entity will be considered to have been formed after the conversion,’ pursuant to a plan of conversion complying with §§7-90-201.3 and 7-90-201.4. The condition running outbound is that the destination jurisdiction must itself recognize or permit the resulting entity form. The definitions that make this reach an out-of-state LLC by plain text are §7-90-102(20) (‘entity’ means a domestic entity or a foreign entity) and §7-90-102(23) (‘foreign entity’ expressly lists ‘a foreign limited liability company … formed under a statute or common law of a jurisdiction other than this state’).
What the filing costs
Statement of Conversion, filed online with the Colorado Secretary of State (statutory basis for filing mechanics is C.R.S. § 7-90-201.7). The official CO SOS fee schedule lists ‘Conversion Statements $50.00’ for a standalone conversion: the relevant fee for this page’s outbound case. A separate ‘Combined Conversions $100.00’ line applies to the inbound case, where an out-of-state entity converts into a Colorado domestic entity in one combined filing. Flagged honestly: which line item applies in every edge case (e.g., an entity already foreign-qualified in Colorado before converting) could not be fully confirmed from the fee page alone.
That is the entity-law filing fee only. It is not the cost of leaving, and anyone who tells you the cost of leaving Colorado is a filing fee is selling something.
The part this page does not answer
The reason people search for this is usually not the filing. It is the tax exposure: what Colorado’s own revenue agency does when you leave, whether a final return is due, and whether the state agrees the entity has actually stopped doing business there. Those questions are governed by Colorado tax law and administrative practice, not by the entity-law citation above, and this cluster does not source them. We have the entity-law answer at primary and the tax answer not at all.
Two things worth knowing even so, both the general shape rather than a state-specific finding: changing the entity’s state of organization does not by itself end an obligation to register as a foreign LLC anywhere you still do business, and a state’s revenue department is a separate counterparty from its filing office. If you are moving to cut a tax bill, the entity move is the easy half.
This page sells nothing and links to no filing service. Moving an LLC is a filing-desk task with a statutory answer, and the answer is either in your two states’ codes or it is not.
What is commonly published about Colorado, and why it is wrong
That Colorado does not offer LLC domestication because Colorado’s statute has no section titled ‘domestication’: Title 7, Article 90, Part 2’s conversion provisions apply to LLCs via the broad entity definitions and produce the same no-dissolution, same-entity result that ‘domestication’ produces in states using that word.
Check both ends of the move, not just the destination
A move needs two things to be true: your destination has to let the entity in, and your current state has to let it out. Nine states have no statutory route out, so an LLC formed in one of them cannot domesticate anywhere, however welcoming the destination is. That is where most published advice goes wrong; it checks one end.
| State you would be leaving | Why there is no route out | What the code offers instead |
|---|---|---|
| Delaware | the statute affirmatively limits it | 6 Del. C. § 18-209 |
| Kentucky | nothing in the code permits it | KRS 275.345 to 275.365 |
| Massachusetts | the statute affirmatively limits it | Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 156C, § 59(b) |
| Missouri | nothing in the code permits it | Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 347.127 to 347.135 |
| New Mexico | nothing in the code permits it | NMSA 1978 § 53-19-62 |
| New York | nothing in the code permits it | NY LLC Law § 1001(b), certificate of merger under § 1003 |
| South Carolina | the statute affirmatively limits it | S.C. Code Ann. § 33-44-904 |
| Washington | the statute affirmatively limits it | RCW 25.15.416 to 25.15.431 |
| West Virginia | nothing in the code permits it | W. Va. Code § 31B-9-904, articles of merger under § 31B-9-905 |
Delaware is the surprise on that list and it is not a mistake; see the Delaware page. For the other eight, the substitute is a merger, not a dissolution: form the new entity in the destination state and merge the old one into it. Merger produces a surviving entity rather than a continuation, so it is genuinely not the same thing as domestication, but it keeps far more alive than dissolving does.
The full 51-jurisdiction table is on the domestication states list; the three routes are compared on how to move an LLC to another state.
Sources
Every row on this page is statutory text. No formation service, no registered-agent marketing page and no aggregator is cited anywhere in this cluster; those are the only publishers of the competing versions.
- Colorado: https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-7-corporations-and-associations/co-rev-st-sect-7-90-201/. Statutory text, Dataset only, not re-fetched this session. Dataset source is a verbatim FindLaw statutory-text mirror, cross-checked against §7-90-102 in the original 2026-08-12 pass..