Updated September 3, 2026. Quick answer: Nevada permits it, in both directions, but the vocabulary splits by direction: Nevada’s Chapter 92A article actually titled ‘domestication’ (NRS 92A.270) is inbound-only by its own definition. The outbound route, a Nevada LLC becoming an out-of-state LLC without dissolving, runs instead through the ‘conversion’ article, NRS 92A.195(2), which carries the same reciprocity condition (the destination state’s own law must allow it). The filing fee is $350 either way, set by NRS 92A.210.
The statute, and why Nevada gets miscounted
NRS 92A.195(2) reads: ‘One domestic entity or domestic general partnership may convert into one foreign entity if: (a) The conversion is permitted by the law of the jurisdiction governing the resulting foreign entity and the resulting foreign entity complies with that law in effecting the conversion; and (b) The domestic entity complies with’ a list of cross-referenced procedural sections. Chapter 92A is captioned ‘Mergers, Conversions, Exchanges and Domestications’ and keeps those as textually distinct mechanisms; Nevada’s own statute reserves the word ‘domestication’ for the inbound direction only. A source that cites NRS 92A.270 as the authority for a Nevada LLC leaving the state has the wrong section.
What the filing costs
Outbound, a Nevada LLC files Articles of Conversion with the Nevada Secretary of State under NRS 92A.210, which sets a flat $350 fee for ‘articles of merger, articles of conversion, articles of exchange, articles of domestication or articles of termination.’ The same $350 figure applies to Nevada’s separate inbound Articles of Domestication filing (NRS 92A.270). An inbound move into Nevada also requires separate LLC-formation-fee filings (a new charter document and an initial list of managers/members), but those are not part of the outbound entity-law filing this page covers.
That is the entity-law filing fee only. It is not the cost of leaving, and anyone who tells you the cost of leaving Nevada 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 Nevada’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 Nevada 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.
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 move-to-another-state guide, which covers Delaware’s route directly. 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.
- Nevada: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/nrs-092a.html. Statutory text, independently re-verified 2026-09-03, matches dataset.