Body: <p>Noticed a bizarre issue that's been present since 5.38. Recently upgraded to 5.40.2 in the hopes that it might fix the problem.</p>
  <p>We noticed that quite a significant number of individual records that have shared contact mailing addresses that are coming from an organizational record or from a household record, are missing the state in the address, but only on the individual record. If we click on the source record that the address is being shared from, either the org record or the household record, the mailing address displays correctly with the state present, however, on the individual record, everything displays EXCEPT for the state record.</p>
  <p>This wouldn't be a huge problem, necessarily, except if we run an export which includes all the fields for the mailing address of an individual record, the state field is completely blank in the export as well. So this appears not just be a cosmetic/display issue, but there's a deeper problem where the state is being dropped off for some reason.</p>
  <p>Any ideas what could be the cause of this bug? We've been exporting batches of contact lists for a huge mailing we're doing, and the lack of state in more than half our records is crippling our ability to get the job done on time. Any help would be much appreciated in helping troubleshoot and fix the issue.</p>
  <p>Many many thanks in advance!!</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-08-24T18:35:55.087Z
Comments.Text: Just found the submission of this known bug here: https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/1605
  
  Seems like the regression bug is still present. Surprised this has been an issue for over a year with no official fix from the devs.
Comments.UserDisplayName: shayaknyc
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-08-31T15:14:59.747Z
Comments.Text: Re your comment - the issue has not been closed but there were a couple of commits mentioning it.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Aidan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-11-08T16:53:49.213Z
Comments.Text: @Aidan and yet, it's still an open issue, and i'm sure many orgs are using the shared address functionality (cuz why wouldn't they if they offer it?!) only to find out that it's borked and worse than useless because it's giving users the sense that it's functional, and is in fact, not.
Comments.UserDisplayName: shayaknyc
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-11-10T09:12:29.177Z
Comments.Text: If you want to help move the issue forward you could test with the latest master and provide comments on the issue. Has anything changed or is the bug description still accurate?  This is open source - things get fixed by people getting involved and helping.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Aidan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-11-11T17:03:46.853Z
Comments.Text: @Aidan - i'm aware....unfortunately, this is still an issue with the latest stable release. I'm not a coder, otherwise I'd have submitted a PR for a fix by now. I'm just not sure I understand the reasoning behind not fixing a feature that the core dev team created, then broke.....
Comments.UserDisplayName: shayaknyc
Tags: <households><organization><civicontact><individual>
Title: Individuals with shared addresses from an org or household record, are missing the state
ThreadText: # Individuals with shared addresses from an org or household record, are missing the state
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-08-24)
  
  Noticed a bizarre issue that's been present since 5.38. Recently upgraded to 5.40.2 in the hopes that it might fix the problem.
  
  We noticed that quite a significant number of individual records that have shared contact mailing addresses that are coming from an organizational record or from a household record, are missing the state in the address, but only on the individual record. If we click on the source record that the address is being shared from, either the org record or the household record, the mailing address displays correctly with the state present, however, on the individual record, everything displays EXCEPT for the state record.
  
  This wouldn't be a huge problem, necessarily, except if we run an export which includes all the fields for the mailing address of an individual record, the state field is completely blank in the export as well. So this appears not just be a cosmetic/display issue, but there's a deeper problem where the state is being dropped off for some reason.
  
  Any ideas what could be the cause of this bug? We've been exporting batches of contact lists for a huge mailing we're doing, and the lack of state in more than half our records is crippling our ability to get the job done on time. Any help would be much appreciated in helping troubleshoot and fix the issue.
  
  Many many thanks in advance!!
  
  **Tags:** households, organization, civicontact, individual
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Just found the submission of this known bug here: https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/1605  Seems like the regression bug is still present. Surprised this has been an issue for over a year with no official fix from the devs.  
  > **username_1**: Re your comment - the issue has not been closed but there were a couple of commits mentioning it.  
  > **username_0**: @username_1 and yet, it's still an open issue, and i'm sure many orgs are using the shared address functionality (cuz why wouldn't they if they offer it?!) only to find out that it's borked and worse than useless because it's giving users the sense that it's functional, and is in fact, not.  
  > **username_1**: If you want to help move the issue forward you could test with the latest master and provide comments on the issue. Has anything changed or is the bug description still accurate?  This is open source - things get fixed by people getting involved and helping.  
  > **username_0**: @username_1 - i'm aware....unfortunately, this is still an issue with the latest stable release. I'm not a coder, otherwise I'd have submitted a PR for a fix by now. I'm just not sure I understand the reasoning behind not fixing a feature that the core dev team created, then broke.....  
  
  ---
  
  ## 0 answers
  
  