|
Posted by roggo on June 24, 2007, 10:41 pm
Please log in for more thread options
A child is born early in 2006, placed into the adoptive home
in August and offically adopted in November. Is this child
a 'qualifying child' for tax purposes? Is the the residency
requirement 'trumped' by the fact that an adopted child is
treated as your own as if 'born' during the tax year? Or is
this a stretch? Thank you in advance!
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Phil Marti on June 26, 2007, 12:19 am
Please log in for more thread options
> A child is born early in 2006, placed into the adoptive home
> in August and offically adopted in November. Is this child
> a 'qualifying child' for tax purposes?
According to IRS Publication 501 an adopted child is
"always" treated as your own child. It's clear that a child
born to you, a/k/a "your own child," is treated as having
lived with you the entire year. Based on this, I'd say yes,
the child is your qualifying child for the year of birth.
--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by A.G. Kalman on July 1, 2007, 6:06 pm
Please log in for more thread options roggo wrote:
> A child is born early in 2006, placed into the adoptive home
> in August and offically adopted in November. Is this child
> a 'qualifying child' for tax purposes? Is the the residency
> requirement 'trumped' by the fact that an adopted child is
> treated as your own as if 'born' during the tax year? Or is
> this a stretch? Thank you in advance!
An adopted child is considered to be your own child for
purposes as to whether the child is a son, daughter,
stepson, or stepdaughter of the taxpayer, or an eligible
foster child of the taxpayer or a brother or sister. As
such, the child has to meet the age and residency test. The
residency test requires that the child live with you for
more than half the year. An exception to the more than half
year test exists for a child that is either born or dies in
the year, is temporarily absent, is kidnapped or is a child
of divorced, separated or never married parents. If the
child is born during the year and can't meet the greater
than 6 months rule, the exception requires that the child
reside with you for the entire time the child was alive
other than for a temporary absence. Therefore, the key
factor in this situation is whether the period of time from
the date of birth to placement in the adoptive home is
considered a temporary absence.
Here is the section of the regulations relating to temporary
absences and birth and death:
A nonpermanent failure to occupy the common abode by reason
of illness, education, business, vacation, military service,
or a custody agreement under which the dependent is absent
for less than six months in the taxable year of the
taxpayer, shall be considered temporary absence due to
special circumstances. The fact that the dependent dies
during the year shall not deprive the taxpayer of the
deduction if the dependent lived in the household for the
entire part of the year preceding his death. Likewise, the
period during the taxable year preceding the birth of an
individual shall not prevent such individual from qualifying
as a dependent under section 152(a)(9). Moreover, a child
who actually becomes a member of the taxpayer's household
during the taxable year shall not be prevented from being
considered a member of such household for the entire taxable
year, if the child is required to remain in a hospital for a
period following its birth, and if such child would
otherwise have been a member of the taxpayer's household
during such period.
Unless the period of time from date of birth to placement in
the home was due to the child being required to remain in
the hospital or if the child had the left the hospital and
was placed in your care but due to your temporary absence
the child did not live with you, then the child would fail
the test.
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Child Tax Credit - Newly Adopted Children | March 7, 2007, 11:45 pm |
| Does my child have to file | March 16, 2007, 1:12 pm |
| FSA vs Child Care Credit | December 12, 2007, 5:24 pm |
| Child Supp Collection | January 27, 2008, 12:48 am |
| Question about child tax credit | March 3, 2008, 12:06 pm |
| Qualifying Child question | October 19, 2008, 5:32 pm |
| child care credit question | February 20, 2007, 6:56 pm |
| Qualifying Child: What's A Temporary Absence? | February 25, 2007, 12:21 am |
| California Child Care Credits | March 15, 2007, 1:09 am |
| Unmarried parents both claimed child | March 21, 2007, 2:06 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap