|
Posted by Mark Bole on July 3, 2008, 10:47 am
Please log in for more thread options
Dick Adams wrote:
> My mistake. I forgot to note there are two minor
> children and they have joint custody and he has an
> [8332] for them.
If the children lived with each parent the same number of days during
the year, the custodial parent is the one with higher AGI. So, why does
he need a Form 8332? Aren't they already his qualifying children for
dependency purposes (and HOH, for that matter)?
Incidentally, back to the original topic: Pub 504 also contains this
statement:
"If you obtained a final decree of divorce or separate maintenance by
the end of the year, you cannot take your former spouse's exemption.
This rule applies even if you provided all of your former spouse's support."
-Mark Bole
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< 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 (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Arthur Kamlet on July 3, 2008, 3:30 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>Dick Adams wrote:
>> My mistake. I forgot to note there are two minor
>> children and they have joint custody and he has an
>> [8332] for them.
>
>If the children lived with each parent the same number of days during
>the year, the custodial parent is the one with higher AGI. So, why does
>he need a Form 8332? Aren't they already his qualifying children for
>dependency purposes (and HOH, for that matter)?
Is this a reference to the tie-breaker rules?
If so, the tie-breaker rules apply to qualifying children
of more than one taxpayer.
So, e.g., if the two parents, now divorced, lived together all
year, the tie-breaker rules then give the dependency exemption
to the higher AGI taxpayer.
Many years ago, just after the dinosaurs dissappeared, the tie-
breaker rules (somewhat different then) automatically gave the
EIC qualifying child to the higher AGI parent.
But since the invention of the greatly misnamed Uniform Definition
of Qualifying Child, the tie-breaker rules are optional, and are
brought into play only when the two or more parties do not agree
on who gets to claim the qualifying child.
>Incidentally, back to the original topic: Pub 504 also contains this
>statement:
>
>"If you obtained a final decree of divorce or separate maintenance by
>the end of the year, you cannot take your former spouse's exemption.
>This rule applies even if you provided all of your former spouse's support."
There are
i) personal exemptions, one per taxpayer listed on Form 1040 lines
8a and 6b
ii) dependency exemption for each dependent listed on line 6c.
I believe Pub 504 is referring to the personal exemption and not
the dependency exemption.
--
ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< 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 (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by D. Stussy on July 3, 2008, 5:19 pm
Please log in for more thread options > I believe Pub 504 is referring to the personal exemption and not
> the dependency exemption.
I agree. There's still the 365/366-day member of household dependent type.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< 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 (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Mark Bole on July 3, 2008, 6:36 pm
Please log in for more thread options Arthur Kamlet wrote:
>> If the children lived with each parent the same number of days during
>> the year, the custodial parent is the one with higher AGI. So, why does
>> he need a Form 8332? Aren't they already his qualifying children for
>> dependency purposes (and HOH, for that matter)?
>
> Is this a reference to the tie-breaker rules?
>
> If so, the tie-breaker rules apply to qualifying children
> of more than one taxpayer.
At first I thought so, and yes the tie-breaker rules are optional if the
taxpayers mutually agree which will claim the dependency. This would
normally be the case for parent/grandparent deciding who will claim a
child living with both, as a common example.
But the "special rule for divorced/separated parents" requires that
exactly one parent must be the custodial parent. Per the recent posting
on "Final Regs Published Section 152(e)", it states that if the number
of days (nights) spent with each parent is equal, then the higher AGI
parent becomes by definition the custodial parent.
Effectively, the tie-breaker rule is mandatory, not optional in this
special case, and can only be overridden by use of Form 8332 (unless I'm
missing something, and I confess I haven't read every word).
> I believe Pub 504 is referring to the personal exemption [of the spouse] and
not
> the dependency exemption.
Thanx, that makes sense.
-Mark Bole
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< 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 (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Claiming ONE parent as dependent | February 21, 2008, 10:26 am |
| Claiming dependent...Fed/State the same rules? | March 26, 2007, 10:57 am |
| claiming tuition on my daughter who is not a dependent anymore | January 15, 2008, 12:37 am |
| Question regarding claiming son as dependent when he formed a business last year | February 18, 2007, 9:51 pm |
| claiming two dependants | April 3, 2007, 6:44 pm |
| Claiming a foreign spouse? | January 4, 2008, 8:36 am |
| claiming MFJ status when unmarried | September 21, 2008, 3:48 pm |
| claiming MFJ status while unmarried, again | September 22, 2008, 12:53 am |
| Mimimizing the AMT by Claiming Fewer Deductions | April 9, 2007, 3:10 am |
| claiming rental as moving expences | April 10, 2008, 12:38 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap