Who gets the tax deduction for having a dependant?

[newgram52]

Wisconsin

I thought this issue would be a no-brainer if one parent is paying more than 50% of the child's support. Isn't that the definition of dependent in the tax law? I have a friend who is just starting the child support battle. It has yet to be determined where the child will stay but let me say that the mother is not married to the father and she has physical custody right now. Three months ago, a temporary court order set child support for the father at $295/mo. Since then (conveniently), he has been fired from both his jobs. He made $63,000 last year. The mother returned to work as a clerk in a retail store after a 6 weeks leave and is slowly getting back to full time hours. She made $18,000 last year.

When he first discovered he was a father (this was a one-night stand), the first thing he asked of the mother was not "when do I get to see my son" but "I need to claim him as a dependent because I have bills to pay." They went before the judge today and 1) the judge reduced his child support to $250/mo because he had bills to pay but then when the question was asked, what if he doesn't pay - the judge informed him that he would have to be $5,300 delinquent in his child support for any action would be taken. ???!!!! Gee, how is that incentive for the guy to step up and meet his obligations? 2) After asking the mother if she was able to support the child on her own, she said that she is but just scraping by. The judge then asked why should it be an issue if they take turns taking the deduction then? First of all, why should the mother be penalized for having a job and trying to support the child? Why shouldn't she get the deduction if she is the one contributing more than 50% of his support? And why should the father be rewarded for not having a job? Can the judge allow the father to get the deduction even if he isn't paying child support?

 

[Ohiogal]

Wisconsin

I thought this issue would be a no-brainer if one parent is paying more than 50% of the child's support. Isn't that the definition of dependent in the tax law?

Tax law is NOT family law.

I have a friend who is just starting the child support battle. It has yet to be determined where the child will stay but let me say that the mother is not married to the father and she has physical custody right now. Three months ago, a temporary court order set child support for the father at $295/mo. Since then (conveniently), he has been fired from both his jobs. He made $63,000 last year. The mother returned to work as a clerk in a retail store after a 6 weeks leave and is slowly getting back to full time hours. She made $18,000 last year.

Okay. So they are both supporting the child. And your insinuations matter not if your friend cannot prove the allegations. Who the heck are you in this situation that you know how much each of these people earn and how much CS is?

When he first discovered he was a father (this was a one-night stand),

Which means mom also had a one night stand. Great morals for the TWO OF THEM.

the first thing he asked of the mother was not "when do I get to see my son" but "I need to claim him as a dependent because I have bills to pay." They went before the judge today and 1) the judge reduced his child support to $250/mo because he had bills to pay but then when the question was asked, what if he doesn't pay - the judge informed him that he would have to be $5,300 delinquent in his child support for any action would be taken. ???!!!! Gee, how is that incentive for the guy to step up and meet his obligations?

You are FAR too involved. You need to butt out and back off. It is incentive because at that point all sorts of things start happening including loss of license, jail time and what not.

2) After asking the mother if she was able to support the child on her own, she said that she is but just scraping by. The judge then asked why should it be an issue if they take turns taking the deduction then? First of all, why should the mother be penalized for having a job and trying to support the child?

Dad also is supporting the child. Why would mom have a child she can't afford? Why should dad not get credit for supporting the child?

Why shouldn't she get the deduction if she is the one contributing more than 50% of his support? And why should the father be rewarded for not having a job? Can the judge allow the father to get the deduction even if he isn't paying child support?

Why should this be any of your business? Oh yeah, it is NOT your business. The judge can allow the father to get the deduction and mom will have to suck it up or be in contempt of family court. And no one is rewarding dad for not having a job anymore than they are rewarding mom. Both of these people have a child. Both are expected to support the child and both therefore should be entitled to the deduction.

 

[LdiJ]

Wisconsin

I thought this issue would be a no-brainer if one parent is paying more than 50% of the child's support. Isn't that the definition of dependent in the tax law? I have a friend who is just starting the child support battle. It has yet to be determined where the child will stay but let me say that the mother is not married to the father and she has physical custody right now. Three months ago, a temporary court order set child support for the father at $295/mo. Since then (conveniently), he has been fired from both his jobs. He made $63,000 last year. The mother returned to work as a clerk in a retail store after a 6 weeks leave and is slowly getting back to full time hours. She made $18,000 last year.

When he first discovered he was a father (this was a one-night stand), the first thing he asked of the mother was not "when do I get to see my son" but "I need to claim him as a dependent because I have bills to pay." They went before the judge today and 1) the judge reduced his child support to $250/mo because he had bills to pay but then when the question was asked, what if he doesn't pay - the judge informed him that he would have to be $5,300 delinquent in his child support for any action would be taken. ???!!!! Gee, how is that incentive for the guy to step up and meet his obligations? 2) After asking the mother if she was able to support the child on her own, she said that she is but just scraping by. The judge then asked why should it be an issue if they take turns taking the deduction then? First of all, why should the mother be penalized for having a job and trying to support the child? Why shouldn't she get the deduction if she is the one contributing more than 50% of his support? And why should the father be rewarded for not having a job? Can the judge allow the father to get the deduction even if he isn't paying child support?

If mom is the CP, she can claim the child for head of household purposes, earned income credit purposes, and child care credit purposes, even if dad gets the exemption.

If dad remains unemployed, the exemption won't be of any real value to dad anyway...