Can My Ex Boyfriend Sue Me For This

[Paul84]

So should I file? And if I do, what will happen to him?

With regard to your tax liability for receipt of his gift/loan, I suggest you contact the IRS by phone, explain the basics, and ask the rules. I've found them very helpful in the past. Even if you were a family member, there's a maximum annual amount that you can give or receive another non-dependent family member as a gift--I think it's about $12k/year from any one individual family member. Otherwise tax liabilities kick in unless you structure the transfer as a formal loan.

According to the facts you've described, if your ex-non-cohabiting boyfriend is trying to claim you as a dependent on his tax returns, that makes me leery that he would ever sue you. Doing so could also incur an IRS tax headache for him. Lawsuits become public knowledge, and mention of the IRS or taxes in a complaint or answer could prompt an audit or worse.

Maybe he's demanding repayment for tax purposes. If so, if it ever came to that, you could claim lax payment terms--interest at the current Fed Funds rate (i.e. basically zero) with an extended bullet (one-time) long-term repayment of principal after many years. But I'm neither a lawyer nor an accountant, so ...

 

[LdiJ]

With regard to your tax liability for receipt of his gift/loan, I suggest you contact the IRS by phone, explain the basics, and ask the rules. I've found them very helpful in the past. Even if you were a family member, there's a maximum annual amount that you can give or receive another non-dependent family member as a gift--I think it's about $12k/year from any one individual family member. Otherwise tax liabilities kick in unless you structure the transfer as a formal loan.

According to the facts you've described, if your ex-non-cohabiting boyfriend is trying to claim you as a dependent on his tax returns, that makes me leery that he would ever sue you. Doing so could also incur an IRS tax headache for him. Lawsuits become public knowledge, and mention of the IRS or taxes in a complaint or answer could prompt an audit or worse.

Maybe he's demanding repayment for tax purposes. If so, if it ever came to that, you could claim lax payment terms--interest at the current Fed Funds rate (i.e. basically zero) with an extended bullet (one-time) long-term repayment of principal after many years. But I'm neither a lawyer nor an accountant, so ...

One: A receiver of a gift is never liable for gift taxes...only the giver could be liable and even then only liable if they have exceeded their lifetime exclusion for gifting (currently in the millions). They might have to file a gift tax return if they are over the limit for an individual, but its highly unlikely to result in any actual tax being due.

Two: The gifting limit is currently 14k, per person , per year.

Three: This year, you won't find the IRS to be helpful at all on the phone for things like that. Their funding has been cut drastically, and they have publically stated that they cannot handle the volume of calls that normally come in, and if the volume is too high at any one specific time, people will get a courtesy disconnect. Be courteous to the people who really DO need to call them by not making unnecessary calls.

 

[Paul84]

One: A receiver of a gift is never liable for gift taxes...only the giver could be liable and even then only liable if they have exceeded their lifetime exclusion for gifting (currently in the millions). They might have to file a gift tax return if they are over the limit for an individual, but its highly unlikely to result in any actual tax being due.

Two: The gifting limit is currently 14k, per person , per year.

Three: This year, you won't find the IRS to be helpful at all on the phone for things like that. Their funding has been cut drastically, and they have publically stated that they cannot handle the volume of calls that normally come in, and if the volume is too high at any one specific time, people will get a courtesy disconnect. Be courteous to the people who really DO need to call them by not making unnecessary calls.

LdiJ,
I'm dubious about the "lifetime exclusion for gifting" and "currently in the millions" part of your comment. I think you're confusing the latter with inheritance (estate) taxes, and I have no idea where you've come up with the former. If you do have any authoritative sources to back up that statement, can you please cite the U.S. code you're referring to?

 

[Funnyfox]

One: A receiver of a gift is never liable for gift taxes...only the giver could be liable and even then only liable if they have exceeded their lifetime exclusion for gifting (currently in the millions). They might have to file a gift tax return if they are over the limit for an individual, but its highly unlikely to result in any actual tax being due.

Two: The gifting limit is currently 14k, per person , per year.

Three: This year, you won't find the IRS to be helpful at all on the phone for things like that. Their funding has been cut drastically, and they have publically stated that they cannot handle the volume of calls that normally come in, and if the volume is too high at any one specific time, people will get a courtesy disconnect. Be courteous to the people who really DO need to call them by not making unnecessary calls.

Thank you, I won't waste the time of the IRS, sounds like a headache anyway. Your heads up is helpful. I'm still not sure how to proceed though. I made an appointment to talk to a book keeper tomorrow to get some insight. My time is limited because I have to make a decision to file or not to file before April 15th. I want to do the legal right thing but I also don't want to enrage him anymore.

 

[Funnyfox]

With regard to your tax liability for receipt of his gift/loan, I suggest you contact the IRS by phone, explain the basics, and ask the rules. I've found them very helpful in the past. Even if you were a family member, there's a maximum annual amount that you can give or receive another non-dependent family member as a gift--I think it's about $12k/year from any one individual family member. Otherwise tax liabilities kick in unless you structure the transfer as a formal loan.

According to the facts you've described, if your ex-non-cohabiting boyfriend is trying to claim you as a dependent on his tax returns, that makes me leery that he would ever sue you. Doing so could also incur an IRS tax headache for him. Lawsuits become public knowledge, and mention of the IRS or taxes in a complaint or answer could prompt an audit or worse.

Maybe he's demanding repayment for tax purposes. If so, if it ever came to that, you could claim lax payment terms--interest at the current Fed Funds rate (i.e. basically zero) with an extended bullet (one-time) long-term repayment of principal after many years. But I'm neither a lawyer nor an accountant, so ...

Paul, so your saying I should not file, but if he decides to take me to court, bring up that he filed me illegally and he can anticipate a tax nightmare?

 

[Paul84]

Paul, so your saying I should not file, but if he decides to take me to court, bring up that he filed me illegally and he can anticipate a tax nightmare?

I'm saying you should get tax advice from someone who knows the rules. Presumably, your bookkeeper does. If not, do some online research about receipt of gifts and any tax liabilities for those. Then as a last resort, if you still don't have a satisfactory answer, try calling the IRS.

 

[quincy]

LdiJ is a tax professional. She tends to know the rules.

Here for your reading enjoyment, Paul, is a January 28, 2015, article titled "The Estate Tax and Lifetime Gifting Tax" written by Rande Spiegelman for Charles Schwab: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/articles/The-Estate-Tax-and-Lifetime-Gifting

 

[Paul84]

LdiJ is a tax professional. She tends to know the rules.

Here for your reading enjoyment, Paul, is a January 28, 2015, article titled "The Estate Tax and Lifetime Gifting Tax" written by Rande Spiegelman for Charles Schwab: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/articles/The-Estate-Tax-and-Lifetime-Gifting

That's useful information, Quincy. Thanks a lot.

 

[quincy]

You're welcome.

 

[I'mTheFather]

This thread has certainly taken on a life of its own with all the machinations designed to scare or discredit the ex. For her sake, I hope those texts the OP is concerned about don't mention marriage or suggest a lifetime spent together. California has a statute that addresses the return of property, including money, that is considered a conditional gift.

Also, I'm a little concerned about Paul's advice, which OP seems so willing to follow. No offense intended, Paul, but you have to do a little more research before offering advice. In my opinion, you've made several questionable posts offering advice or interpreting actions. When you doubted LdiJ, a quick little google would have shown you how right she was.

As for the following:

Am curious, Ohiogal: on what grounds could the ex-boyfriend sue? How is it different from a fiancee calling off a wedding and not returning a diamond engagement ring? Presumably both are gifts ...

Without some sort of written contract, even an oral agreement of repayment in the event of X has about as much worth as the paper it's not written on (unless there's a witness ...). Legal eagles, please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are wrong about engagement rings. Another quick little google will disclose that most states consider an engagement ring to be a conditional gift, and therefore revocable.

 

[Funnyfox]

This thread has certainly taken on a life of its own with all the machinations designed to scare or discredit the ex. For her sake, I hope those texts the OP is concerned about don't mention marriage or suggest a lifetime spent together. California has a statute that addresses the return of property, including money, that is considered a conditional gift.

Also, I'm a little concerned about Paul's advice, which OP seems so willing to follow. No offense intended, Paul, but you have to do a little more research before offering advice. In my opinion, you've made several questionable posts offering advice or interpreting actions. When you doubted LdiJ, a quick little google would have shown you how right she was.

As for the following:





You are wrong about engagement rings. Another quick little google will disclose that most states consider an engagement ring to be a conditional gift, and therefore revocable.

There actually was a condition to the support. I have it in text from him "as long as there's no other guys in your life, you don't owe me anything." It was that I not see anyone else while I was down here. Which i held up my end of the bargain. I was very faithful.

 

[Funnyfox]

This thread has certainly taken on a life of its own with all the machinations designed to scare or discredit the ex. For her sake, I hope those texts the OP is concerned about don't mention marriage or suggest a lifetime spent together. California has a statute that addresses the return of property, including money, that is considered a conditional gift.

Also, I'm a little concerned about Paul's advice, which OP seems so willing to follow. No offense intended, Paul, but you have to do a little more research before offering advice. In my opinion, you've made several questionable posts offering advice or interpreting actions. When you doubted LdiJ, a quick little google would have shown you how right she was.

As for the following:





You are wrong about engagement rings. Another quick little google will disclose that most states consider an engagement ring to be a conditional gift, and therefore revocable.

I'm not Trying to scare him. I'm trying to figure out how I can protect myself in this potential situation. I don't really think thats outlandish.

 

[LdiJ]

Thank you, I won't waste the time of the IRS, sounds like a headache anyway. Your heads up is helpful. I'm still not sure how to proceed though. I made an appointment to talk to a book keeper tomorrow to get some insight. My time is limited because I have to make a decision to file or not to file before April 15th. I want to do the legal right thing but I also don't want to enrage him anymore.

You only have a choice whether or not to file a tax return in limited circumstances. It all depends on your income for the year. If you have less than 10k in income, and none of it is self employment income, then you may have a choice as to whether or not to file a federal return. State rules vary, but generally the thresholds are much lower.

However, making a choice not to file a tax return based on a fear of "enraging" someone is who not being rational is foolish.

 

[LdiJ]

LdiJ,
I'm dubious about the "lifetime exclusion for gifting" and "currently in the millions" part of your comment. I think you're confusing the latter with inheritance (estate) taxes, and I have no idea where you've come up with the former. If you do have any authoritative sources to back up that statement, can you please cite the U.S. code you're referring to?

Paul, The lifetime exclusion for gifting is a very basic concept that any tax professional is familiar with, and I have been a tax professional for over 30 years. I will let you read the article that has already been linked.

 

[Paul84]

This thread has certainly taken on a life of its own with all the machinations designed to scare or discredit the ex. For her sake, I hope those texts the OP is concerned about don't mention marriage or suggest a lifetime spent together. California has a statute that addresses the return of property, including money, that is considered a conditional gift.

Also, I'm a little concerned about Paul's advice, which OP seems so willing to follow. No offense intended, Paul, but you have to do a little more research before offering advice. In my opinion, you've made several questionable posts offering advice or interpreting actions. When you doubted LdiJ, a quick little google would have shown you how right she was.

As for the following:





You are wrong about engagement rings. Another quick little google will disclose that most states consider an engagement ring to be a conditional gift, and therefore revocable.

Thanks for the clarification. If my bumbling advice brings out the experts to comment and correct, that in itself is good. I did a quick google to confirm your comment and found this from Wiki:

"In most states of the United States, engagement rings are considered 'conditional gifts' under the legal rules of property. This is an exception to the general rule that gifts cannot be revoked once properly given. See, for example, the case of Meyer v. Mitnick, 625 N.W.2d 136 (Michigan, 2001), whose ruling found the following reasoning persuasive: 'the so-called "modern trend" holds that because an engagement ring is an inherently conditional gift, once the engagement has been broken, the ring should be returned to the donor.'"