Tax Issues

What is the name of your state? What is the name of your state? UT/WY

Do civil local courts have power or authority on tax issues over the IRS?

My understanding is that the person who provided the care for more than 50% time and expenses is the one entitled to the EIC credit. Is that not correct? I have an issue where I did as I believed I should and as advised by H&R Block. The IRS is trying to garnish my wages and I am being penilized essentially for being the responsible parent.

Does anyone have any experience or relevant case history that may benifit me?

The papers stated I could claim both children and at which time she can benifit she can claim one, but I understand that as 1) The child Tax credit not the EIC as per my understanding of the IRS code and as was advised to me by H&R block.

This area is a little grey and I think attorneys ought to be educated enough to clarify this issue in the decree so that it doesnt send clients back to them to pad there pockets because the attorney was to incompittent or scrupolous to clarify the issue and used vague language!

Any thoughts or advice?

frcisafraud said:

What is the name of your state? What is the name of your state? UT/WY

Do civil local courts have power or authority on tax issues over the IRS?

My understanding is that the person who provided the care for more than 50% time and expenses is the one entitled to the EIC credit. Is that not correct? I have an issue where I did as I believed I should and as advised by H&R Block. The IRS is trying to garnish my wages and I am being penilized essentially for being the responsible parent.

Does anyone have any experience or relevant case history that may benifit me?

The papers stated I could claim both children and at which time she can benifit she can claim one, but I understand that as 1) The child Tax credit not the EIC as per my understanding of the IRS code and as was advised to me by H&R block.

This area is a little grey and I think attorneys ought to be educated enough to clarify this issue in the decree so that it doesnt send clients back to them to pad there pockets because the attorney was to incompittent or scrupolous to clarify the issue and used vague language!

Any thoughts or advice?

Click to expand...

Actually, its not a grey area at all. The rules are very concise.

EIC may only be claimed by the parent (or other party) with whom the child primarily resides. That means if the child didn't spend at least 184 nights in your home during the calendar year, you cannot claim EIC.

The same rule applies for the Child Care Credit.

A state court has no power or authority to make orders regarding those two items.

The dependency exemption and the Child Tax Credit can potentially be claimed by either parent, therefore a state court has ability to make orders there. The state court doesn't actually have the authority to do so, but it can get away with it because either parent can't potentially take those.

Confused

The children were with me for the amount of time required to qualify for the EIC and yet the IRS is still attempting to garnish my wages?

I dont understand? The local civil court cant put it in the papers but it can?

What case Law do I need to verify this and how do I resolve. I have allready sent prrof and documentation to the IRS?
Basicly the other party is entitled to claim one child on the child tax credit and I am qualified to recieve EIC based on what has been mentioned, based on IRS code, based on advice from H&R block, based on reason and justice, yet the IRS (which is a fraudulaent anti american orginization) is still trying to garnish my wages over money I legitimately do not owe? Go figure?

frcisafraud said:

The children were with me for the amount of time required to qualify for the EIC and yet the IRS is still attempting to garnish my wages?

I dont understand? The local civil court can put it in the papers but it can?

What case Law do I need to verify this and how do I resolve. I have allready sent prrof and documentation to the IRS?
Basicly the other party is entitled to claim one child on the child tax credit and I am qualified to recieve EIC based on what has been mentioned, based on IRS code, based on advice from H&R block, based on reason and justice, yet the IRS (which is a fraudulaent anti american orginization) is still trying to garnish my wages over money I legitimately do not owe? Go figure?

Click to expand...

I will repeat. A state court judge cannot rule that you qualify for EIC. Only the tax code and the IRS can.

Obviously you didn't prove to the IRS that you qualified for EIC......most likely because the children did not reside with you more than mom.

What year did you claim the EIC as prior to 2005 there was a different definition for qualifying child for the dependency exemption, child tax credit, child and dependent care benefit, head of household filing status AND the earned income credit? For tax years beginning in 2005 there is one universal definition of qualifying child for all of the above.

It also appears she filed and claimed the credit before you as the IRS always responds to the second person claiming/filing. They typically do not care if there is a divorce decree stating one party or another, they only know two people claimed and the second claimant will be considered the guilty party. You should request former spouse to provide you with Form 8332 if you are the noncustodial parent. This is the only way you can be protected from this issue arising in the future with the service.

The final decree should have addressed all of these issues, but it is unclear whether it did.

hmmm...

I dont know where this is headed but clearly I need to inject a few more details.

1. I am the custodial parent, the other party had statuatory visitation.
2. The children were with me and enrolled at school through my address.
3. The tax dispute with the IRS is over the tax years of 03 and 04.
4. The papers did not say she was entitled to EIC. Yes I think the wording was vague but I agree with the post above that the court had no jurisdiction nor did they say the other party could claim the EIC by any means outside IRS code and qualifications.

What is that form and what benifit is it to the custodial parent?

frcisafraud said:

I dont know where this is headed but clearly I need to inject a few more details.

1. I am the custodial parent, the other party had statuatory visitation.
2. The children were with me and enrolled at school through my address.
3. The tax dispute with the IRS is over the tax years of 03 and 04.
4. The papers did not say she was entitled to EIC. Yes I think the wording was vague but I agree with the post above that the court had no jurisdiction nor did they say the other party could claim the EIC by any means outside IRS code and qualifications.

What is that form and what benifit is it to the custodial parent?

Click to expand...

You need to take your paperwork and the letters you recieved from the IRS to a tax professional. Something is seriously messed up.

I can't imagine the IRS not allowing you EIC under those conditions...unless mom could have somehow proven that despite the court orders the children actually lived with her rather than with you....and even then only if mom could file a tax return, or could file a joint return with her husband....or unless a grandparent could prove the same.

Please note that the IRS rules based on actual reality and not based on court orders....so even if the court orders showed you as having primary custody, if mom...or a grandparent even, could prove otherwise the IRS would side with them.

Messed up!

Whats messed up as I told IRS at advocate hotline today, is that yes I submitted school records and proof including decree almost 2 years ago and it shouldnt be that difficult to resolve. My original submittal did nothing and I had to get H&R to go to bat for me (Who knows where they are now?) I have done all the work but needed the clout of an attorney to defend my rights. the advocate rep agreed with me today and said the 03 year is under review and being worked but not the 04 year. I expect that is because there was a screw up from the attorney not filing the power of attorney for both years when originally asked to do so. I think it was only aprox 6 months back when the attorney filed the second one therefor it is delayed and that is the one they are garnishing my wages over. So I expect I will beat the false IRS claims, yet I suffer and have to defend myself and go through mind torment and hours of headache and stress because of the situation. Also meanwhile until resolved and re-imbursed I will have garnishments from my wages. Unless my attorney will respond some day and take care of the situation for me a little more thoroughly and aggressively.

Oh yeah!

www.freedomtofascism.com

2005 changes

what are the changes to tax credits and EIC for the 05 year and on as they relate to divorced parents?

Suggest you engage a CPA after discussing your issues with several. They will provide you better personal service than H&R. The tax prep fees H&R charges are almost always excessive for the amount of time they spend with the client. I know from experience with clients who dropped H&R for us and were shocked at a lower price for more personal time spent with a real CPA, Check around and choose the one you interact with best and who has a good reputation with settling IRS disputes quickly.

chitown said:

Suggest you engage a CPA after discussing your issues with several. They will provide you better personal service than H&R. The tax prep fees H&R charges are almost always excessive for the amount of time they spend with the client. I know from experience with clients who dropped H&R for us and were shocked at a lower price for more personal time spent with a real CPA, Check around and choose the one you interact with best and who has a good reputation with settling IRS disputes quickly.

Click to expand...

A CPA isn't necessary. An enrolled agent or someone with many years of experience would be more than sufficient. What he needs is an office that is open all year long.

Also, I would like to point out that you are not correct that its always the second claim that is investigated. That was true several years ago, but has not been the case now for a while.

Both parties now receive their refunds....and later on down the road the IRS sends out a letter stating that there was a duplicate claim to both parties, and asks the the offending party amend their return. If one of the returns is not amended, then BOTH parties are investigated.

The second to file issue is still in effect with electronically filed returns. The return will be rejected if there is a dependent ssn# that has previously been used by someone else. If the taxpayer is sure the number is right and that no one else is supposed to be using the number, we'll prepare a paper return for the taxpayer to send in. This will often "fix" the problem.

tranquility said:

The second to file issue is still in effect with electronically filed returns. The return will be rejected if there is a dependent ssn# that has previously been used by someone else. If the taxpayer is sure the number is right and that no one else is supposed to be using the number, we'll prepare a paper return for the taxpayer to send in. This will often "fix" the problem.

Click to expand...

My main point was however, that the second filer will get their refund...any investigation will come later and will involved both parties.

LdiJ said:

A CPA isn't necessary. An enrolled agent or someone with many years of experience would be more than sufficient. What he needs is an office that is open all year long.

Also, I would like to point out that you are not correct that its always the second claim that is investigated. That was true several years ago, but has not been the case now for a while.

Both parties now receive their refunds....and later on down the road the IRS sends out a letter stating that there was a duplicate claim to both parties, and asks the the offending party amend their return. If one of the returns is not amended, then BOTH parties are investigated.

Click to expand...

I agree, the biggest issue her is likely that the attorney is on vacation or not in the office even on Tue and Thur as the answering machine suggests. Also I am not paying for the representation because it was part of the contract when I filed returns through H&R block.
It has been several weeks and I have had no return call or response to my email? Also I have been unable to file and claim EIC credits and return for the 05 year. So when it is said and done I should be owed interest on my money as well.

I think the best solution would be to do away with the inefficient anti freedom IRS!