• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Income tax

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

newwife03

Member
What is the name of your state? TX**************...... If my son graduated from high school in June,2007, and he went to work full time in August, 07, can I still claim him as a dependent on my taxes that I file at the begining of the year? I'm a single mom of 2, and I file head of household.
 


TinkerBelleLuvr

Senior Member
If your son was a full-time student for 5 months AND you provided more than half his support for the year, yes.

Is he still living at home? Paying rent?
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
What is the name of your state? TX**************...... If my son graduated from high school in June,2007, and he went to work full time in August, 07, can I still claim him as a dependent on my taxes that I file at the begining of the year? I'm a single mom of 2, and I file head of household.
Yes, because he was in school for the first semester of 2007. However, that could really hurt him on his income taxes if he is working full time. Therefore it would be best to run things both ways to be certain that you claiming him is the wisest option.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
I'll go back to my statement. Did MOM provide more than half the support of son for the year 2007?
I don't think that question can be answered at this time. The total amount of money that the son will have earned between graduation and the end of the year will have a significant impact on that. If the boy earns 15k in 7 months mom is going to be hard pressed to demonstrate that she provided more than 50% of his support. If he earns only 5k, he would be hard pressed to prove that he provided more than 50% of his own support.
 

abezon

Senior Member
Guys, kid lived at home for over half the year & was a full time student. Whether mom provided over half his support is irrelevant. The question is whether *he* provided over half his own support. He may very well have done so. If that is the case, mom can't claim him as a dependent, but he is still a qualifying child for EIC purposes.

If he did not pay over half his own support, he is a dependent. Even if mom doesn't claim him, he can't claim himself & has to file as a dependent.
 
Last edited:

LdiJ

Senior Member
Guys, kid lived at home for over half the year & was a full time student. Whether mom provided over half his support is irrelevant. The question is whether *he* provided over half his own support. He may very well have done so. If that is the case, mom can't claim him as a dependent, but he is still a qualifying child for EIC purposes.

If he did not pay over half his own support, he is a dependent. Even if mom doesn't claim him, he can't claim himself & has to file as a dependent.
Which is why how much he will have earned is so important. If he earns enough that mom claiming him seriously hurts him tax wise, then he has earned enough that he has probably paid more than 50% of his own support.

I disagree that he would still be a qualifying child for EIC purposes if he provides more than half of his own support. I have had a couple of clients lose EIC in a mini audit in similar circumstances.
 

abezon

Senior Member
I disagree that he would still be a qualifying child for EIC purposes if he provides more than half of his own support. I have had a couple of clients lose EIC in a mini audit in similar circumstances.
:confused: If support is the reason they lost, then the auditors you dealt with were idiots & you should have appealed. A parent may claim EIC even when the kid provides all her own support. The law is simply not open to interpretation on this.

IRC sec 32: [EIC]
(3) Qualifying child
(A) In general
The term “qualifying child” means a qualifying child of the taxpayer (as defined in section 152 (c), determined without regard to paragraph (1)(D) thereof and section 152 (e)).


IRC 152(c)(1)(D): [The term “qualifying child” means . . . an individual—] . . .
(D) who has not provided over one-half of such individual’s own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer begins.


IRC 152(e) is the divorced or separated parents rule that lets the NCP claim the kid as a dependent. This is why the CP gets EIC for the kids rather than the NCP who claimed the kids.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
:confused: If support is the reason they lost, then the auditors you dealt with were idiots & you should have appealed. A parent may claim EIC even when the kid provides all her own support. The law is simply not open to interpretation on this.

IRC sec 32: [EIC]
(3) Qualifying child
(A) In general
The term “qualifying child” means a qualifying child of the taxpayer (as defined in section 152 (c), determined without regard to paragraph (1)(D) thereof and section 152 (e)).


IRC 152(c)(1)(D): [The term “qualifying child” means . . . an individual—] . . .
(D) who has not provided over one-half of such individual’s own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer begins.


IRC 152(e) is the divorced or separated parents rule that lets the NCP claim the kid as a dependent. This is why the CP gets EIC for the kids rather than the NCP who claimed the kids.
Interesting....

So, someone graduates from college in May with a good job waiting for them...makes 20k in 7 months, and their parents can still claim EIC. I can't argue with what you are showing me in the code on this one, but I am not going to use it without doing more research.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top