Child Exemption - Who can Claim?

[artbuc]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? DE

My nephew's daughter moved in with him on June 19, 2009. Prior to June 19, child lived with mother (nephew's ex). Move-in date is documented in a letter written by mother. Also, nephew's child support order was revoked on June 19 based on the child's residency change.

For some reason, nephew's ex is now insisting that the child moved on July 1 instead of June 19. Today we saw a copy of Mother's 2009 FIT return (was presented at child support mediation) and, as we suspected, mother claimed child as an exemption on her 2009 FIT return.

As I understand the rules governing child exemptions, mother is not entitled to claim child even if the move date was July 1 because child did not live with her for "more than half of 2009". Apparently mother believes she can claim the child if the child lived with her from Jan 1 through June 30.

Can you think of any tax benefit that will come to mother if the child moved on July 1 instead of June 19? Thanks.

 

[jumac]

you would be best to call the irs and ask them what their rules are. base on you post it sounds as she is trying to say they both had her half the year ie 50% each. The irs can tell you what thier rules are in that area.

as for why she would want to claim them well.

1st. the regular tax deduction for a extra person.
2nd. depeding on the mom's income posibly got a EIC which depending on her income could have been 1 to 2 thousand dollars.

 

[Banned_Princess]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? DE

My nephew's daughter moved in with him on June 19, 2009. Prior to June 19, child lived with mother (nephew's ex). Move-in date is documented in a letter written by mother. Also, nephew's child support order was revoked on June 19 based on the child's residency change.

For some reason, nephew's ex is now insisting that the child moved on July 1 instead of June 19. Today we saw a copy of Mother's 2009 FIT return (was presented at child support mediation) and, as we suspected, mother claimed child as an exemption on her 2009 FIT return.

As I understand the rules governing child exemptions, mother is not entitled to claim child even if the move date was July 1 because child did not live with her for "more than half of 2009". Apparently mother believes she can claim the child if the child lived with her from Jan 1 through June 30.

Can you think of any tax benefit that will come to mother if the child moved on July 1 instead of June 19? Thanks.

The rules are simple and easy to understand online, your nephew doesn't have to call the IRS.

If mom already filed her return, claiming the child, then dad, who presumably wants to claim the kid too, will have to old fashion mail his tax return in. Then the GOV gets red flagged that two people want to claim kid, and they will referee the claim between them. Mom might have to return her refund, or nephew might loose for this year.

Mom appears to be setting the claim that they each had kid equally as long. .


A ?Qualifying Child?

 

[davew128]

Mom appears to be setting the claim that they each had kid equally as long.

Which is a physical impossibility since the rule is based on number of nights spent, and there are 365 nights in a year.....

 

[artbuc]

The rules are simple and easy to understand online, your nephew doesn't have to call the IRS.

If mom already filed her return, claiming the child, then dad, who presumably wants to claim the kid too, will have to old fashion mail his tax return in. Then the GOV gets red flagged that two people want to claim kid, and they will referee the claim between them. Mom might have to return her refund, or nephew might loose for this year.

Mom appears to be setting the claim that they each had kid equally as long. .


A ?Qualifying Child?

Mother did not claim EIC or child tax credit, only claimed dependent exemption. I have already talked with IRS. They said it was cut and dried. Jan1-June30 equals 181 days. July1-Dec31 equals 184 days. So mother has child less than 50% of the time. This is why I am perplexed by her insistence to change the date. Maybe she is just trying to establish a more credible alibi?

 

[Banned_Princess]

Who knows why then, only mom does.


Dad just has to wait for IRS to get around to investigating, and auditing the whole affair.

 

[FlyingRon]

Pretty darned slow to. The first thing they do is send you a computer generated letter and a 1040X to both parties offering to let them amend off the duplicate exemption. Then it gets unpleasant.

 

[artbuc]

Pretty darned slow to. The first thing they do is send you a computer generated letter and a 1040X to both parties offering to let them amend off the duplicate exemption. Then it gets unpleasant.

Father will offer two documents as proof: (1) a signed letter from mother dated June 19, 2009, indicating child is living with father beginning June 19, 2009 and (2) an Order from Delaware Family Court revoking father's support order effective June 19, 2009. Do you think this will be sufficient evidence? Thanks.

 

[Banned_Princess]

Father will offer two documents as proof: (1) a signed letter from mother dated June 19, 2009, indicating child is living with father beginning June 19, 2009 and (2) an Order from Delaware Family Court revoking father's support order effective June 19, 2009. Do you think this will be sufficient evidence? Thanks.

Yes, we don't think dad will loose against mom with the IRS, it just might take up to, or longer then a year to get it all cleared up

That is sufficient evidence. (ESPECIALLY the court order changing residencies...)