Claiming non biological children on taxes.

[Granger666]

My ex partner has claimed my biological child on her tax forms. We were living together at the time and she was the primary source of income. Is this legal without me waiving my rights to claim her myself? I was living in Arizona at the time.

 

[FlyingRon]

"Biological" doesn't enter into the tax code, but I presume that there is no adopted, "step", or foster parenthood relationship involved here?

Your "partner" can't claim someone who is your qualifying child as a dependent.

 

[davew128]

"Biological" doesn't enter into the tax code, but I presume that there is no adopted, "step", or foster parenthood relationship involved here?

Your "partner" can't claim someone who is your qualifying child as a dependent.

Except if the OP is to be believed, they can here if the child lived under the ex partner's roof for the entire year. As such, the child qualifies as a member of the household, and presuming that primary source of income = supporting the household and ergo meeting the support test, the ex partner certainly can claim the child. There is no "legal right" to claim a tax dependent. You either meet the rules or you don't.

 

[FlyingRon]

There's more to the requirement for the exemption than the "support test."
The child is the poster's qualifying child, even if she provides ZERO support.

In order for the partner to be eligible, they would need to pass the qualifying relative rules because theirs no qualified child relationship (son, daughter, stepchild, foster child, sibling, half sibling, or descendents of one of these).

The partner is blocked from claiming the exemption for a qualifying relative because the child is the qualifying child of another tax payer. Even if they are in the same household, even if she provides 100% of the support.

There is no way to "waive" the rights to allow the partner to claim the exemption, even if she wanted to.

 

[LdiJ]

There's more to the requirement for the exemption than the "support test."
The child is the poster's qualifying child, even if she provides ZERO support.

In order for the partner to be eligible, they would need to pass the qualifying relative rules because theirs no qualified child relationship (son, daughter, stepchild, foster child, sibling, half sibling, or descendents of one of these).

The partner is blocked from claiming the exemption for a qualifying relative because the child is the qualifying child of another tax payer. Even if they are in the same household, even if she provides 100% of the support.

There is no way to "waive" the rights to allow the partner to claim the exemption, even if she wanted to.

I would have agreed with the bolded up until a few months ago. Because the 2005 changes seemed to make that clear. However the IRS put out information specifically addressing this issue a few months ago. The child is not the parent's qualifying child if the parent would not be required to file a tax return. So yes, her partner can claim the children as long as they meet the other tests for qualifying relative.

I posted information on this forum about this when it first came out.

 

[FlyingRon]

I would have agreed with the bolded up until a few months ago. Because the 2005 changes seemed to make that clear. However the IRS put out information specifically addressing this issue a few months ago. The child is not the parent's qualifying child if the parent would not be required to file a tax return. So yes, her partner can claim the children as long as they meet the other tests for qualifying relative.

Yes, I had seen that out (the law says "taxpayer"). But it sounds like the OP had a return of her own that year too.

 

[davew128]

Yes, I had seen that out (the law says "taxpayer"). But it sounds like the OP had a return of her own that year too.

Actually the other exception is if a return is filed solely to claim a refund of tax withheld which may be a possibility.