Claiming step children who do not live with you.

[Jereme]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Oregon / Washington

My kids and their mother live with her parents in Oregon; yes that means no bills and zero responsibility. Their mother, my ex, got married to a guy living in Washington just a few months ago. The kids have not moved up there, their official address and school remains 3 hours south here in Oregon, and there are no plans for them to live with him without going to court first.

Based on our current custody agreement this year (tax year 2014) their mother, her new husband is not specified, gets to claim two of my kids provided she worked. She did work and made a little money, however her new husband claimed the kids on a joint return raking in a lot of money for kids who do not live with him and who he sees less than I (their real father) do.

I know she is legally allowed to claim two of the kids and I do not have a problem with her claiming them; however I hate gold diggers like her new husband who take other peoples money. Is it really legal for her new husband to claim kids who don't live with him and who he does not see or support more than maybe 1 weekend a month?

In the past she always makes so little that I claim all the kids and give her more than the difference that she would have gotten. This year she thinks she has found a new money pot to tap into, has she and is this legal?

 

[justalayman]

My kids and their mother live with her parents in Oregon; yes that means no bills and zero responsibility.

how do you come to that conclusion?

Based on our current custody agreement this year (tax year 2014) their mother, her new husband is not specified, gets to claim two of my kids provided she worked. She did work and made a little money, however her new husband claimed the kids on a joint return raking in a lot of money for kids who do not live with him and who he sees less than I (their real father) do.

why are you so worked up about this? The mother gets to take them per the agreement. Are they dependents on whatever filing she made? If so, then drop it. I don't know what you would expect them to do to make you happy but since the mother gets 2014, you have nothing to gripe about.

In the past she always makes so little that I claim all the kids and give her more than the difference that she would have gotten.

I see. She has replaced you and you are upset. Get over it.

 

[davew128]

I see. She has replaced you and you are upset. Get over it.

#butthurt

 

[Jereme]

Lol, interesting, apparently I joined a forum of people who are not professionals after all and are not capable of answering questions. I guess I will have to try another forum to get my question answered.

I did have a fairly length response to the lay man guy, however after the second post I realise that people in this forum are not actually interested in offering advice after all.

 

[Zigner]

Lol, interesting, apparently I joined a forum of people who are not professionals after all and are not capable of answering questions. I guess I will have to try another forum to get my question answered.

I did have a fairly length response to the lay man guy, however after the second post I realise that people in this forum are not actually interested in offering advice after all.

You did get your answer.

 

[Jereme]

You did get your answer.

No, actually I did not. What I got was a couple of people making fun of a situation they probably can not understand. As to the "butt hurt" areas of my post, those can easily be associated with by other parents who are supporting ex-spouses who waste all their support money.

As for the actual question, it was can a guy who does not live with, and does not support my kids actually claim them as dependents on his return simply because he has a piece of paper saying he is married to their mother? He can not claim that they lived with him, and he can not claim his residence as their residence. Even their mother does not live with him, although i'm guessing she claimed she does on the forms and since she has no real house of her own that one could be argued either way. I am not questioning or arguing her ability to claim the kids as her dependents, I am asking about his ability.

So if she claims the kids as dependents it should count towards her income, but I would expect her to have to say she actually lived with the kids. If she lumped her income with her new husbands and then I would not expect him to be able to claim the kids. Can you really claim to be the primary caregiver for kids whose address is not the same as your own? Notice I said "primary" caregiver. Even on years I am allowed to claim the kids there is a lot I can not claim because they only live with me 40% of the time.

And yes, I am very "butt hurt" that some random guy can sail in, sign some piece of paper, sail back out and live in a different state from myself, my kids, and my ex and yet be collecting lots of money on my kids.

 

[I'mTheFather]

No, actually I did not. What I got was a couple of people making fun of a situation they probably can not understand. As to the "butt hurt" areas of my post, those can easily be associated with by other parents who are supporting ex-spouses who waste all their support money.

As for the actual question, it was can a guy who does not live with, and does not support my kids actually claim them as dependents on his return simply because he has a piece of paper saying he is married to their mother? He can not claim that they lived with him, and he can not claim his residence as their residence. Even their mother does not live with him, although i'm guessing she claimed she does on the forms and since she has no real house of her own that one could be argued either way. I am not questioning or arguing her ability to claim the kids as her dependents, I am asking about his ability.

So if she claims the kids as dependents it should count towards her income, but I would expect her to have to say she actually lived with the kids. If she lumped her income with her new husbands and then I would not expect him to be able to claim the kids. Can you really claim to be the primary caregiver for kids whose address is not the same as your own? Notice I said "primary" caregiver. Even on years I am allowed to claim the kids there is a lot I can not claim because they only live with me 40% of the time.

And yes, I am very "butt hurt" that some random guy can sail in, sign some piece of paper, sail back out and live in a different state from myself, my kids, and my ex and yet be collecting lots of money on my kids.

Your ex is allowed to claim the exemptions per your order. Whether or not she files single, head of household, or married filing jointly, she is allowed that exemption. Since your ex and her husband are filing a joint return, they claim the exemptions. If you stop looking at it in terms of 'his' return, and look at it as 'their' return, it should be clear.

 

[Zigner]

No, actually I did not.

Yes, you did:

why are you so worked up about this? The mother gets to take them per the agreement. Are they dependents on whatever filing she made? If so, then drop it.

 

[cbg]

What did you expect your ex-wife to do? File singly instead of jointly? Give you the money from the tax exemptions? Just exactly what was your expectation of how this would happen?

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Oregon / Washington

My kids and their mother live with her parents in Oregon; yes that means no bills and zero responsibility. Their mother, my ex, got married to a guy living in Washington just a few months ago. The kids have not moved up there, their official address and school remains 3 hours south here in Oregon, and there are no plans for them to live with him without going to court first.

Based on our current custody agreement this year (tax year 2014) their mother, her new husband is not specified, gets to claim two of my kids provided she worked. She did work and made a little money, however her new husband claimed the kids on a joint return raking in a lot of money for kids who do not live with him and who he sees less than I (their real father) do.

I know she is legally allowed to claim two of the kids and I do not have a problem with her claiming them; however I hate gold diggers like her new husband who take other peoples money. Is it really legal for her new husband to claim kids who don't live with him and who he does not see or support more than maybe 1 weekend a month?

In the past she always makes so little that I claim all the kids and give her more than the difference that she would have gotten. This year she thinks she has found a new money pot to tap into, has she and is this legal?

As you have been told already, not only is this totally and completely legal, its absolutely NORMAL as well. Husband's and wives file joint tax returns. They get to claim their dependents on their tax returns. Their stepfather did not claim the children on HIS return, their mother claimed them on HER return. The return that she filed jointly with her husband.

Surely you realized that this day had to eventually come?

 

[Jereme]

Your ex is allowed to claim the exemptions per your order. Whether or not she files single, head of household, or married filing jointly, she is allowed that exemption. Since your ex and her husband are filing a joint return, they claim the exemptions. If you stop looking at it in terms of 'his' return, and look at it as 'their' return, it should be clear.

Yes, I can see that, a loophole in the system. And before people go saying it is not a loophole, he does not pay any of my kids bills, does not have to feed or cloth them, does not provide heat or shelter, nothing, and yet he gets to collect money on them. My ex's parents should be the ones who get to claim them. I have, shelter, feed, and clothe the kids 40% of the time while they shelter, feed, and clothe the kids 50% of the time, they might go up to see him 10% of the time. So really it is not me getting money taken away it is her parents and they have every right to do whatever they want with their money. That does not mean I have to like it when people work the system to take from those who actually do work.

Ok, now this is going back in the direction of a pointless rant. Thank-you for answering the question I'mTheFather.

 

[Jereme]

As you have been told already, not only is this totally and completely legal, its absolutely NORMAL as well. Husband's and wives file joint tax returns. They get to claim their dependents on their tax returns. Their stepfather did not claim the children on HIS return, their mother claimed them on HER return. The return that she filed jointly with her husband.

Surely you realized that this day had to eventually come?

Despite what the law says, the kids are not dependent on her or him. So while this may indeed be normal, in this particular case those who are actually caring for the kids are not getting any of the tax relief designed for such people. I am not sure how you can argue that their stepfather did not claim the kids on HIS return if his income is what is being used to give a refund; regardless of it being a join return, the tax refund is coming from his money, not hers.

 

[LdiJ]

Yes, I can see that, a loophole in the system. And before people go saying it is not a loophole, he does not pay any of my kids bills, does not have to feed or cloth them, does not provide heat or shelter, nothing, and yet he gets to collect money on them. My ex's parents should be the ones who get to claim them. I have, shelter, feed, and clothe the kids 40% of the time while they shelter, feed, and clothe the kids 50% of the time, they might go up to see him 10% of the time. So really it is not me getting money taken away it is her parents and they have every right to do whatever they want with their money. That does not mean I have to like it when people work the system to take from those who actually do work.

Ok, now this is going back in the direction of a pointless rant. Thank-you for answering the question I'mTheFather.

As I already told you its not a loophole, its totally NORMAL. Yes, its a little bit different that the husband and wife are not living together since they are newlyweds, however I am quite sure that is due to the fact that you do not want your children relocated 3 hours away.

 

[Zigner]

Despite what the law says, the kids are not dependent on her or him. So while this may indeed be normal, in this particular case those who are actually caring for the kids are not getting any of the tax relief designed for such people. I am not sure how you can argue that their stepfather did not claim the kids on HIS return if his income is what is being used to give a refund; regardless of it being a join return, the tax refund is coming from his money, not hers.

Did you want an accurate legal response, or an audience for your rant?

 

[LdiJ]

Despite what the law says, the kids are not dependent on her or him. So while this may indeed be normal, in this particular case those who are actually caring for the kids are not getting any of the tax relief designed for such people. I am not sure how you can argue that their stepfather did not claim the kids on HIS return if his income is what is being used to give a refund; regardless of it being a join return, the tax refund is coming from his money, not hers.

No, the refund is due to their joint, marital income. If you feel so strongly, from a moral point of view, that the grandparents should have been receiving the exemptions for the children then you should have insisted on it all along, and not taken their exemptions yourself in past years.

Look, its understandable that you are disappointed that you did not get to claim the children again this year. However, again, you had to have realized that this was eventually going to happen.