unmarried couple child tax

[Lloyd Hudson]

I had a phone call from a referral, the question is regarding child tax credit. the caller was a stay at home mom. No income for the past several years. Solely supported by "boyfriend". Her child, fully supported by "boyfriend". child is eligible for dependency, obviously. However, point of phone call was that HRB would not allow child tax credit. I tended to agree because of 2010 definition of child for EITC. Upon reflection I am questioning this. The child is admittedly not his child, however they are cohabiting and living as man and wife via appearances if not declaration. Not in violation of local laws. (city even recognizes domestic partner). could it be reasonably construed that the child is hIs STEP-CHILD in that he voluntarily provides all of the child's support and they live as man and wife? Fortunately not my client but I would like to know thoughts as I am sure this is prevalent in today's society and do not want to run afoul.

I also wondered if they could not be MFJ even though the state does not recognize "common-law marriage"

(see what happens wHen software does not work and IRS does not accept returns, Start borrowing trouble"

[ILLMAS]

What is a qualifying child?

http://www.irs.gov/uac/A-%E2%80%9CQualifying-Child%E2%80%9D

[kcjenkins]

NO they can not file MFJ. Remember what the M stands for? Even in a common-law state, which you say this is NOT, they would have to hold themselves out as married, to qualify for common-law status.

As for the CTC, you need to go through the worksheet to determine if he could claim the child. I don't see it, given the facts given, unless he marries her, making the child his step-child. And that would not apply to last year, if they married now.

[jainen]

>>living as man and wife via appearances if not declaration<<

Sure, why can't you claim the "substance over form doctrine"? Well, in my opinion of 37 years, for marriage the declaration is fundamental to the substance. Your mileage may vary.

As for the child, I believe that someone who is not a parent is different from someone who is a parent. In the old days you could claim a foster child for "one who is in your care that you care for as your own child." But a couple of years before federal law implemented uniform definition of child, California Franchise Tax Board began disallowing Head of Household based on an unmarried partner's child. Despite a reputation for being tolerant of casual family relationships, California said that when a natural parent is present, it is not possible to care for an unrelated child as your own. In my observation, that is true.

[Lloyd Hudson]

i appreciate the input. KC that is exactly what I said in the phone conversation, but started doubting myself with all the hoopla over domestic partner etc. AZ even has a "marriage by covenant" law. no license required. but there are still some legal stuff that has to be done. this couple probably would not qualify for that Either.

[tetspa]

If not a common-law state, then they are not married. The child could be a qualifying relative (I much prefer the term qualifying non-relative as I think that term is more accurate) but the relationship would be "NONE" and would not qualify for the child tax credit.

Cudo's for HRB...most chains would have just filed him as HOH claiming the child as his own.

[David1980]

It seems like taxpayers want "step child" to mean something other than what it means. I don't see anyway for him to get them as qualifying children.

[Guest Taxed]

I am really surprised that HRB did it correctly. We get these situations every year. Mother and child living off the boyfriend, not married, mother basically gets welfare and boyfriend has low income so qualifies for fuel assistance (the child is living in his home).

My standard answer is if the boyrfiend want to get CTC on his return, ask him to put a ring on your finger! Usually gets a good laugh and hopefully I planted a seed for holy matrimony!

May be I should give up tax practice and play match maker. That would be fun!!