Jump to content
ATX Community

Recommended Posts

Posted

Jail is not an exception... although I can see cases where jail is education as well as a vacation for the parents. I would say >= 6 months incarcerated, no way the parents have a dependent. More than 30 days incarcerated, jail could have provided more than half support depending on the situation.

---

Residency Test

To meet this test, your child must have lived with you for more than half of the year. There are exceptions for temporary absences, children who were born or died during the year, kidnapped children, and children of divorced or separated parents.

Temporary absences. Your child is considered to have lived with you during periods of time when one of you, or both, are temporarily absent due to special circumstances such as:

* Illness,

* Education,

* Business,

* Vacation, or

* Military service.

Posted

What does in system mean. In some cases if the chid is in Juvy the parents pay part or all of the room and board. Again not enough information to make a call on this one.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Linda and buddy

Posted

In looking at the support and residency requirements, I took child as dependent in '08 since he did not go to detention center until 8/1. Parents are not paying support while he is incarcerated. If he stays incarcerated most of 2009, I won't claim him for next year. Thanks for the thoughts.

Julie

Posted

I remember this topic mentioned before. I can't find the thread. There was a cite that said as long as the incarcerated dependent was planning to return to the home when released, he/she can still be claimed as a dependent for the entire time of incarceration.

I am looking for the cite.

Posted

I remember this topic mentioned before. I can't find the thread. There was a cite that said as long as the incarcerated dependent was planning to return to the home when released, he/she can still be claimed as a dependent for the entire time of incarceration.

I am looking for the cite.

Dependency exemption—earned income credit—incarcerated child—proof of support; principle abode.

Taxpayer was denied dependency exemption for son who was incarcerated during entire year at issue: taxpayer failed to show that she provided more than 1/2 of son's support where she wasn't required by state to support son while incarcerated and amounts she voluntarily contributed to account for him to purchase allowable incidentals was significantly less than support provided by state. Also, taxpayer was denied EIC where son wasn't qualifying child under Code Sec. 32©(1)(A)(i) : he didn't have same principal place of abode as mother for more than 1/2 of year at issue. (Latanya Haywood v. Commissioner, (2002) TC Memo 2002-258 , 2002 RIA TC Memo ¶2002-258 )

Maybe this will help.

Good luck,

Dan

Posted

But that was under the old dependency tests. Current support test does not require the parent to provide over half the support for a qualifying child.

The residency test could be an issue, depending on the details.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...