Exemptions

[Nashville]

What about the Age Test

Hard to imagine all these comments and not a single one about the daughter being over age 23. I thought they (govt) came up with this one to stop parents from claiming a child forever. The only exception being permanent/total disability.

Why doesn't Congress just pass a law that says "Y'all just do whatever you want and claim whoever you want." Family members and dysfunctional family members can then all get together on New Year's Eve and play poker winning and losing exemptions, filing statuses, EIC, etc. They do this anyway and then bring their agreements to the tax preparer, expecting us to buy into their crap. And if we don't, they just go across town to "Shifty Eyed Sam."

I can just hear it now...

"I told Bettye I would let her claim that snotty-nosed brat this year, but she told me I could have the Earned Income thing if there is any. We've done decided thet so go ahead with it."

[BP.]

the daughter being over age 23.

Since these dependents seem to be QRs, there is no age test.

[ChEAr$]

Latest twist

Remember how I said parents were under impression that rascal didn't live in household with baby and mother all year?
And how the mother's brother hit her lover with the baseball bat, allegedly justified? Well......

That daughter calls me asking about it, so I asked her if father lived in household all year. Yes, except for two months last March and April.

Surprise!

Parents think otherwise, probably what daughter told them.

But I'm thinking that the rascal can't possibly claim the baby since he and baby did not live together in same household for full twelve months.
Agree? Does that cinch it now?

[BP.]

Confused about when the baby was born. Was it Oct '12?

If so, it almost appears from your posts that Mom, Dad & child all lived together in 2012? Oct- Dec? (You said Dad was absent in Mar/ Apr.)

[BP.]

he and baby did not live together in same household for full twelve months.

So many tests . . . . But if you now have facts that may make baby the QC of Dad, the member-of-household test does not require full twelve months.

[ChEAr$]

Confused about when the baby was born. Was it Oct '12?

If so, it almost appears from your posts that Mom, Dad & child all lived together in 2012? Oct- Dec? (You said Dad was absent in Mar/ Apr.)

Forgot to mention that baby had been born as I found out today, October of 2011.

Now, since child is his, and lived with him more than 6 months, he gets to claim after all.

[appelman]

I am assuming the daughter does not live with her mom. If so, the father could claim the child as a qualifying child if the mother were to sign 8332 to allow him to do so. If so, dad would have priority over grandma.

Only if the parents together provide more than half the child's support.

[David1980]

Only if the parents together provide more than half the child's support.

Not necessary. Under qualifying child rules all the support test requires is that the child didn't provide over half their own support.

[BP.]

if the mother were to sign 8332

Only if the parents together provide more than half the child's support.

Not necessary. Under qualifying child rules all the support test requires is that the child didn't provide over half their own support.

TTB 3-17

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8332.pdf

Looks necessary for Form 8332.

[David1980]

TTB 3-17

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8332.pdf

Looks necessary for Form 8332.

I don't think the 8332 is necessary. At this point the father lived with the child for 10 months of the year (everything except March and April). You're right though, if 8332 was necessary the parents would need to provide over half the support.