In 2004 for federal tax purposes, taxpayer could claim head of household if T/P paid over half the cost of keeping up home for entire year and principal residence for more than six months of tax year for qualifying person; thus boyfriend who was supporting girlfriend and children could claim HOH. If client lived in CA which did not allow T/P to claim HOH in 2004, can client claim HOH on federal return and single on CA return?
-
peggysioux -
That is the position
That is the position of the Franchise Tax Board, but it obviously conflicts with the law that says you must use the same filing status. Do you have the heart and finances to fight the FTB? Maybe they'll let you go, since the conflict has since been resolved at the federal level. -
The FTP is relentless
I have a client who got a collection letter from the FTP over this very issue 13 years after the filing of the return. Since he lives far away from CA and has no connections there, he ignored the notice. He got another letter about 6 months after the first and no contact in the last 2 years since.In other words, a democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.
Alexis de TocquevilleComment
-
Hoh
thus boyfriend who was supporting girlfriend and children could claim HOH.
Under your scenario this TP could not file HOH because his girl friends children did not meet the relationship test.Confucius say:
He who sits on tack is better off.Comment
-
So, if client did
file HOH for both federal and CA and CA now says he owes; will CA notify IRS and IRS then send letter notifying him that he also can't claim HOH on federal as well and owes additional money?peggysiouxComment
-
ask your client
The IRS wasn't making such an issue of it -- they just went to Congress and got the law changed. California's argument was that the taxpayer couldn't care for the child as if he were the actual parent, because somebody else was already doing that. Did you ask your client in what way he considers the child to be his own? For example, does he make medical decisions, and is he obligated to support the child to age 18?Comment
-
Now that this is after the fact
where client did claim child (and he truly was supporting child), but CA said no, will IRS disallow due to the regulation stating TP has to file same for both federal & state?peggysiouxComment
-
no such rule
>>will IRS disallow due to the regulation stating TP has to file same for both federal & state?<<
There is no such regulation on the federal level--obviously you have to file federal even where there is NO state tax. However, the requirements for head of household ARE the same, and IRS could (although it's not likely) take a closer look in light of the California decision.
Whether your client "supported" his girlfriend's child has always been irrelevant for head of household. The financial element is limited to upkeep of the home, and nobody doubts him on that point.
The sticky one is the relationship test. You used to be able to claim that even if you weren't actually related, you cared for your "foster child" AS IF she were your very own. That question about medical permission slips always reveals just how thin an excuse such nonsense is. So thin that, eventually, even our Senators could see through it.Comment
-
Jainen and all you tax experts,
Thank you for the clarification. I so appreciate being able to have this board to come to with questions. Thanks to you all.peggysiouxComment
Comment