Claiming Children

[Lion]

OP wants to know if the client/homeowner can claim the children living in his house but not related to him. One important qualification for QR is whether the children lived in his house the full year. It doesn't matter if the OP's non-client ex-wife qualified for the Adoption Credit. I want the OP to use the QR tests to see if the client can claim the kids that live in his house as QRs.

[Rapid Robert]

EDIT: as noted in the following, I was forgetting that it wasn't the ex husband who did the adoption. So nevermind.

One important qualification for QR is whether the children lived in his house the full year. .

Lion, you have posted this several times, so I must point out that just as with a child who is born or who died during the year, adopted children are treated as living with the taxpayer the full year, in the year they are adopted.

Pub 501
"There are exceptions for temporary absences, children who were born or died during the year, children who were adopted or lawfully placed for
adoption during the year, children who are eligible foster children placed during the year, children of divorced or separated parents (or parents
who live apart), and kidnapped children."

[Uncle Sam]

The question is whether they can be claimed by the ex-husband, who is NOT on the adoption papers at all. Mother used the father's income on the adoption application even though it was NOT a MFJ return.

[dtlee]

I have watched this thread for several days. If I understand correctly, the two non-children lived in the same home the entire year. The children are the ex-wife's foster children and the ex-wife's adopted children. From what I've read, they meet the requirements to be her Qualifying Children (regardless of whether or not any expenses or credits can be claimed).

The ensuing discussion seems to be whether or not anyone can claim, as a Qualifying Relative, any child who meets the qualifications to be someone's Qualifying Child.

I say no, but given the discussion above, I would like to understand why my interpretation of Section 152(d)(1)(D) is wrong.

The code basically says that a Qualifying Relative must meet certain criteria including among other things that it must be an individual:

(D) who is not a qualifying child of such taxpayer or of any other taxpayer for any taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which such taxable year begins.

What are we saying that disqualifies these children as the ex-wife's Qualifying Children?

I follow the arguments that the ex-wife may have very little income and may, in fact, be able to be claimed as someone's dependent (though I have trouble discerning precisely what her income was) which would mean that she cannot claim dependents, but that, by itself, does not mean they are not her Qualifying Children. It just means they are not Qualifying Child Dependents.

Thanks.

[TaxGuyBill]

What are we saying that disqualifies these children as the ex-wife's Qualifying Children?

I don't know the situation of the ex-wife either, but there is also the rule if the ex-wife wasn't required to file a tax return, it could allow the Qualifying Relative for the client. I would need to look up where the official rule is, but below is the link for it in Publication 501.

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p501#en_US_2023_publink1000220947

[New York Enrolled Agent]

I don't know the situation of the ex-wife either, but there is also the rule if the ex-wife wasn't required to file a tax return, it could allow the Qualifying Relative for the client. I would need to look up where the official rule is,

I think Notice 2008-5 is what you want.

[dtlee]

So have we determined that the ex-wife is not a taxpayer by this definition?

[DoubleO]

To be a QR for taxpayer, TP also would have had to provide over half of the children’s support. With the aid the state gives for special needs children, even with adopted children, health insurance and medical coverage, would TP have done that?

[Lion]

Have you done a Support worksheet, yet? Are the children special needs?

[DoubleO]

Would it matter if they are special needs for the TP? Not his children.

[Lion]

Special needs could mean outside funding which could decrease the % your client is paying toward a child's support. Has the OP done a support worksheet, yet?

[DoubleO]

That was what I was getting at in Post 23, but thought maybe you were inferring disability or something else. I see we were trying to make the same point as far as outside support.