Qualifying child

[HBurkholder]

It is my understanding that a foster child can be a qualifying child if placed with the taxpayer by placement agency, judgement, decree, or court order.

TP received two foster children (twins) directly from mother (in Aug 05) who was incarcerated to keep until she was released. Mother was released and has not been heard from since. Judge ruled in 06 that foster parents have custody of children based on abandonment. Parents are working toward adopting children. I believe they would be qualifying children for 06.

My question - since they now have official custody can we amend 05 return to claim children?

There is also a question in my mind as to support for 05. Govt. paid hospital bill (they were preemies and were in the hospital 4-5 weeks after birth. Parents also received WIC benefits for formula etc.

Any help would be appreciated.

[DonPriebe]

Support not necessary

Remember that the support test for a qualifying child starting in 2005 is that the child not provide over 50% of his own support. The person claiming the qualifying child for EIC or as a dependent need not support that child at all.

[jainen]

rewarded in heaven

>>the support test for a qualifying child starting in 2005<<

Even if they had been officially placed in 2005, they were not qualifying children because they didn't live with taxpayer more than six months. And since they WEREN'T officially placed in 2005, they fail both the relationship and member-of-household tests for qualifying relative.

But good deeds are rewarded in heaven.

[JoshinNC]

Oh, that's so sweet.

I didn't know you had it in you Jainen.

[jainen]

six months of the year

>>I didn't know you had it in you Jainen<<

I may not, but I try to at least recognize it in others.

Seriously, I think we do ourselves and our country a great disservice by trying to finagle a tax angle on everything. It's bad enough to demand a public subsidy for driving to work or fixing your own roof, but when you ask the government to get involved in the intimate details of family life, there's nothing but trouble ahead.

Yesterday, over on one of the software boards, there was a big discussion about whether to give a tax refund to a young man who didn't buy the groceries for his kid brother. Now, I ask you!

Fortunately this forum is full of sophisticated professionals who are mainly discussing procedural issues about a successful practice. We only occasionally get sidetracked by whether someone is sleeping with his wife in the last six months of the year.

[HBurkholder]

Thanks

It is so nice when working alone to be able to pick the brains of the wiser and more experienced.

[jainen]

a different perspective

>>It is so nice when working alone to be able to pick the brains of the wiser and more experienced.<<

You are very welcome, and thank YOU for the nice euphemism about my aging grey matter.

I noticed you posted the same question on the ATX forum this morning. They are very hung up about support issues over there (which just happens to be what my previous post was about). Perhaps they will give a different perspective on the matter.

[HBurkholder]

I got too impatient

I posted last night late and when I didn't have much response this morn I posted over there. I think I received the correct answer here and will go with that. Thanks again.

[Gretel]

Please

would you care to share with us your correct answer?

[HBurkholder]

Not Qualifying children

Even if they would have been officially placed in05