I Hate Dependent Laws

[New York Enrolled Agent]

NYEA,

I have come to grips with the fact that the IRS does not want us to do that.

The comment that the QC does not have to be a dependent to qualify you for Head of Household is a holdover from happier times but REMAINS TRUE. There are times when you cannot claim a QC as a dependent but you can claim Head of Household with that QC.

Doug

Are you're telling me that the Internal Revenue Code in §2(b) says Bob's dad qualifies for HOH but the IRS does not want us to do that?????????????

If I'm misreading the IRC, please correct me. If I'm reading it correctly, then the clear language of the statute should govern. I still ask the question - where in the IRC does it prohibit Bob's client from HOH? The IRC is the ULTIMATE authority.

I still believe putting the child's name on line 4 is not "claiming" the child as envisioned in
IRS Notice 2006-86.

Dependent defined—rule for 2 or more CLAIMING qualifying child—interim guidance.
Headnote:
Until regs are issued, IRS provided interim guidance for situations where more than one taxpayer CLAIMS child as “qualifying child” within meaning of Code Sec. 152;

In any case, The Giants won so who cares about the IRS. In the interim you, I and BP will agree to disagree.

[dtlee]

Are you're telling me that the Internal Revenue Code in §2(b) says Bob's dad qualifies for HOH but the IRS does not want us to do that?????????????

Yes.

I still believe putting the child's name on line 4 is not "claiming" the child as envisioned in IRS Notice 2006-86.

Here is where things are clear to both the normal human reader and also to the IRS, but their interpretation is different. You do not claim a child for Head of Household or for EIC purposes, but the IRS interprets any use of a Qualifying Child as "Claiming" the child. Hence, I do not believe the rules are "clear."

If you peruse the link I provided to the other thread, you can see that there are others who agree that the language in the code does not restrict multiple taxpayers from using a Qualifying Child for different purposes. However, there are also those who cite the committee reports of the intent of the law and I would also suggest that the original proposal by the IRS was that a Qualifying Child should only appear on an single tax return. Obviously, they lost on the divorced/separated parent rule, but they believe the law supports them for all other situations.

My point is that the IRS has repeatedly interpreted all of this as meaning the Qualifying Child can only be listed on a single return (for any and all purposes) and will use the tiebreaker rules if they find this child on more than one. If the taxpayer feels that they can win this in court and the preparer feels comfortable taking the position that Head of Household is available even when the other parent claims the dependent exemption, I would love to read the decision in that case.

If I'm misreading the IRC, please correct me.

Seriously, Frank if I thought you were misreading the code, I would tell you (after getting my head examined).

In case you have not yet noticed, when they added the Uninformed Definition of a Child, they did not do a very good job. There are complicated situations and unintended consequences all through the sections that are infected with that change. My example of parents who can't claim the child due to the rules for support being different for parents compared to other relatives living in the home is another problem where they did not make sure all areas of the code made sense together.

Recent discussions here and elsewhere about the QW or HOH status and why a Qualifying Child can't qualify you for QW or to be considered unmarried unless it is your child (i.e. not a grandchild) show how convoluted the rules have become. The contention by a majoyr tax firm that Qualifying Relatives are eligible for Child Care Credits is yet another case where someone found something that could make sense if interpreted in some way but no one else seems to have interpreted that same rule the same way.

[Bees Knees]

Are you're telling me that the Internal Revenue Code in §2(b) says Bob's dad qualifies for HOH but the IRS does not want us to do that?????????????

If I'm misreading the IRC, please correct me. If I'm reading it correctly, then the clear language of the statute should govern. I still ask the question - where in the IRC does it prohibit Bob's client from HOH? The IRC is the ULTIMATE authority.

The IRC is the ultimate authority, and the IRC section you quoted does in fact prohibit Bob’s client from HOH, IF the tie breaker rule applies and Mom winds up claiming the dependency exemption.

IRC Section 2(b)(1)(A)(i) says you get HOH if the person living with you is a qualifying child as defined in Section 152(c).

Section 152(c)(4) says if 2 or more try to claim the same qualifying child, then the tie goes to….blah blah blah….(you know the rules)

In other words, only one taxpayer can ever claim any individual as a qualifying child. If the tie breaker rules give qualifying child status to mom, then that child is NOT a qualifying child of Dad, thus voiding any HOH under Section 2(b). If the tie breaker rules give qualifying child status to Dad, then that child IS a qualifying child of Dad, thus allowing HOH under Section 2(b).

The key here is even though Section 152(c) applies to the dependency exemption deduction, Section 2(b) uses Section 152(c) to define whether you get HOH.

You can’t ignore who actually claims the child as a dependent when considering the HOH rules.

[BOB W]

Just to complicate this discusion> When would 1040 line 4 be used?

[BP.]

Just to complicate this discusion> When would 1040 line 4 be used?

TTB 3-16, situation 3.

[BOB W]

Situation 3 says child can be claimed as an exemption, so 1040 line 4 is not needed???

Line 4 is for HOH without a child's or a person's exemption> just listing name and SS#.

[Gene V]

I use line 4, when the divorce mother has custody of the child, however, she signs an 8332 and release exemption to ex-spouse.
This way she claims HOH without a dependent exemption.

[Jesse]

If I am the custodial parent qualifying for HOH but I sign form 8332 to allow the noncustodial parent the exemption I would need to list the child on line 4.

[BOB W]

That makes total sense. Probably that is the only time...???