"Phil Marti" <prm20871[at]verizon.net> wrote:
- quote -

Ok, thanks. It's all clear to me now. They count time instead
of money.

That actually makes more since in a way, since it's a lot easier
to determine.

Stu

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

"Stuart A. Bronstein" <spamtrap[at]sbcglobal.net> wrote:

- quote -

Sorry for the confusion. The custody that matters is
physical custody, IOW, where the child lives aside from
temporary absences.

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

Stu,

The law controlling the claiming of the exemption for divorced
or separated parents just changed on December 23, 2005 and the
confusion on this point has been clarified. New IRC =A7152(e)(4)
reads:

`(4) CUSTODIAL PARENT AND NONCUSTODIAL PARENT- For purposes of
this subsection--

`(A) CUSTODIAL PARENT- The term `custodial parent' means the parent
having custody for the greater portion of the calendar year.

`(B) NONCUSTODIAL PARENT- The term `noncustodial parent' means the
parent who is not the custodial parent.

Tim

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

- quote -

Custody means legal right to raise the child, not who the
child actually lives with. So when you say that hoh status
goes to the parent with custody, it is possible for one to
have custody while the child resides with the other more
than half the time.

What is becoming more and more common is that both parents
have legal custody, while one is given primary actual
custody. Is that what you were thinking of?

- quote -

Again, one parent may have "custody" under the divorce
decree while the child may actually reside with the other
parent. So the question is, does the fact one parent is
given "custody" supercede the other parent's ability to
claim hoh status even if the child resided with him more
than half the year? By your statement it wasn't at all
clear.

Stu

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

- quote -

I don't understand the question. If you're talking about
HofH filing status, the divorce decree is meaningless. A
child is qualifying only for the custodial parent and need
not be a dependent on the HofH return.

With respect to exemptions, the parties are free to
determine how they want to use the childrens' exemptions.
If the noncustodial parent (had the child less than 50% of
the year) is claiming the exemption, (s)he must provide
proof that the custodial parent has relinquished the
exemption.

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

"Phil Marti" <prm20871[at]verizon.net> wrote:

- quote -

So the divorce decree trumps the "more than 50%" requirement?

Stu

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

"Bob Sandler" <bob_usenet[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

The part about the divorce decree is redundant and could
confuse. (At least it did me.) The parent who had custody
more than half the year gets the exemption unless (s)he
relinquishes it. Even if the custodial parent doesn't claim
the exemption because of the divorce decree or other
agreement, the child is still a qualifying child for HofH
filing status.

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

- quote -

Yes, you can file as head of household if your younger
daughter lived with you for more than half the year, AND she
is your dependent (meeting all the IRS requirements, not
just because the divorce decree says she is), AND you paid
more than half the cost of maintaining the home where you
and she lived.

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

"tjones" <tsj423[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

Between here and the unmoderated group this is the third
fact version you've posted. Eliminate the "probably" in
your statement and the answer is "yes."

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

I adopted my oldest daughter, and she has spent more than 50%
of the year with her mother. My biological daughter has
probably spent more than 50% of the year with me, I will have
to check the calendar to be certain. If this is correct, could
I file for HOH?

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

- quote -

Actually, a divorce decree is no longer effective unless it
is the equivalent of Form 8332. The law has reverted to the
requirement the dependent exemption be released by the
custodial parent.

Timothy E Kelly
Certified Specialist in Taxation Law
State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

"tjones" <tsj423[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

You cannot be head of household without a qualifying child.

--
David M. Woods, EA, ChFC, CLU
Woods Financial Services
Norwood, MA 02062
www.woods-financial.com

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

tsj423[at]comcast.net (tjones) posted:

- quote -

No. One of the tests is that you must have had a qualifying
child _living with you_ for more than 6 months. By your
statement, this is not true.

Only your former wife can file as HH, assuming she paid more
than half the cost of keeping up the home.

You may still claim them as dependents, if the decree awarded
you this right as a noncustodial parent. But there is an
exception granted for the custodial parent which qualifies
the children for your wife, even though she cannot claim
dependency. See Chapter 3, Pub 17.

Bill

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

tjones wrote:

- quote -

To qualify for Head of Household status, the child(ren) must
live with you, and you must provide at least half of the cost
of providing such living quarters. Sounds like only your
ex-wife gets to make the HOH claim, you are SINGLE.

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

My divorce was final in March 2005, moved out in Nov 2004.
We have two young children and accordance with the divorce
papers I get to claim them for 2005, however, they reside
with my ex-wife.

Can we both claim head of household, I for one child and she
another, and then I still claim both as dependants? Any
advice would be greatly appreciated.

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only > << and does NOT constitute legal OR professional advice. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2005) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >