snip
- quote -

I'm not exactly sure what you are saying. I believe you are
saying no they aren't his qualifying relatives. I have now
taken the time to re-read the code and this is my analysis.

Please note that my post assumed that the girlfriend was the
boyfriend's dependent.

Under 152(a) a dependent is a qualifying child or a
qualifying relative. Qualifying child is defined in 152(c)
and I think we all agree that his girlfriend's children are
not his qualifying children. So we are left with the
question of whether they are his qualifying relatives or
not.

The tie-breaker of 152(c)(4) is not applicable since they
aren't his qualifying children.

A qualifying relative is defined under 152(d) as:

For purposes of this section--
(1) In General.--
The term `qualifying relative' means, with respect to
any taxpayer for any taxable year, an individual--
(A) who bears a relationship to the taxpayer described
in paragraph (2),
(B) whose gross income for the calendar year in which
such taxable year begins is less than the exemption
amount (as defined in section 151(d)),
(C) with respect to whom the taxpayer provides over
one-half of the individual's support for the calendar
year in which such taxable year begins, and
(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.

He certainly meets or can meet A, B, and C. He meets A
under 152(d)(2)(H) because the children apparently lived
with him as part of his household. We don't really know
about B but I am going to assume the children had less than
$3,300 of income. The post makes pretty clear that the
boyfriend meets the support test. So we are left with
152(d)(1)(D).

Having now re-read it I believe the answer is no, they are
not qualifying relatives of the boyfriend. This is because
they are still the mother/girlfriend's qualifying children
even though she cannot claim them (since I have assumed she
is his dependent).

Thanks for making me go back and re-read the law.

--
Drew Edmundson, CPA
Cary, NC

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

Drew Edmundson wrote:
- quote -

But things changed effective last year for tax year 2005.
Unless he's the father of the kids he can't claim them,
since they are qualifying children of the mother. (only)

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

- quote -

No, according to Uniform Definition of a Child, no one can
claim any tax benefits for the children (he can't, as
already discussed, and she will get no tax benefit even if
she files to claim them since she has no taxable income).

-Mark Bole

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

- quote -

We had an extensive discussion of this last year because
several of us, I among the group, thought this couldn't
possibly be right. It is, sadly, and Congress hasn't
changed the law.

IIRC it basically boils down to the kids are her qualifying
children even if she has no income.

It was an interesting discussion, with lots of cites and all
angles considered. You might find it through Google.

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

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

If he can claim his girlfriend as a dependent then she can't
claim her children (or anyone else) as dependents.
Therefore they wouldn't be qualifying children of anyone
(unless some other adult lives with them). So couldn't her
kids count as qualifying relatives for him?

From the description they appear to meet the test of living
with him the entire year. Obviously the living arrangement
cannot violate local law.

Obviously they have to meet the other tests - resident or
citizen of the US, kids not filing a joint return, etc.

--
Drew Edmundson, CPA
Cary, NC

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

<suzy.marsh[at]gmail.com> wrote:

- quote -

He might be able to claim girlfriend, but not the kids and
not head of household.

Since kids are qualifying children of her and not him, only
she gets the exemption. But not if she is his dependent.

--
Art Kamlet ArtKamlet [at] AOL.com Columbus OH K2PZH

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

<suzy.marsh[at]gmail.com> wrote:

- quote -

The only possible tax benefit for him is the girlfriend as a
dependent "qualifying relative." This assumes that she has
no other income than the child support, which doesn't count
as gross income to her. He gets nothing for the children
and has no basis for an filing status other than Single. IRS
Publication 501. (The children are not "qualifying
children" for him.)

Not that a mother would want to meddle, but were they to
marry they could file a joint return, claim the children as
dependents, get the child tax credit and, perhaps, the
Earned Income Credit.

--
Phil Marti
Clarksburg, MD

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

suzy.marsh[at]gmail.com wrote:

- quote -

No. You do not have a "qualifying child."

RB

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >

Ohio
My son lives with a girl who has 2 children. They have lived
together for 3 years. The Mom of the 2 children has all tax
rights, she has had no income other that sporadic child
support at $423.00 per month. My question is, can he claim
all of them as dependents and head of household?

Thanks for your help.

<< ================================================== ===== > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ================================================== ===== >