From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Basic Tax Questions --> Demanded HH
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Demanded HH
Libtax (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| A client has 10 years olds son that live with his divorced wife. Son visited him only on the weekend (roughly about 3 months of the year). He paid alimony to his ex-wife and child support. He told me that he claimed HH last year, and so should be this year. How could he claim HH last year when his son didn't live with him?
|
DZCPA (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
Your client is an idiot wrong..
|
Taxea (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| If you didn't prepare his last year's return don't you ask for a copy of it. You can also explain to him that he can expect a HH letter from the IRS asking that he prove the claim. Only other way he could have done it is if the ex signed the IRS form that allows him to take the deduction and he will have to have this form signed every year. taxea
|
TheTinCook (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| Even if the custodial parent waived their right to the exemption so the non-custodial parent, the non-custodial parent still couldn't qualify for HoH.
|
Smokeytax (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| If you take on the work, under ethics rules, you probably should consider informing the client in writing that last year's return should be amended to correct the filing status.
|
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| This tells me something: while IRS is very good at informing both parties when the same dependent is claimed twice, apparently it has not gotten around to checking the name in the block on Line 6 for HH. You would think someone would have thought of that line being based on SS# to prevent this.
|
EZTAX (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| But D&T: Quite likely that mom did not claim HH on her return so there was nothing to double check. Also she might have remarried or had other kids so I don't think we can no for sure that your point is correct. Interesting though, and quite possible.
|
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:
| 31 January 2008
|
| What I am saying, EZ, is that we input a name, not a SS #. Remember, IRS uses the SS# to find duplicate dependents, but a name. My point is that it is not an easy tree search by computer, especially since many returns are still handwritten. My son-in-law was married to Muller which could come out Miller to someone entering it.
|
To join in on this discussion, you must first
log in.
