feedup
recently joined
Reged: 12/28/04
Posts: 4
|
|
Here is what my decree states: In the event that petitioner (exhusband) is current in the payment of present support as of the last day of each calendar year , then he should be entitled to claim the minor child as an income tax exemption for that period.
Now my question is this does "present" support only mean for that calendar year? Because he has owed me over 4,000 for years. The judge ordered him in 2002 to pay 10.00 a week towards arreages and he never paid that either.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. I have the IRS calling saying that we bothed claimed her last year. Thanks again.
|
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
|
|
You would have to have the court decide on it, as it can be interpretted differently depending on who's reading it at the time. It is *generally* completely current...meaning no arrears. However, if the order lists you as the primary custodial parent, YOU can legally claim the deduction in any event until this wording is corrected/ammended. Unless you sign an IRS Form 8332, you would get the deduction. If the court sides with your ex however and says that they are supposed to get it, the court may require you reimburse them for the deduction, but that is very highly unlikely. Mostly, they will simply ammend so that it is not confusing in the future.
--------------------
Char Fox
|
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 19893
Loc: Third rock from the sun
|
|
Now my question is this does "present" support only mean for that calendar year?
---> Yes.
--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!
|
feedup
recently joined
Reged: 12/28/04
Posts: 4
|
|
Thank you very much for the responses. One more question if I may.
When the judge ordered him to pay 10.00 a week towards arrearages and he doesn't pay it at all does that affect him being current in support?
I know this is confusing but I just can't see how he can owe me thousands of dollars and NOT pay the 10.00 extra a week but still be current for the present year.
Let it be known he sent be over half the money of the "current support" on December 31.
Thanks again.
|
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 19893
Loc: Third rock from the sun
|
|
I know this is confusing but I just can't see how he can owe me thousands of dollars and NOT pay the 10.00 extra a week but still be current for the present year.
---> I know, $10 a week doesn't seem like much, but I can remember a time in my life when it meant that I could eat that week ($10 of ground beef can go a long way) or whether I was walking or driving to work (gasoline).
--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!
|
aussie928
old hand
Reged: 10/29/04
Posts: 969
Loc: Dallas
|
|
[quote] However, if the order lists you as the primary custodial parent, YOU can legally claim the deduction in any event until this wording is corrected/ammended. Unless you sign an IRS Form 8332, you would get the deduction.
This is only partially true...the custodial parent though entitled to this gets into a bit of a sticky wicket unless they file first. If they dont and the other files and takes the deduction first...then it is up to the custodial parent to PROVE they provided over 50% support. This can be a long and tedious process. Anyone divorcing should have this clearly stated in the divorce decree who takes the IRS deduction. Then if the other tries this all you have to do is send a copy of your divorce decree. Though I do not know all state laws...I have a relative that works for the IRS so I know this part is true.
|
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
|
|
And have that deduction bit changed. He's manipulating the system by holding half the support until the end of the year and paying it on the last day like that. A judge won't like it, and you'll likely be awarded all future deductions since he's decided to play games with the court order.
--------------------
Char Fox
|
aussie928
old hand
Reged: 10/29/04
Posts: 969
Loc: Dallas
|
|
[quote] I know this is confusing but I just can't see how he can owe me thousands of dollars and NOT pay the 10.00 extra a week but still be current for the present year.
Thanks again. [/quote]
lets see if this helps luv. Lets say your child support for each month is 100 dollars and during 2003 he only gave you 90 dollars each month..per your court order he could not take her as a deduction for the 2003 tax year. Now in 2004 he does pay you the 100 a month but he isnt paying you the extra ten. As his c/s is 100 he is current for this year and he has already been penalized for not paying the 10 dollars. Hope that helps
|
feedup
recently joined
Reged: 12/28/04
Posts: 4
|
|
He did it AGAIN this year. He owed me a total of 900.00 "present" support. Never paid any of the 10.00 a week that was supposed to go tp back support. That leaves the back support bill over 7,000.00
Anyways he went to the CS office on December 31 and paid the 900 towards the present support. It's the 4th of January already and I haven't gotten the check yet. Meaning that he can claim her for 2004 because he's current in present support. Too bad I didn't get to actually use the money IN 2004 towards support!
|
Pete
member
Reged: 12/30/04
Posts: 132
|
|
The Custodial parent has the right to claim the child. Period. Unless otherwise specified in the decree. The form Aussie is only needed on decrees prior to 1984. If specified alternating years in the decree, custodial parent would have the year decree was ordered as the starting point.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
