hippiechick
Member
Since both parents are supporting their children, shouldn't they both get a tax break at the end of the year?
Shouldn't BOTH parents get a tax expemption for the children
- Thread starter hippiechick
- Start date
Sierra39
Hairball Magnet
I understand your point, but under the current system it wouldn't work – the IRS computers WON'T let two people claim the same dependent with the same social security number...if two people try to, they will return the second tax return they received claiming that dependent, along with a rather NASTY letter to let you know that you CAN'T claim that child, because someone else already has! (Unless you send them the below-mentioned form...)
If the parent who currently has the rights to the deduction WANTS to give the tax deduction to the other parent, you just have to fill out the IRS' form to do so and file a signed copy with your taxes (you don't have to go back to court.)
It doesn't seem fair, but it probably keeps alot of people from cheating on their taxes by claiming a child they don't have legal rights to claim! (i.e. deadbeat parents who NEVER pay their child support!) Perhaps it would be easier to allow parents who don't have custody, but pay child support, get a special tax credit.
If the parent who currently has the rights to the deduction WANTS to give the tax deduction to the other parent, you just have to fill out the IRS' form to do so and file a signed copy with your taxes (you don't have to go back to court.)
It doesn't seem fair, but it probably keeps alot of people from cheating on their taxes by claiming a child they don't have legal rights to claim! (i.e. deadbeat parents who NEVER pay their child support!) Perhaps it would be easier to allow parents who don't have custody, but pay child support, get a special tax credit.
earthchild
Member
that was really a nice response. The most intelligent one I have seen since I have been here. I think the governement needs to change the curent poilicy. Both parents are supporting the child. just because you are divorced and do not have custodial custody does not mean you are not supporting your child. ( I realza there are some who don't so don't jump me on that)
The person paying child support does not have the great benefit of having their children with them all the time so they lose out there.
then they are supporting them with child support of which the custodial parent does not have to report to irs because it is no concidered income. Then the custodial parent not only gets to be with the children more they recieve moetary support without having to report it and they get earned income credit along with tax exemptions for the dependents.
the person paying child support loses all the way around. It is not fair and should be changed to be fair to ALL parties
The person paying child support does not have the great benefit of having their children with them all the time so they lose out there.
then they are supporting them with child support of which the custodial parent does not have to report to irs because it is no concidered income. Then the custodial parent not only gets to be with the children more they recieve moetary support without having to report it and they get earned income credit along with tax exemptions for the dependents.
the person paying child support loses all the way around. It is not fair and should be changed to be fair to ALL parties
I think you are right. They should change the tax laws accordingly for those who PAY their share of child support. It really does not seem fair to the non-custodial parent. They lose having their children with them, pay out the a$$
and do not even to share the dependent tax exemptions.
I wonder what if anything can be done?
modwoman
and do not even to share the dependent tax exemptions.
I wonder what if anything can be done?
modwoman
slackjawyokel
Member
There is another point to be taken here. I am a single father, and I do get child support. My son's mother pays $200 a month. I pay out more than $700 a month (above her support) to support my son. Why should we both get the same exemption?
My ex and I negotiated it in our divorce - he'd pay X amount of child support and I would claim the kids on my taxes. Like Sierra said, if you want to make a different arrangement, all you have to do is fill out a form.
Another thing to think about (and my ex and I have had several discussions on this topic):
Typically it's the C parent that is on-call 24/7 - if the kid is sick, the C parent takes the time off work and deals with the doctors. While the non-C parent is meeting friends for drinks after work, the C parent is running home to the kids. While the non-C parent is entertaining a boy/girlfriend in their apartment (if you know what I mean), the C parent has to actually go somewhare else and pay a babysitter to do it. Etc, etc, etc...
So if you think you're getting screwed on your child support, add up an hourly wage of $6.25 (which is cheap), then multiply it by 24 hours. Comes out to $150 per day. That wage doesn't include food, shelter, clothing, school supplies, etc. My ex tried that old "I'm paying for more than half of the kids' essentials and it's not fair!" I replied, "Well, then let's crunch the numbers..." and that usually shuts him up.
If you are a non-custodial parent, in essence you're paying someone else to raise your children full-time so you don't have to. I'm certain that statement will make some of you non-Cs defensive and you'll come back with some story about how you fought to retain custody and the ex had a better lawyer or some other blah blah. But we can address that subject if it comes up.
See what you started, HippieChick?
Another thing to think about (and my ex and I have had several discussions on this topic):
Typically it's the C parent that is on-call 24/7 - if the kid is sick, the C parent takes the time off work and deals with the doctors. While the non-C parent is meeting friends for drinks after work, the C parent is running home to the kids. While the non-C parent is entertaining a boy/girlfriend in their apartment (if you know what I mean), the C parent has to actually go somewhare else and pay a babysitter to do it. Etc, etc, etc...
So if you think you're getting screwed on your child support, add up an hourly wage of $6.25 (which is cheap), then multiply it by 24 hours. Comes out to $150 per day. That wage doesn't include food, shelter, clothing, school supplies, etc. My ex tried that old "I'm paying for more than half of the kids' essentials and it's not fair!" I replied, "Well, then let's crunch the numbers..." and that usually shuts him up.
If you are a non-custodial parent, in essence you're paying someone else to raise your children full-time so you don't have to. I'm certain that statement will make some of you non-Cs defensive and you'll come back with some story about how you fought to retain custody and the ex had a better lawyer or some other blah blah. But we can address that subject if it comes up.
See what you started, HippieChick?
slackjawyokel
Member
Right on. Thank you.to put a price on the parent that has custody was really tacky. That is what being a parent is all about; you should be happy you have the chance to be there 24/7. I have children and recieve child support. But I concider myself fortunate to have ny children to charge by the hour? no way. I feel so bad when the ex misses out on being there. to tuck them in, to see thier first tooth, dance etc.etc. and to be there when they are sick..Thats a special moment I get to share with my children. Think about it like this. How would you like to be on the other foot;not have your children;most pay alot more than 200 a month;and then have to pay taxes on an income you do not see because it is to help support your child;which it should but you do not even get something to help wth the taxes.
I do not think that the one paying child support should get the same tax break but I do think a break. Like I said I have children and I know I am more then compensated an the end of the year and taxes.
I do not think that the one paying child support should get the same tax break but I do think a break. Like I said I have children and I know I am more then compensated an the end of the year and taxes.
hippiechick
Member
The problem I see so far in here is that you are thinking about yourself and the position you personally are in.
People need to be open minded and be able to see both sides of the issue with allowing theri emotions play a role in the conclusion.
I think that sense it takes both parents to have a child, and sense if you think about it in most noral cases both parents have pros and cons they each should receive a tax break accordingly.
Just because you are bitter or share not so happy thought about your ex..or a friends ex and so on that should not cloud your judgement on being able to come to something that is fair to both.
As far as the non-custodial parents "whining" about the other having a better lawyer or they tried. Alot of the cases that is a true factor. I know first hand working in the Circuit Court and seeing that myself. One has got to be awarded custody, that does not always mean the one who does not have custody is any less of a parent. If nothing else they lose out on alot more than money. If ou think it is a chore to raise your kids or so on maybe you should concider not.
People need to be open minded and be able to see both sides of the issue with allowing theri emotions play a role in the conclusion.
I think that sense it takes both parents to have a child, and sense if you think about it in most noral cases both parents have pros and cons they each should receive a tax break accordingly.
Just because you are bitter or share not so happy thought about your ex..or a friends ex and so on that should not cloud your judgement on being able to come to something that is fair to both.
As far as the non-custodial parents "whining" about the other having a better lawyer or they tried. Alot of the cases that is a true factor. I know first hand working in the Circuit Court and seeing that myself. One has got to be awarded custody, that does not always mean the one who does not have custody is any less of a parent. If nothing else they lose out on alot more than money. If ou think it is a chore to raise your kids or so on maybe you should concider not.
hippiechick
Member
The problem I see so far in here is that you are thinking about yourself and the position you personally are in.
People need to be open minded and be able to see both sides of the issue with allowing their emotions play a role in the conclusion.
I think that since it takes both parents to have a child, and sense if you think about it in most normal cases both parents have pros and cons they each should receive a tax break accordingly.
Just because you are bitter or share not so happy thought about your ex..or a friends ex and so on that should not cloud your judgement on being able to come to something that is fair to both.
As far as the non-custodial parents "whining" about the other having a better lawyer or they tried. Alot of the cases that is a true factor. I know first hand working in the Circuit Court and seeing that myself. One has got to be awarded custody, that does not always mean the one who does not have custody is any less of a parent. If nothing else they lose out on alot more than money. If ou think it is a chore to raise your kids or so on maybe you should concider not.
People need to be open minded and be able to see both sides of the issue with allowing their emotions play a role in the conclusion.
I think that since it takes both parents to have a child, and sense if you think about it in most normal cases both parents have pros and cons they each should receive a tax break accordingly.
Just because you are bitter or share not so happy thought about your ex..or a friends ex and so on that should not cloud your judgement on being able to come to something that is fair to both.
As far as the non-custodial parents "whining" about the other having a better lawyer or they tried. Alot of the cases that is a true factor. I know first hand working in the Circuit Court and seeing that myself. One has got to be awarded custody, that does not always mean the one who does not have custody is any less of a parent. If nothing else they lose out on alot more than money. If ou think it is a chore to raise your kids or so on maybe you should concider not.
Mod, I agree with you completely - I think it's beyond tacky that my ex puts a price tag on his children's welfare. But it's what we agreed to so there you go. And I don't charge him by the hour or he'd be one broke motor scooter. We do not have the type of divorced relationship that makes me want to take him to the cleaners in revenge.
I, too, think it's sad that the ex doesn't get to share the things that make child raising so rewarding - the plays and concerts they're involved in, the bumper sticker that says I'm the proud parent of an honor student, the breakfast in bed they make me on my birthday, actually <i>knowing</i> my children as people and not just occasional visitors. But he chose that when we divorced. I've never denied him visitation or tried to make it difficult for him to see his kids in any way. He was the one who packed up and moved to California with his girlfriend, not me. And he doesn't seem to miss those special moments too much so there you go - I get child support, he gets freedom, everyone's happy.
If you feel strongly about it, why don't you let your ex take the deduction on his taxes? Or do you already? You could also voluntarily reduce your child support so the ex isn't taking such a financial bite.
I, too, think it's sad that the ex doesn't get to share the things that make child raising so rewarding - the plays and concerts they're involved in, the bumper sticker that says I'm the proud parent of an honor student, the breakfast in bed they make me on my birthday, actually <i>knowing</i> my children as people and not just occasional visitors. But he chose that when we divorced. I've never denied him visitation or tried to make it difficult for him to see his kids in any way. He was the one who packed up and moved to California with his girlfriend, not me. And he doesn't seem to miss those special moments too much so there you go - I get child support, he gets freedom, everyone's happy.
If you feel strongly about it, why don't you let your ex take the deduction on his taxes? Or do you already? You could also voluntarily reduce your child support so the ex isn't taking such a financial bite.
missdevilish
Member
I must express my opinion one this, you did read hippiechicks response very well vchick. Your circumstances are yours not and should stay that way. You guys are just looking for an arguement. the question was should both parents get a tax break. As far as parents chosing when the divorce is final that statment is your only. I know my ex husband loves and supports his children. And you did put a price on taking of the children in your last response.
I do allow my ex to claim them at the end of the year. But It would be nice if Both he and I both can get a break on taxes at the end since we both share the responsibilites. Where is the harm in that?
I do allow my ex to claim them at the end of the year. But It would be nice if Both he and I both can get a break on taxes at the end since we both share the responsibilites. Where is the harm in that?
missdevilish
Member
that statment was to virleblonde or whatever your nick is
hippiechick
Member
Thank you Missdevilish.
I see that you did take the time to read the response I had written.
The post is simply shouldn't both parents get a break.
Child support is broken down during the court process, and determined on each parties ablity to pay and the child care expenses. Now I am not saying it is a full proof procedure but what is...
All I am saying is if both parents are supporting them I think Both shoud get a break accordingly.
Yes I do give my ex the rght to claim them on his taxes, but it would be easier and a little air for both of us if we both can share or have tax exemptions.
Once again you have to see the whole picture and not just what you/friends have been though or experinced.
"blonde" you have taken this too personally it was not directed to you. Just a question to see how people feel.
ANd I have seen more divorce and custody cases in my life than you have and have seen how it effects people on BOTH sides.
But again that was not the qustion asked
I see that you did take the time to read the response I had written.
The post is simply shouldn't both parents get a break.
Child support is broken down during the court process, and determined on each parties ablity to pay and the child care expenses. Now I am not saying it is a full proof procedure but what is...
All I am saying is if both parents are supporting them I think Both shoud get a break accordingly.
Yes I do give my ex the rght to claim them on his taxes, but it would be easier and a little air for both of us if we both can share or have tax exemptions.
Once again you have to see the whole picture and not just what you/friends have been though or experinced.
"blonde" you have taken this too personally it was not directed to you. Just a question to see how people feel.
ANd I have seen more divorce and custody cases in my life than you have and have seen how it effects people on BOTH sides.
But again that was not the qustion asked
I'm not taking this personally at all - I already gave you a solution if you think there's an inequity in child deductions. Sierra gave you the same information. Did you know that, if you have more than one kid, you can claim one and the ex claims the other? Also, you can adjust child support so that the tax deductions are more fair. This is such a free country with so many options that I can't stand it! I may break out in hives!
Iamthatdamngood
Member
Vraiblonde obviously she/he would know that if she works in court.
I would like to address the post.
Should both parents receive a tax break?
Yes. Some how it should be worked out that the parent with the children living with them should of course claim them but the parent that pays child support should get a tax exemption for the amount of support he/she pays. It parties involved should not have to "work" anything out, it should not be up to them in this case. You get the right to claim them plus all the other benefits of having custody of the children, the other parent should atleast get a tax exemption also. pure and simple.
Your are to partial to your opinion, and you are not looking at it from all sides.
I would like to address the post.
Should both parents receive a tax break?
Yes. Some how it should be worked out that the parent with the children living with them should of course claim them but the parent that pays child support should get a tax exemption for the amount of support he/she pays. It parties involved should not have to "work" anything out, it should not be up to them in this case. You get the right to claim them plus all the other benefits of having custody of the children, the other parent should atleast get a tax exemption also. pure and simple.
Your are to partial to your opinion, and you are not looking at it from all sides.
Iamthatdamngood
Member
ohh and one more thing....
I do not belive you gave a solution to the question asked...
A solution would be a given guide posed by the federal government.
I think the people receiving the child support should have to report on a regular basis what they spend the child support on to the child support agency, they should not have a problem with this if the money is going to support the child and so on
I do not belive you gave a solution to the question asked...
A solution would be a given guide posed by the federal government.
I think the people receiving the child support should have to report on a regular basis what they spend the child support on to the child support agency, they should not have a problem with this if the money is going to support the child and so on
I say no to your question. I have several reasons. First, how could this be effectively managed with respect to those that don’t pay their support. Should they get the benefit also? Support is an after tax expense, just as if you had to buy the stuff when you were together. If you had the children it would be obvious that what you pay in support doesn’t come close to actual expenses. I think it is very fair to say that to be a dependent you would have to contribute over half of the funds necessary to support the child or have it set by a legal writ. I think Vraiblonde was only attempting to do this when she established a figure for what in her mind is the cost of raising a child for comparison with the support she receives.
This is just one area that isn’t fair with our tax system and makes me think that a national sales tax (consumption tax) would level the field for all inconsistencies when compared to an income tax.
This is just one area that isn’t fair with our tax system and makes me think that a national sales tax (consumption tax) would level the field for all inconsistencies when compared to an income tax.
hippiechick
Member
dear ken,
Please READ the respose. I SAID tax exemptions based on what you PAID.
If they garnish your wages you have an actual record of what you PAID.
also child support would have an record of what you PAID.
My God you people are so quick to argue but you do not read or comprehend very well what is being said.
Please READ the respose. I SAID tax exemptions based on what you PAID.
If they garnish your wages you have an actual record of what you PAID.
also child support would have an record of what you PAID.
My God you people are so quick to argue but you do not read or comprehend very well what is being said.
Do you know what I'm tired of? People who post an opinion, get responses that disagree with that opinion, so they create new screen names and make posts to support their POV, making it look like more people are in favor of it than really are. Then they post back to themselves something like "Thank you for agreeing with my post". You know who you are...and so do the rest of us.
Consider yourself officially busted out. Now find somewhere else to play.
Consider yourself officially busted out. Now find somewhere else to play.