One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the child
lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does that mean that
the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and can
qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Thanks.
--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com
--Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for more than half of the time he or she was alive in the year. Whether a child is born alive depends on state law.
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.com
--
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the
child lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does
that mean that the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and
can qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's
main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for more
than half of the time he or she was alive in the year. Whether a
child is born alive depends on state law.
Alan <tempuser@vacationmail.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the
child lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does
that mean that the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and
can qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's
main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for more
than half of the time he or she was alive in the year. Whether a
child is born alive depends on state law.
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but if it
is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is only
"alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year, whether the child has
lived with the parent for more than half the year. In the case of a
newborn, it is half the calendar year, or half the child's life up to
the end of the year? It sounds like you're saying that a child born,
even late in the year, can qualify.
"Stuart O. Bronstein" wrote in message news:XnsAFB663895628Eavocatstuyahoofr@130.133.4.11...
Alan <tempuser@vacationmail.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the
child lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does
that mean that the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and
can qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's
main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for
more than half of the time he or she was alive in the year.
Whether a child is born alive depends on state law.
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but
if it is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is
only "alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year, whether the
child has lived with the parent for more than half the year. In
the case of a newborn, it is half the calendar year, or half the
child's life up to the end of the year? It sounds like you're
saying that a child born, even late in the year, can qualify.
I've known many people who had a child born in December (even
December 31) who got full credit for the child. As I understand
it, the issue is always whether the child lived more than half the
time (i.e., the time the child is alive) with the parent claiming
the credit.
As to what constitutes a legal birth, I would assume a child born
alive (even if only for a few seconds) who is issued a birth
certificate by the state showing date of birth within the tax year
would qualify.
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but if it
is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is only
"alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year,
"Rick" <rick@nospam.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
Alan <tempuser@vacationmail.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the
child lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does
that mean that the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and
can qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's
main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for
more than half of the time he or she was alive in the year.
Whether a child is born alive depends on state law.
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but
if it is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is
only "alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year, whether the
child has lived with the parent for more than half the year. In
the case of a newborn, it is half the calendar year, or half the
child's life up to the end of the year? It sounds like you're
saying that a child born, even late in the year, can qualify.
I've known many people who had a child born in December (even
December 31) who got full credit for the child. As I understand
it, the issue is always whether the child lived more than half the
time (i.e., the time the child is alive) with the parent claiming
the credit.
As to what constitutes a legal birth, I would assume a child born
alive (even if only for a few seconds) who is issued a birth
certificate by the state showing date of birth within the tax year
would qualify.
According to the IRS, the child has to have a Social Security Number.
I suspect that would be difficult if the child didn't live very long.
"Rick" <rick@nospam.com> wrote:
"Stuart O. Bronstein" wrote in message
news:XnsAFB663895628Eavocatstuyahoofr@130.133.4.11...
Alan <tempuser@vacationmail.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the
child lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does
that mean that the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and
can qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's
main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for
more than half of the time he or she was alive in the year.
Whether a child is born alive depends on state law.
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but
if it is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is
only "alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year, whether the
child has lived with the parent for more than half the year. In
the case of a newborn, it is half the calendar year, or half the
child's life up to the end of the year? It sounds like you're
saying that a child born, even late in the year, can qualify.
I've known many people who had a child born in December (even
December 31) who got full credit for the child. As I understand
it, the issue is always whether the child lived more than half the
time (i.e., the time the child is alive) with the parent claiming
the credit.
As to what constitutes a legal birth, I would assume a child born
alive (even if only for a few seconds) who is issued a birth
certificate by the state showing date of birth within the tax year
would qualify.
According to the IRS, the child has to have a Social Security Number.
I suspect that would be difficult if the child didn't live very long.
On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 12:47:25 EST, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but if itWill the IRS equate "180 days" with "six months"? They're not the
is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is only
"alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year,
same.
July-December have four 31-day months and two 30-day, for a total of
184 days. January-June have _three_ 31-day months, two 30-day months,
and _one_ 28- or 29-day month, for a total of 181 or 182 days.
To be alive at the end of the year but less than 180 days in the
year, a child would need to be born on or after July 6th.
--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
Rick <rick@nospam.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
Alan <tempuser@vacationmail.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
One of the requirements for the Child Tax Credit is that the
child lived with the parent for more than half the year. Does
that mean that the child must have been born before July 2?
Or is the child considered alive on the date of conception and
can qualify for the credit even if not born before July 2?
Births and deaths meet the requirement as long as the taxpayer's
main home was (or would have been) the child's main home for
more than half of the time he or she was alive in the year.
Whether a child is born alive depends on state law.
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, but
if it is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it is
only "alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year, whether the
child has lived with the parent for more than half the year. In
the case of a newborn, it is half the calendar year, or half the >>>>child's life up to the end of the year? It sounds like you're
saying that a child born, even late in the year, can qualify.
I've known many people who had a child born in December (even
December 31) who got full credit for the child. As I understand
it, the issue is always whether the child lived more than half the
time (i.e., the time the child is alive) with the parent claiming
the credit.
As to what constitutes a legal birth, I would assume a child born
alive (even if only for a few seconds) who is issued a birth
certificate by the state showing date of birth within the tax year
would qualify.
According to the IRS, the child has to have a Social Security Number.
I suspect that would be difficult if the child didn't live very long.
Well, there is this:
https://www.irs.gov/faqs/earned-income-tax-credit/qualifying-child-rules/qualifying-child-rules-1
On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 12:31:29 AM UTC-5, Stan Brown
wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 12:47:25 EST, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
Thanks Alan. The issue isn't whether a child is born alive, butWill the IRS equate "180 days" with "six months"? They're not the
if it is born (alive and stays alive) after July 2, so that it
is only "alive" for 182 or fewer days during the year,
same.
July-December have four 31-day months and two 30-day, for a total
of 184 days. January-June have _three_ 31-day months, two 30-day
months, and _one_ 28- or 29-day month, for a total of 181 or 182
days.
To be alive at the end of the year but less than 180 days in the
year, a child would need to be born on or after July 6th.
--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...
Counting days of the year has nothing to do with it. The date that
the child is born is not the issue. It's not a strict requirement
that the child live with you for more than 182 days. IRS
Publication 501 says the following.
"Death or birth of child. A child who was born or died during the
year is treated as having lived with you more than half the year
if your home was the child's home more than half the time the
child was alive during the year."
So a child born anytime during the year is "treated as" having
lived with you for more than half the year, even if the child did
not actually live with you for more than half the year. The date
that the child was born doesn't matter, and the actual number of
days doesn't matter.
Under 1. The Earned Income Credit, if the child was born and died within
the same calendar year and wasn't issued an SSN, IRS allows the the birth
or death certificate or record of live birth to be substituted for the SSN.
This doesn't make any sense. Applications for issuance of birth and death >certifications are mandatory under state vital statistics laws and these >days, the record of live birth is part of the very same application package >used to obtain the SSN. Medical personnel are obligated to record ...
According to Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
Under 1. The Earned Income Credit, if the child was born and died within >>the same calendar year and wasn't issued an SSN, IRS allows the the birth >>or death certificate or record of live birth to be substituted for the SSN.
This doesn't make any sense. Applications for issuance of birth and death >>certifications are mandatory under state vital statistics laws and these >>days, the record of live birth is part of the very same application package >>used to obtain the SSN. Medical personnel are obligated to record ...
Life can be complicated. Not every child is born in a hospital, some >hospitals are better at carrying through the paperwork than others.
While I agree that in recent years most newborns get SSNs along with
their birth certificate, not all of them do.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 39:31:31 |
| Calls: | 6,708 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,241 |
| Messages: | 5,353,642 |