Can a father of the child freeze the mother of a childs tax return?

[Jack from Ohio]

The Kidd, I don't understand why you asked for advice and then refuse to listen to it. Many experienced pros on this board tried to help you out by explaining the rules and even citing the Code, but you are arguing with them. Omit the extraneous facts about last year, etc. and get to the meat of the issue: To file as HOH, you must have a qualifying child. A qualifying child must be a blood relative. Pub 501 states only the following relationships qualify:

• Your son, daughter, stepchild, foster child [legally placed by an agency], or a descendant (for example, your grandchild) of any of them, or

• Your brother, sister, half brother, half sister, stepbrother, stepsister, or a descendant (for example, your niece or nephew) of any of them.

These children are not related by blood and do not qualify the taxpayer for HOH. What don't you understand?

I don't know how long you have been in the business, but those of us with years under our belts know the IRS looks unkindly at male HOHs. A few years back they audited ALL of them. Since you already filed the return, re-enter the data using Single in a practice return, then call the client and tell him how much of his refund he will have to pay back so he doesn't spend it before the IRS letter comes.

I am not so sure he is actually a professional. If he is, he is freshly hatched. Of course, he is not seeing this, so no worries!!

[kcjenkins]

Thanks. your a good guy and I really want to see if I am right or wrong.

I will do what it takes to protect myself and firm as you stated and more. but I still am very anxious to see if this right or wrong. LOL and the said thing is this will be a waiting game and not something I'll find out next week.

It seems from this that you are assuming that "if the IRS accepts the return, that means it is correct". But that is not correct.

1. Often the IRS accepts a return, pays the refund, even though it's a bogus return.

2. Often the IRS accepts a return, pays the refund, and then a year or two later challenges the return with a CP2000.

What the members here have been trying to communicate to you is what is the correct, legal possible filing status in this situation. You ask how we would have handled this situation. OK, here's how everyone in this group would handle it. We would explain to the client that while he could claim all three as dependents IF they lived with him all year, he can NOT claim any of the four tax benefits that require a qualifying child, including Head of Household, EIC, CTC, and Form 2441.

The correct, legal possible filing status is based on what the Code says, not on what someone might get away with. Clearly, the last guy she lived with filed a fraudulent return. If you filed this new client as HOH you did too. How you deal with that is up to you. We've done all we can to help, by explaining why he does not qualify.

[kcjenkins]

I am not so sure he is actually a professional. If he is, he is freshly hatched. Of course, he is not seeing this, so no worries!!

If you look at his member profile, he's been doing this only a few years. Says he wants to learn. If so, he will find this board a great resource, but only if he's open to listening. And being a bit less defensive. No one really likes being told they are wrong, but we all make mistakes sometimes. What is important is to acknowledge it and learn from it. Which is the only reason we are still trying to get him to understand. We will see if he accepts advice when he sees it is backed up with cites, and has the cojones to admit his mistake. If so, I for one will be happy to help him in future. If not, I won't waste my time on him.

[Mr. Pencil]

if you need more information, please ask.

There IS still one other thing--the amount on that W-2. If it's less than the EIC max of $45,000 I would probably refuse to do the return. The whole engagement is tainted by the family's apparent history of trading SSN's and tax fraud. I would say it exactly in those direct terms, and explain that I am personally required to sign under penalty of perjury that I have investigated inconsistencies, such as whether they moved in 2012 or 2013. If the taxpayer did not immediately agree, I would not waste any more time with him. Because in the end he won't accept the return anyway.

By the way, did you ask why he didn't go back to his previous preparer? That's always my FIRST question for a new client.