|
My ex-husband's sister works at the office where I have filed taxes for many years. My ex-husband recently told me that he is going to claim our daughter as a dependant on his taxes. He does NOT have our daughter's SSN so I know his sister is simply going to look it up and give it to him. I do NOT want him to claim our daughter as I have been living with my father and mother since I moved out and they have been paying for everything in regards to the care of our daughter. As far as I am concerned (please tell me if I'm wrong) she would be filing a fraudulent return if she claims him as the head of the house and is supporting our daughter. He hasn't even seen her since we left 8 months ago. What can I do to prevent his sister from giving our our daughter's SSN and what action(s) can I take if she does? Is there some place I can report her? |
|
In order for the non-custodial parent to claim a dependency exemption for a child, the non-custodial parent is requried to provide more than 50% of the child's support for the tax year, and second, Form 8332 is required to be attached to the tax return of the non-custodial parent. Form 8332 is also required to be signed by the custodial parent. With regards to the sister providing the social security #, Internal Revenue Code section 7216 prohibits tax preparers from disclosing any information furnished in connection with the preparation of any return. The infraction is a misdemeanor and upon conviction the perpetrator shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Additionally, this also could be considered unethical amoung other considerations and if the tax preparer is a CPA firm, a complaint could be lodged with the State Accountancy Board especially if Sec 7216 has been violated. |
|
But remember too that a non CPA or Enrolled agent, in essence just a tax preparer is not governed by Circular 230, so they would face no penalties for giving out the information. However Brent is correct on how to file but it still happens from time to time. As well poster is mentioning head of household and there are other items to prove to IRS that you are indeed head of household. You can still claim a dependency if you provide the support, but other tests are required for head of household Excellent point! There is virtually no leverage against someone or company who is just a tax preparer except for the State Attorney General.
(23 Oct '09, 15:16)
Brent Berkman
Not yet, but there is talk that professional tax preparers should at least have to follow some sort of guidelines, if so would certainly make life easier on pros to charge what we are worth
(24 Oct '09, 14:06)
SandySea
|
|
The solution is for you and your parents to do your taxes as the law requires. If he files first then whoever claims the child must mail in the return. The IRS will not allow more than 1 person to take the exemption. They will ask both parties to prove their claims. If he already got a refund he will have to pay it back and with penalties. If he claimed EIC then he will be barred from receiving it again for up to 10 years. 1
Yes, the second person needs to file by mail. I had this happen and both got a refund for the same dependent, but then IRS sent it to their investigation unit. Nothing ever came of it, but is so true that keeping records and the tax preparer asking the questions helps in the long run.
(25 Oct '09, 16:56)
SandySea
|
|
The first question that comes to my mind is if you were married and the child is the child of both of you, was the child claimed while you were married on a joint return? If so the information is already on a prior return of his and your personal information is not needed. There would other places to get that SS number, such as the divorce decree or child support orders. My point being that the preparer has many options to acquire that information. I am not in any way saying that he would be entitled to the dependency, the custodial parent must sign away the right to the dependency for the other parent to claim the child and in no way would he qualify for HOH for that child. This is more or less an "ethical problem situation" not only involving obtaining information, but rightfully claiming a dependency exemption on behalf of whomever is entitled to it!
(08 Nov '09, 22:44)
Brent Berkman
|
|
A part of this discussion has been bothering me for a couple days and I have finally had the time to do some research. ANY tax preparer is subject to the regulation and penalties set out in Regulation section 301.7216-1. The term tax preparer is very broad in this case and would include the preparer, anyone that assists in the preparation of the return and even the software company. This is not just a Cir 230 issue. Even the receptionist in the office could be fined if it was proven that she gave personal information to an unauthorized person. Yes, that is correct. New Sec 7216 and the related Treasury Regulations are extremely broad, on purpose, to cover just about anyone, so there is no potential for misinterpretation, or "wiggle room" as historically has been the situation with "certain other areas". (The pendulum is swinging far the other way now!)
(12 Nov '09, 14:32)
Brent Berkman
I will be the devil's advocate here and IF software companies, box stores, automobile dealerships, etc. have to abide by Circular 230, then should they not be allowed to then practice in front of the IRS? If they have to suffer consequences, then IRS should let them defend their positions without having to resort to another person to handle the consequences. What is fair is fair....I don't want to lose business to someone who doesn't know what to do, but make them responsible? I think not....
(12 Nov '09, 20:49)
SandySea
Section 7216 is about protecting the privacy of persons vulnerable to loss due to others having access to their information. It is imposible to do a return without having that access. It is not much different then all the rules that came down a few years on medical information. You make take all steps to protect the information and no one may share that information without written permission of the the taxpayer, with a few necessary exceptions. It does not matter if you are subject to the 230 rules or not, if you are have access to personal information you must protect it at all costs.
(12 Nov '09, 21:38)
AJ
|
