Fear v. Rogers

J. T. Hammond, J.

(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in the result and in the dispositive reasoning.

I write separately only relative to the matter of the income tax dependency exemption for Sarah, the child of the parties.

The purpose of this exemption is to ease the tax burden borne by those who support dependents. The courts of the state have no power to compel the United States Internal Revenue Service to award or allocate this income tax dependency exemption or exemptions. I agree, however, that our courts, in divorce actions, may, in accordance with settled principles of equity, enter orders and judgments that affect the income tax dependency exemption.

*648Our courts may do so, not by trying to order the irs to do or not do anything, but, rather, by requiring the custodial parent (who automatically gets the exemption if nothing is done to change the effect of the federal law) to execute an irs Form 8332 (Part 1).

The usual way this is done is to require the custodial parent to execute and deliver to the noncustodial parent the annual version of this Form 8332 (Part 1) each January if (but only if) the awarded support for the prior year is paid in full by December 31 of that prior year. This often provides enough incentive to result in significant "catch up” payments, in time for Christmas shopping.

The real danger here is if the custodial parent, by mistake, signs the permanent version of Form 8332 (Part 2) and it is filed with the irs. In that event, there is no changing the exemption as long as both parents are alive.

Because the entire rationale for the income tax dependency exemption relates to and is based upon recognition of the burden of child support, I cannot agree that this exemption could ever be a property settlement matter under any circumstances. To the extent that the foregoing opinion implies otherwise, I must respectfully dissent.