Check out some similar questions!

Dupydog · Oct 27, 2009, 04:31 PM

My girlfriend and I are buying a house together. I am not eligible for the credit because I already own a home. I will be putting the down payment down, but we will be splitting the mortgage. We will both be on the deed, but under tenancy in common. This allows us to provide different ownership percentages, and hers will most likely be under 50%.

Can she claim the entire credit since I am not eligible?

Also, how can we divvy up the mortgage and property tax deductions?

JudyKayTee · Oct 27, 2009, 04:39 PM

This was just answered in my local newspaper - you CANNOT get the first time homebuyer's credit if a person on the mortgage or deed is, in fact, not a first time home buyer.

I'm curious to see what anyone else has to say because I considered this - I've owned several parcels of property and was thinking of buying property with someone else who is a first-time buyer. Both bank and mortgage company told me the property would have to be held exclusively in the other person's name.

Dupydog · Oct 28, 2009, 02:23 PM

Did this local newspaper quote anything official (e.g. IRS publication)?

JudyKayTee · Oct 28, 2009, 02:25 PM

I didn't save the article and so I don't know.

But I DID find this which seems to say just the opposite: Federal Housing Tax Credit for First-Time Home Buyers: Frequently Asked Questions

Dupydog · Oct 28, 2009, 02:47 PM

I have found some articles and IRS publications which say that my girlfriend can get the whole credit. I just haven't found anything that's crystal clear, nor have I found anything addressing the ownership interest.

AtlantaTaxExpert · Oct 28, 2009, 03:11 PM

Since you are BOTH on the deed, she CANNOT claim the entire $8,000 credit.

She CAN claim half of the credit ($4,000) if her ownship is at 50%. If not, then she needs claim the credit based on her percentage of ownership.

Dupydog · Oct 28, 2009, 06:01 PM

I have read publications that state differently, but most of what I've read applies to the old $7500 deduction. Can you state your sources please? Thanks

JudyKayTee · Oct 28, 2009, 07:01 PM

I think I already did - above.

"For example, if you have not owned a home in the past three years but your spouse has owned a principal residence, neither you nor your spouse qualifies for the first-time home buyer tax credit. However, unmarried joint purchasers may allocate the credit amount to any buyer who qualifies as a first-time buyer, such as may occur if a parent jointly purchases a home with a son or daughter. Ownership of a vacation home or rental property not used as a principal residence does not disqualify a buyer as a first-time home buyer."

Dupydog · Oct 29, 2009, 01:26 AM

I meant the AtlantaTaxExpert. I was just wondering where he's getting his info from?

JudyKayTee · Oct 29, 2009, 05:51 AM

Possibly the same site I got mine from because "Atlanta" says the same thing I quoted.

AtlantaTaxExpert · Oct 29, 2009, 10:15 AM

Notice 2009-12, which is linked below:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-09-12.pdf

Dupydog · Oct 29, 2009, 12:53 PM

That is the same publication I've been reading. In there, it says I can use any reasonable method to allocate the credit. It defines a reasonable method as "any method that does not allocate any portion of the credit to a taxpayer not eligible to claim that portion". In Example 4, it even says the whole credit can go to one buyer since the other buyer is not eligible for the credit.

So I still have to ask where you're getting that she can only claim $4k?

AtlantaTaxExpert · Oct 30, 2009, 12:51 PM

DupyDog:

If you think an IRS auditor would consider it "reasonable" for your girl friend to claim the entire credit when she only owns, at most, half of the house, then it is apparent who have never had to deal with an IRS auditor.

Have her claim the full $8,000 credit. Just do not be surprised when the IRS challenges the credit, disallows it in total due to alleged fraud, then slap her and probably you with a large fine.

Dupydog · Oct 30, 2009, 02:26 PM

I'm not sure I like your tone. There's no need to imply we're trying to fraud the IRS. I was simply asking why you think the answer to my question is $4k, and I see I still haven't gotten a straight answer from you. I'm guessing you think it's $4k because that's what you think the fairest method is. Or perhaps you've had experience with similar laws where the IRS said one thing and then changed it later to a more fair ruling. If this is the case, please speak up and give me that evidence.

As for what's reasonable, why would the IRS provide example 4 in notice 2009-12? According to you, person A should only be allowed 1/2 the credit, but the IRS is giving him the entire credit. So I'm not sure why you say the IRS will question what we're doing when they've already provided the basis for doing it that way.

I'm not trying to work around the system. I just want a straight answer on how to do this. I'm no tax expert and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if I'm interpreting the IRS incorrectly. If something in your experience is telling you that $4k is the right answer, then please explain it to me. Don't jump off the handle and tell me I'm trying to commit fraud.

JudyKayTee · Oct 30, 2009, 03:29 PM

This is a question and answer site - for the very specific information you need to HIRE a professional. "We" provide very broad base information and a direction and then it's up to you.

Our resident expert is not obligated to give you his reasoning and references - you have been furnished with the law and now it's up to you.

Anything specific - HIRE a professional.

Don't mean to be disrespectful but this is #15 in the question and answers on ONE subject and there are all sorts of people waiting for answers out there - and we are all volunteers.

Dupydog · Oct 30, 2009, 03:50 PM

I understand this is a free service where I won't get the most specific information available. That doesn't mean that I should be talked down to or accused of cheating the IRS. And I realize you're providing a free service, but that doesn't mean I don't have the right to question what you have to say.

I appreciate any free advice given and any time taken to give that advice. I would also not be insulted if I was told my case is too specific and that I needed to hire a professional. So I take no offense to your post, Judy.

JudyKayTee · Oct 31, 2009, 07:13 AM

You questions are too specific and you need to hire a professional - and no offense taken.

stevetcg · Nov 2, 2009, 04:40 AM

And yet another shining example of someone not liking the answer they are given and attacking the responder.

OP - have your girlfriend file for the full 8k like AtlantaTaxExpert (and that's NOT just a screen name... its accurate) said and let the IRS deal with your fraud. And that IS what it is.

JudyKayTee · Nov 2, 2009, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by stevetcg

And yet another shining example of someone not liking the answer they are given and attacking the responder.

OP - go ahead and have your girlfriend file for the full 8k like AtlantaTaxExpert (and thats NOT just a screen name... its accurate) said and let the IRS deal with your fraud. And that IS what it is.

Well, but he DID explain his "rights" to us - :)

stevetcg · Nov 2, 2009, 08:09 AM

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Well, but he DID explain his "rights" to us - :)

They always do... they always do. Funny thing is that most people do not understand what their rights actually are and more importantly, how they apply to the real world.