Woman sues the IRS to have her dog recognized as a dependent
A New York lawyer sued the IRS to have her dog recognized as a dependent for tax purposes: here are the arguments she makes
For millions of taxpayers in the United States, filing taxes is a rigid and inflexible process. However, a New York lawyer decided to challenge one of the clearest rules of the tax system. Her argument has generated national debate. Can a dog be considered a dependent before the IRS?
The protagonist of this case is Amanda Reynolds, a lawyer who lives in New York City. On June 19, she filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Her goal is to have her dog legally recognized as a dependent on her tax return. The center of the dispute is Finnegan Mary Reynolds, an eight-year-old golden retriever that Amanda adopted in 2016. In the lawsuit, the lawyer argues that the animal is completely dependent on her for survival. According to the legal document, the dog does not generate its own income and lives permanently in her home. Reynolds claims that she spends more than $5,000 a year on Finnegan's care. These expenses include doggy daycare, boarding, transportation, veterinary care, grooming, food, and shelter. All of this, she argues, meets the basic maintenance criteria required by tax law. The lawsuit is based on Section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code. This rule states that, to claim a dependent, the taxpayer must share a residence with that person and provide the majority of their financial support. Reynolds argues that his dog meets these requirements, even though it's not human. Currently, the IRS does not recognize animals as dependents. At the federal level, pets are considered property. Dependents, under current regulations, are typically children, close relatives, or other individuals who meet specific income, financial support, and residency requirements. Those who do qualify as human dependents can access significant tax benefits. These include the Child Tax Credit (CTC).The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Dependent Care Credit, among other tax relief programs.
The IRS does allow certain animal-related deductions, but under very specific conditions. For example, some service dogs may be considered deductible medical expenses. This is not the case for Finnegan, as she does not perform a certified medical function.
In her lawsuit, Reynolds makes a broader argument. She claims that the legal status of animals is evolving. In the document, she argues that “the changing understanding of the legal status of animals, along with state and federal regulation, justifies recognizing dogs as quasi-citizens with limited civil rights, including dependent status for tax purposes.”
“For all practical purposes, Finnegan is like a daughter and is definitely a 'dependent,'” the lawsuit adds.
Furthermore, Reynolds states that she is filing the lawsuit not only for herself. She indicates that she is acting “on behalf of a potential class of similarly situated dog owners.”
According to the document, many owners meet the criteria for financial support but do not receive any tax credit for it.
To date, the IRS has not issued any official comments on the lawsuit.
The case could open a broader legal discussion about the role of pets in American homes. Millions of taxpayers will be interested in this story, as it could mark a turning point in tax treatment regarding the role of pets in American families.