Children as Tax Deductions

[fryingpan]

Is it legal/ethical to force your kid not to work in order for you to claim them as a tax deduction? Does it make any sense? Assuming you are not a neglectful parent, wouldn't the food and utilities they use outweight the deduction you get for them? Are there any cases where the parent might actually make a profit from this? Wouldn't it be better if the kid went out and got a job (especially if they really wanted one) and helped pay bills instead?

[geoffrey]

Is it legal/ethical to force your kid not to work in order for you to claim them as a tax deduction? Does it make any sense? Assuming you are not a neglectful parent, wouldn't the food and utilities they use outweight the deduction you get for them? Are there any cases where the parent might actually make a profit from this? Wouldn't it be better if the kid went out and got a job (especially if they really wanted one) and helped pay bills instead?

It's ethical, its a parental choice, and you've got to respect those choices.

Does it make sense? Mostly yes, the tax credits are worth more than the kids $100 paycheques from their few shifts at the Dairy Queen.

If the parent is 'profiting' from this all the better. Do you not understand that parents don't make profits for themselves, but in the best interest of their family. It's like in the kids best interest not to work and let the parents take the credits.

Until your 18 you have no rights, remember that. At 18, your parents then have the right to give ya the boot.

[fryingpan]

Is it legal/ethical to force your kid not to work in order for you to claim them as a tax deduction? Does it make any sense? Assuming you are not a neglectful parent, wouldn't the food and utilities they use outweight the deduction you get for them? Are there any cases where the parent might actually make a profit from this? Wouldn't it be better if the kid went out and got a job (especially if they really wanted one) and helped pay bills instead?

It's ethical, its a parental choice, and you've got to respect those choices.

Does it make sense? Mostly yes, the tax credits are worth more than the kids $100 paycheques from their few shifts at the Dairy Queen.

If the parent is 'profiting' from this all the better. Do you not understand that parents don't make profits for themselves, but in the best interest of their family. It's like in the kids best interest not to work and let the parents take the credits.

Until your 18 you have no rights, remember that. At 18, your parents then have the right to give ya the boot.

So why do some parents actually make their kids go out and get jobs? Almost all teenagers I know that have jobs are not expected to contribute to bills or lost tax deductions or save for post-secondary education. They are free to spend their money on whatever they want (which usually only benefits themselves).

[geoffrey]

So why do some parents actually make their kids go out and get jobs? Almost all teenagers I know that have jobs are not expected to contribute to bills or lost tax deductions or save for post-secondary education. They are free to spend their money on whatever they want (which usually only benefits themselves).

Because they want the kids out of their hair? Or to maybe have them learn very valuable life skills that go beyond any dollar value.

Personally I saved for post-secondary out of self-dignity, and the fact that I valued work more than school, not because I had to. My siblings will be paid for by the parents because they chose a different path to get to where they want to be at.

When I got my first job, my parents didn't make me. I wanted to work. I wanted to pay for my own post-secondary. It wasn't even about money, I could have nearly anything I wanted without working. It's an attitude that exists in many people, and not in others.

Thats why we have employed and unemployed people. Work is more than just money, its dignity and self-respect.

[fryingpan]

So why do some parents actually make their kids go out and get jobs? Almost all teenagers I know that have jobs are not expected to contribute to bills or lost tax deductions or save for post-secondary education. They are free to spend their money on whatever they want (which usually only benefits themselves).

Because they want the kids out of their hair? Or to maybe have them learn very valuable life skills that go beyond any dollar value.

Personally I saved for post-secondary out of self-dignity, and the fact that I valued work more than school, not because I had to. My siblings will be paid for by the parents because they chose a different path to get to where they want to be at.

When I got my first job, my parents didn't make me. I wanted to work. I wanted to pay for my own post-secondary. It wasn't even about money, I could have nearly anything I wanted without working. It's an attitude that exists in many people, and not in others.

Thats why we have employed and unemployed people. Work is more than just money, its dignity and self-respect.

What if the kid really wants to work and is willing to contribute to the family? Shouldn't the parent allow them to work if the kid contributes his/her fair share back to the family? This way, the kid could learn valuable life skills like you said, but the parent wouldn't have to worry about losing money.

[margrace]

AS soon as I got out and got a job I was expected to pay board.

[geoffrey]

So why do some parents actually make their kids go out and get jobs? Almost all teenagers I know that have jobs are not expected to contribute to bills or lost tax deductions or save for post-secondary education. They are free to spend their money on whatever they want (which usually only benefits themselves).

Because they want the kids out of their hair? Or to maybe have them learn very valuable life skills that go beyond any dollar value.

Personally I saved for post-secondary out of self-dignity, and the fact that I valued work more than school, not because I had to. My siblings will be paid for by the parents because they chose a different path to get to where they want to be at.

When I got my first job, my parents didn't make me. I wanted to work. I wanted to pay for my own post-secondary. It wasn't even about money, I could have nearly anything I wanted without working. It's an attitude that exists in many people, and not in others.

Thats why we have employed and unemployed people. Work is more than just money, its dignity and self-respect.

What if the kid really wants to work and is willing to contribute to the family? Shouldn't the parent allow them to work if the kid contributes his/her fair share back to the family? This way, the kid could learn valuable life skills like you said, but the parent wouldn't have to worry about losing money.

Well, firstly, a kid's got to work alot to have their parents lose the deducation. They have to make more than the allowable earnings... which is around $10k right now. Thats a decent pay for a kid.

I think parents should do whats best and let the kid work personally. But they have to look at their finacial postion and the costs associated with it.

Some parents don't think their kids are ready to work... or don't like the thought of some of the jobs the kids do work... this may be also justified in some situations. I'm telling you I grew up fast working in a busy kitchen, not the most pleasent place in the world. For some people, it teaches you the real world fast, for others at a young age, its truly frightening!

AS soon as I got out and got a job I was expected to pay board.

Thats not unreasonable... though I kind of have objections to 14 year old kids paying board. I think we ought to encourage kids to get out in work and not have them taxed by their parents. But...

I guess that all depends on family finances. If a family was having trouble making ends meet, then I can see that being reasonable.

[fryingpan]

So why do some parents actually make their kids go out and get jobs? Almost all teenagers I know that have jobs are not expected to contribute to bills or lost tax deductions or save for post-secondary education. They are free to spend their money on whatever they want (which usually only benefits themselves).

Because they want the kids out of their hair? Or to maybe have them learn very valuable life skills that go beyond any dollar value.

Personally I saved for post-secondary out of self-dignity, and the fact that I valued work more than school, not because I had to. My siblings will be paid for by the parents because they chose a different path to get to where they want to be at.

When I got my first job, my parents didn't make me. I wanted to work. I wanted to pay for my own post-secondary. It wasn't even about money, I could have nearly anything I wanted without working. It's an attitude that exists in many people, and not in others.

Thats why we have employed and unemployed people. Work is more than just money, its dignity and self-respect.

What if the kid really wants to work and is willing to contribute to the family? Shouldn't the parent allow them to work if the kid contributes his/her fair share back to the family? This way, the kid could learn valuable life skills like you said, but the parent wouldn't have to worry about losing money.

Well, firstly, a kid's got to work alot to have their parents lose the deducation. They have to make more than the allowable earnings... which is around $10k right now. Thats a decent pay for a kid.

I think parents should do whats best and let the kid work personally. But they have to look at their finacial postion and the costs associated with it.

Some parents don't think their kids are ready to work... or don't like the thought of some of the jobs the kids do work... this may be also justified in some situations. I'm telling you I grew up fast working in a busy kitchen, not the most pleasent place in the world. For some people, it teaches you the real world fast, for others at a young age, its truly frightening!

AS soon as I got out and got a job I was expected to pay board.

Thats not unreasonable... though I kind of have objections to 14 year old kids paying board. I think we ought to encourage kids to get out in work and not have them taxed by their parents. But...

I guess that all depends on family finances. If a family was having trouble making ends meet, then I can see that being reasonable.

Kids should definitely be allowed to work (if they are legally old enough). In this day and age, employers are just as interested in work experience as they are in grades. Even if you only work at McDonalds, it's still more impressive than a blank space under "work experience" on your resume.

I'm not sure on this, but I heard that if a kid makes more than about $3500 or so, the parents only get a partial deduction. After 10k, they lose the deduction completely. Most teens working part time make about 6k a year, at least in Ontario.