Nancy Grace 11/04/08 - Tuesday

[yolorado]

I bolded what I had a thought on. Not sure if this is the right place to put it or if it has been brought up before, but Casey is still under 24 and living in her parents home. Do we know if they would still claim her on her taxes? If they would then how in the heck did they not know that she didn't have a job?

I've been wondering about the A-et al tax returns from the beginning. If KC's 'job' paid her more than the low to mid 3,000's over the past few years (per year, depending on the year), then the A's couldn't (or shouldn't) have taken her as a dependent on their tax retun. Who took KLee? Claiming her could have provided either KC (if she HAD income) or the Anthony's with tax benefits such as Earned Income Credit, Child Tax Credit, Child Care Credit and shielded a hunk of income from taxation even if only the exemption for her were taken. Wonder who did or didn't claim both KC/ KLee. It might be informative to see the A's tax returns. If they took KC and/or Klee, then they should have had a pretty good idea about what KC was or wasn't making at 'work', which might indicate they also knew there was no big job at Universal.

 

[yolorado]

I don't know about Florida, but in California you can't legally claim anyone 18 and older unless they're full time in school and you're paying expenses. And there are limitations to that too.

There are a couple of ways you can claim dependents. By IRS jargin, the first way is as a "Qualifying Child" (which be an actual son or daughter or a brother, sister, niece, nephew, foster child or grandchild who lived with you more than 1/2 the year and who did not provide more than 1/2 their own support). Under that category, the 'child' has to be 18 or under unless they are enrolled at least 1/2 time in school. If they are in school, high school, college, university, trade school, they can be claimed under this category until they turn 24 (so 23 and under) as long as they maintain their parents' residence as their domicile while attending school (and don't file a joint return with a spouse- except under a few excluded conditions.) Income of the dependent is not a factor. KC would not qualify under this definition because she's too old and not in school, but KLee would--as a dependent for either KC or the Anthony's.

The second way to take a dependent is as "Qualifying Relative" (which could be the same people who could be 'Qualifying Children" except there is no age requirement. It could also be your aunts, uncles who live with you more than six months during the year, your parents who wouldn't have to live with you and even unrelated people who live with you all year.) Under this case, the 'relative' would have to make less than the personal exemption amount for a given year ($3,400 for last year) and the person claiming them would have had to furnish over 1/2 their support. KC would have fallen into this category unless somehow she did have a source of income we don't know about and was supporting herself.

 

[kuriouskate]

There is only one psychic that I have first hand knowledge that helped solve a crime and that is Sandy from the Lacy Peterson case. As some of you old timers may remember she came on the forum and was frantically asking people with boats to search near I believe the 5th booey. Although Lacy's body was found washed up on shore, there was some realization that it could have been dumped in that area. Lacy's mother thanks this psychic in her book.

I remember this. Does anyone know if Sandy reported any psychic revelation in this case?

 

[impatientredhead]

Kobi saying a study at bodyfarm shows 1 out of 2 cars will have traces of chloroform in them. Of course they only tested 2 cars. Kobi - what a joke !!

Our tap water and soil would test postive as well, what is his point? The level found is the relevant factor. He must think people are idiots.

 

[Dejablue]

Claiming her could have provided either KC (if she HAD income) or the Anthony's with tax benefits such as Earned Income Credit, Child Tax Credit, Child Care Credit and shielded a hunk of income from taxation even if only the exemption for her were taken.

Bolded by me.

I sure hope they haven't been claiming the Child Care Credit. The IRS might wanna do an audit, since the Nanny is a figment of KC's imagination.

 

[yolorado]

Bolded by me.

I sure hope they haven't been claiming the Child Care Credit. The IRS might wanna do an audit, since the Nanny is a figment of KC's imagination.

To claim the Child Care Credit, you have to provide an Employer ID # for the child care giver. A fake almost certainly would have been detected by now. So, I'd guess that the CCC wasn't taken for Caylee. Wonder if the A's ever questioned KC about that.