Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 3119 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.82 (2026)

Designating parent entitled to claim federal income tax deduction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
February 11, 2019
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 70 - 132nd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

Except when including a revised amount of child support in a revised child support order as recommended pursuant to section 3119.63 of the Revised Code, whenever a court issues, or whenever a court modifies, reviews, or otherwise reconsiders a court child support order, or upon the request of any party, the court shall designate which parent may claim the children who are the subject of the court child support order as dependents for federal income tax purposes as set forth in section 151 of the "Internal Revenue Code of 1986," 100 Stat. 2085, 26 U.S.C. 1, as amended. If the parties agree on which parent should claim the children as dependents, the court shall designate that parent as the parent who may claim the children. If the parties do not agree, the court, in its order, may permit the parent who is not the residential parent and legal custodian to claim the children as dependents for federal income tax purposes only if the court determines that this furthers the best interest of the children and, with respect to orders the court modifies, reviews, or reconsiders, the payments for child support are substantially current as ordered by the court for the year in which the children will be claimed as dependents. In cases in which the parties do not agree which parent may claim the children as dependents, the court shall consider, in making its determination, any net tax savings, the relative financial circumstances and needs of the parents and children, the amount of time the children spend with each parent, the eligibility of either or both parents for the federal earned income tax credit or other state or federal tax credit, and any other relevant factor concerning the best interest of the children.

If the court determines that the parent who is not the residential parent and legal custodian may claim the children as dependents for federal income tax purposes, it shall order the residential parent to take whatever action is necessary pursuant to section 152 of the "Internal Revenue Code of 1986," 100 Stat. 2085, 26 U.S.C. 1, as amended, to enable the parent who is not the residential parent and legal custodian to claim the children as dependents for federal income tax purposes in accordance with the order of the court. Any willful failure of the residential parent to comply with the order of the court is contempt of court.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 100 cases (30 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case: Serra v. Serra, 2016 Ohio 950 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Serra v. Serra, 2016 Ohio 950 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 5× “04AP-508, 2005- Ohio-1155, Jose argues the trial court arbitrarily allocated the exemptions to Cynthia without sufficiently considering the factors listed in R.C. 3119.82. {¶ 35} Under federal tax law, a custodial parent generally may claim the dependency exemption.”
In re J.H., 2011 Ohio 6536 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 9× “First Assignment of Error {¶10} “The trial court abused its discretion in failing to specify whether the factors of R.C. 3119.82 were applied in its determination that it was not in the best interests of the minor child to allocate the tax exemption solely to the…”
Lundy v. Lundy, 2013 Ohio 3571 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 8× “{¶32} In her second assignment of error, El Gazzer argues that the December 2002 Order allowing Lundy to claim the children as dependents did not follow the mandates of R.C. 3119.82. She essentially argues that since the court did not consider the necessary factors to allow…”
Brown v. Brown, 2014 Ohio 2402 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “ons for an upward deviation, it did set forth a number of justifications, including the high combined income of the parents; the substantial disparity of income between the parties and their households; as well as the fact that the parties had a high standard of living during…”
Deitz v. Deitz, 2017 Ohio 8354 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 13× “{¶ 9} In her first assignment of error, Julie argues that the trial court erred in finding her in contempt of court for failing to provide Paul with the appropriate form for him to claim the tax dependency exemption for the child because the divorce decree did not include the…”
Lykins v. Lykins, 2023 Ohio 4469 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 6× “However, "this discretion is both guided and limited by the statutory requirements of R.C. 3119.82." Id., citing Ornelas v. Ornelas, 12th Dist.”
Yenni v. Yenni, 2022 Ohio 2867 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 4× “82, where the parties do not agree on which parent should claim their child as a dependent — as was the case between Husband and Wife — the court may permit the parent who is not the residential parent and legal custodian to claim the child as a dependent for federal income tax…”
Brownlee v. Brownlee, 2012 Ohio 1539 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 7× “R.C. 3119.82. {¶36} The judge who presided over the divorce trial had retired by the time this court dismissed the parties’ first appeal for lack of a final appealable order.”
Loewen v. Newsome, 2018 Ohio 73 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “{¶61} In her third assignment of error, Mother argues that the trial court failed to properly apply R.C. 3119.82 when allocating the dependent child tax exemption solely to Father.”
Meassick v. Meassick, 871 N.E.2d 1210 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 5× “) R.C. 3119.82. {¶ 14} We have stated that domestic relations decisions are reviewed for abuse of the trial court’s discretion, including decisions involving the allocation of the federal tax-dependency exemption.”
Facemyer v. Facemyer, 2021 Ohio 48 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 6× “{¶26} Section 3119.82 provides that a court “may permit the parent who is not the residential parent * * * to claim the children as dependents for federal income tax purposes only if the court determines that this furthers the best interest of the children * * *.”
Long v. Long, 893 N.E.2d 217 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “{¶ 52} Before granting Jeffrey a tax exemption, R.C. 3119.82 obligated the trial court to consider “any net tax savings, the relative financial circumstances and needs of the parents and children, the amount of time the children spend with each parent, the eligibility of either…”
Show all 100 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.