Student dependent

No reason at all. Remember, though, that she doesn't get an exemption for herself even if dad doesn't claim her because he is ELIGIBLE to claim her which is the test.

Do we know that? He still has to pass the support test.

Which support test?

More than 50%. - IRC 152(a). You should know that.

Not if she's a full time student under age 24. Then it is a self-support teat. I.e., the student can't be self-supporting.

So.. if this is the case, the father can avoid claiming her and the student would then be eligible to take the education credit. The student could not claim her own exemption.

The clear implication of the OP is that the dad is eligible to claim the daughter as a dependent. If you have doubts about that eligibility, challenge prucker, not me.

Citation correction: 152(c)(1)(D). It used to be in 152(a) before the section was rewritten.

My reading of the code is that the student/age exceptions only override the gross income test (which no longer exists for children under 18/FTS-24), not the support test. The support test is still present as a requrement.

Why can't a student be self-supporting? In this case, the student in question has more than $1,000/month of NON-WAGE income (in addition to any wage income that may have been earned), and if used toward support, it could be 50%+, especially if the school is a community college.

That is a presumption of which no facts were stated to confirm it.

You misread if your interpretation is that the parent must provide over 1/2 the support of a full time student (under age 24) in order to take that student as a dependent.

Once again, it is clear from the OP that the father (and prucker) believe the father is eligible to claim a dependency exemption for the daughter. Once again, if you believe they are mistaken, challenge them.

When they created the uniform definition of a qualifying child in

2005, the total support test was dropped for a qualifying child and only remains for a qualifying relative. The support test for a qualifying child is as I described it. You may be looking at an old version of the Code.

test (child is not self supporting) or it could be the qualifying relative support test (the taxpayer provides more han 50% of the support) or perhaps a multiple support agreement test.

There's more than just one support test and they're not the same.

So you're referring to the qualifying relative support test. That means you have found there is not a qualifying child here.

18/FTS-24),

requrement.

as of Jan. 5, 2009 "(c) Qualifying child. For purposes of this section- ... "(1) In general. The term "qualifying child" means, with respect to any taxpayer for any taxable year, an individual- ... "(D) who has not provided over one-half of such individual's own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer begins, and ..."

Subsection (c)(1)(D) still requires support. Now, I agree that the test itself has changed a bit - in that it states that the student cannot provide more than half of his own support, but that's still a support test that was not addressed in the OP's question. I do agree that it doesn't require the claiming taxpayer to provide any support.

Under the uniform definition of qualifying child, the qualifyin child tests are applied first.

That includes the QC support test.

If, and only if, the child is not the QC of "any taxpayer" the qualifying relative tests may be applied, including the old well-known "provides more than half the support of the qualifying relative" test.