New York Attorney Sues IRS to Claim Her Furry Friend as a Dependent- Tax Attorney’s Perspective

Rona Law Firm
13 minutes ago
3 min read

A recent lawsuit filed by a New York attorney has gone viral after she sued the Internal Revenue Service for denying her attempt to claim her dog as a dependent on her federal tax return.

As a tax attorney, I understand why this story caught national attention. Many pet owners financially support their animals just as much, if not more, than human dependents. But while the emotional argument resonates, the tax law answer is far less flexible.

Here’s what actually happened and what taxpayers should understand before trying anything similar.

What the Lawsuit Is About

According to the complaint, the New York attorney attempted to claim her furry friend as a dependent under the Internal Revenue Code, arguing that her dog:

Lives with her full-time
Has no income
Is fully financially supported by her
Costs thousands of dollars annually for care

When the IRS rejected the dependent claim, she escalated the issue by filing a lawsuit challenging how the tax code defines a “dependent.” Her argument centers on the idea that dependency should be based on financial reliance, not species.

Why the IRS Rejected the Furry Friend as Dependent Claim

From a tax law perspective, the IRS’s position is straightforward.

Under Internal Revenue Code Section 152, a dependent must be a person who meets specific tests related to:

Relationship
Residency
Support
Citizenship or residency status
Identification (such as a Social Security number or ITIN)

Pets, even beloved ones, are legally classified as property, not people, under federal tax law. Because of that classification alone, a dog cannot meet the statutory definition of a dependent, regardless of how much support the owner provides.

This isn’t a gray area for the IRS. It’s a bright-line rule.

Why This Case Is Unlikely to Change Tax Law

From my professional perspective, this lawsuit is more symbolic than practical.

Courts interpret tax statutes as written. Unless Congress amends the Internal Revenue Code to redefine who or what qualifies as a dependent, courts are extremely unlikely to override decades of statutory interpretation. In other words, even though many taxpayers emotionally relate to this case, judges don’t have authority to rewrite the tax code based on fairness arguments.

The Important Tax Lesson Most People Miss

While you cannot claim a pet as a dependent, this case does highlight something important I see often in my practice: Many taxpayers misunderstand what is versus what is not deductible.

Here’s what is sometimes allowed under existing tax law:

Service animals prescribed for medical conditions (certain expenses may qualify)
Business-related dogs, such as guard dogs used exclusively for a business property
Income-producing animals, such as breeding or training operations

In those cases, documentation, business purpose, and proper reporting are critical — and these claims are frequently challenged in audits.

Why This Matters During an Audit

I regularly represent clients who are audited for:

Improper dependents
Unsupported deductions
Personal expenses claimed as business write-offs
Misunderstood tax “tips” seen online

The IRS does not evaluate claims based on intent or emotional reasoning — it looks strictly at statutory authority and documentation. That’s where taxpayers often get into trouble.

My Take as a Tax Attorney

This lawsuit makes headlines because it’s relatable-but it also serves as a reminder that tax law is technical, rigid, and unforgiving when misunderstood.

Before claiming anything unconventional on a tax return, it’s critical to understand:

Whether the tax code actually allows it
How the IRS views the issue
What happens if the claim is denied

Trying to be creative with dependents or deductions can easily lead to audits, penalties, and unnecessary stress.

Final Thoughts

While this New York attorney’s case has sparked conversation, it does not change the current reality:

Pets cannot be claimed as dependents under federal tax law
The IRS treats animals as property, not people
Exceptions exist only in narrow, well-documented circumstances

If you have questions about dependents, deductions, or a pending audit, getting advice before filing or early in the audit process, can make all the difference.