Attorney's Bold Move to Classify Dog as Tax Dependent

Have you ever glanced at your pet’s annual healthcare and maintenance bills and pondered, “Is this not a rightful dependent?” You’re not the only one. Recently, a New York attorney took this concept to federal court in hopes of redefining the traditional tax-dependent framework.

In December 2025, attorney Amanda Reynolds initiated legal action against the IRS seeking recognition for her eight-year-old golden retriever, Finnegan, as her dependent for tax purposes.

While the case seems atypical, it surfaces a recurring taxpayer query annually: Are any pet-related expenses deductible? If they aren't, why not?

The details of Reynolds’ case exemplify the intersection of tax law and unconventional claims, demonstrating the limits of existing regulations and their adaptability to modern living circumstances.

The Lawsuit: “My Dog Meets Dependence Criteria”

Reynolds contends that Finnegan aligns with IRS dependency standards due to:

full-time residency with her,
absence of personal income, and
her provision of over half of his upkeep (exceeding $5,000 annually for items such as food, medical care, and daycare).

A national news report quoting Reynolds states, “For all intents and purposes, Finnegan is akin to a daughter, and undoubtedly a ‘dependent,’” encapsulating the emotional undertaking of the complaint.

Her case further questions the constitutional fairness of IRS standards by alleging discriminatory practices based on the “species” of dependents (an Equal Protection claim) and unfair property rights (a Fifth Amendment claim).

Current Status of the Case

The case resides in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Currently, the proceedings are stalled, following a motion granted by a federal judge to stay discovery while the IRS prepares their dismissal arguments.

The judge's comments on the case underscore its complexity. Although they recognize the issue’s novelty, they also spotlight significant legal challenges, indicating the claims may not withstand a motion to dismiss.

Why Pets Aren’t Tax-Eligible Dependents

The core legal contention lies in how dependents are defined as “individuals” in the tax code.

According to Internal Revenue Code Section 152, dependents must be either a “qualifying child” or “qualifying relative.” Here, “individual” traditionally signifies a human entity.

This human-centered interpretation explains why neither IRS forms nor rules allow pets as dependents. Dependents require Social Security or taxpayer identification numbers, with associated benefits structured around human familial relationships.

Despite meeting the functional dependency parameters (no income, cohabitation, support mainly provided), the tax code does not extend to treating animals as dependent “individuals.”

Tax Benefits Available for Animals

Though routine pet expenses are generally non-deductible, some exceptions do exist. Readers will appreciate this section, offering practical tax insights.

1) Service Animals as Medical Deductions

Costs for trained service animals assisting with disabilities may be deductible as medical expenses under itemized deductions.

The IRS guidelines state that medical expenses are deductible if itemized and surpass the AGI threshold. This framework includes expenditures for acquiring, training, and maintaining service animals linked to medical needs.

Key Distinction: Emotional support animals generally do not classify as service animals under the IRS; service animals must perform tasks specifically tied to a disability.

2) Business Animals for Business Deductions

Under specific conditions, animals integral to a trade or business – such as:

a guard dog protecting a business, or
animals used for pest control in an enterprise.

These instances may allow certain associated costs to qualify as ordinary and necessary business expenses, subject to proper documentation and genuine business intent.

3) Charitable Deductions for Foster Animals

Taxpayers fostering animals for qualified nonprofits may sometimes deduct certain unreimbursed expenses as charitable contributions—conditional on strict adherence to rules and documentation.

Conclusion for Taxpayers

The heartfelt motivation behind this lawsuit is evident: pets are central to the lives of many Americans, and associated costs can be significant. However, tax legislation prioritizes statutory criteria over emotional ties.

In summary:

Pets cannot be claimed as dependents on federal taxes.
Routine pet expenses remain personal and non-deductible.
Certain exceptions exist for deductions concerning service animals, business-related animals, and specific charitable fostering costs.

As the Reynolds case unfolds, it serves more as a cultural commentary than as a forecast of policy change. It raises awareness of how deeply embedded pets are in households today, yet how definitively tax policy draws a line between “family” and “property.”

Ultimately, it’s a helpful reminder: always verify what deductions the IRS acknowledges before assuming any expenses as deductible.

Share this article...

Facebook

Twitter WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Pocket Reddit Email

Want tax & bookkeeping tips and insights?

I confirm this is a service inquiry and not an advertising message or solicitation. By clicking “Submit”, I acknowledge and agree to the creation of an account and to the and .

Shelton Financial Management LLC We love to chat!

Please feel free to use the buttons below to use our Ai powered chat assistant or contact us.

Please fill out the form and our team will get back to you shortly The form was sent successfully

First Name *

Last Name *

Email *

Mobile Number

Message *