ClientHub

(818) 338-8700

Make A Payment

January 8, 2026

Can You Claim Your Dog as a Dependent? A Legal Challenge

Ever reviewed your pet's veterinary bills, grooming expenses, daycare fees, and special dietary needs and thought, “This pet is definitely my dependent?” You're not alone. A New York attorney is making that argument in a case against the IRS.

In December 2025, attorney Amanda Reynolds filed a lawsuit to have her eight-year-old golden retriever, Finnegan, recognized as a dependent for federal tax purposes.

The case stands as a fascinating inquiry into the perennial taxpayer question: Are any pet expenses deductible? If they aren’t, why not?

Here’s an overview of the proceedings, a dive into existing tax law, and the scenarios in which the IRS does grant tax benefits relating to animals.

The Lawsuit: "Proving Finnegan as a Dependent"

Reynolds argues that Finnegan meets IRS dependency criteria because:

he resides with her full time,
he generates no income, and
she supports more than half of his living expenses, totaling over $5,000 annually in essentials like food, medical care, and daycare.

According to a national news report, Reynolds claims, “For all intents and purposes, Finnegan is like a daughter and is truly a ‘dependent.'”

Her filings extend to constitutional claims, asserting that existing IRS rules unequal treatments for dependents based on "species" (an Equal Protection argument) and that non-recognition is a "taking" (a Fifth Amendment argument).

Current Status of the Lawsuit

Presented in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, the case is somewhat stalled.

A magistrate judge has granted a stay on discovery (pausing evidence exchange) as the IRS prepares to dismiss the suit.

In the court's written order, the lawsuit is characterized as posing a "novel but urgent question" about recognizing domestic companion animals as dependents under tax law. Nevertheless, the judge indicates skepticism, noting the claims seem "unmeritorious on their face" and likely to be dismissed.

Legal Challenges: Why Pets Don’t Qualify as Dependents

Here lies the lawsuit's challenge: tax law interprets dependents as "individuals."

According to Internal Revenue Code Section 152, a dependent must be either a “qualifying child” or “qualifying relative”. The statute specifies “individual”, signifying a human.

Have Questions?

Let's talk. We are here to help!

Hence, IRS forms and guidelines do not consider pets as dependents. Dependents need Social Security or taxpayer IDs, and tax benefits involving dependents are structured around human family or household ties.

While Reynolds contends that Finnegan meets a functional dependency definition (no income, cohabitation, supported by her), U.S. tax code isn’t designed to include animals.

When Animals Can be Tax-Beneficial

Even if everyday pet expenses aren't deductible, there are exceptions valuable to our readers, providing real-world tax insights.

1) Service Animals as Medical Deductions

If an animal is a recognized service animal, aiding disability, its expenses can be classified as medical expenses if itemized.

The IRS details that medical expenses may qualify for deductions when itemized, subject to the AGI threshold. Acquisition, training, and maintenance expenses of a service animal align with medical care and may qualify.

Note: Emotional support animals generally do not measure up as service animals; service animals are task-trained for a specific disability.

2) Business Animals and Expense Deductions

Animals linked to business operations can be considered business expenses under certain conditions:

Guard dogs for business security, or
animals used in pest control in professional premises.

Here, ongoing expenses might qualify as business costs if documented and justified for business purposes. IRS recognizes this as a niche area for animal-related deductions.

3) Charity-linked Expenses for Foster Animals

Taxpayers fostering animals for registered organizations might deduct certain unreimbursed expenses as charitable contributions, provided they retain stringent documentation.

Final Thoughts for Tax Practitioners

This lawsuit taps into a sentiment that resonates: Pets are family to many U.S. households; their expenses are undeniable. Yet, tax policy thrives on specific statutory terms—not sentiments.

Currently:

Dogs and cats cannot be dependents on federal returns.
Ordinary pet expenses (food, regular vet visits, grooming) are generally categorized as non-deductible personal expenses.
Animal-related tax deductions exist where service, business use, or charity can be substantiated.

As for the Reynolds case, it's intriguing—not because pet ID numbers for tax purposes are imminent, but because it brings to light the emotional and financial dependence on pets and how tax definitions sharply diverge "family" from "property."

Let this case remind us: Always verify what the IRS allows before assuming expenses are deductible.

Have Questions?

Let's talk. We are here to help!

Share this article...

Facebook

Twitter WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Pocket Reddit Email

Sign up for our newsletter.

Each month, we will send you a roundup of our latest blog content covering the tax and accounting tips & insights you need to know.

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 .

We care about the protection of your data.

Welcome! We're here to help.

How can I assist you?

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 *

Where can I book an appointment?