Can You Declare a Dog as a Tax Dependent? Unpacking a Peculiar IRS Lawsuit
For those pet owners who have faced heavy vet bills, grooming costs, and other pet-related expenses, the feeling that your furry friend is akin to a legal dependent may resonate deeply. This sentiment has now found its way into the legal courts, thanks to a daring move by a New York attorney.
In December 2025, attorney Amanda Reynolds took the bold step of filing a lawsuit against the IRS to have her eight-year-old golden retriever, Finnegan, recognized as a dependent for federal tax purposes.
While the lawsuit may sound comical to some, it brings to the forefront a genuine query: Are there any circumstances under which pet expenses can be tax-deductible, and if not, what stops them from being considered?
Below, we delve into the intricacies of the lawsuit, examine the stance of tax law, and explore the narrow scenarios where animals might receive tax benefits.
The Case Breakdown: "My Pet Qualifies as a Dependent"
Reynolds' complaint to the court lays out that Finnegan fulfills IRS dependent prerequisites since:
he has a constant residence with her,
lacks an income source, and
she financially supports him, allegedly surpassing $5,000 yearly on essentials like medical care and dietary needs.
A detailed news report recaps Reynolds' statement, "For all intents and purposes, Finnegan is equivalent to a daughter, explicitly a 'dependent.'"
She further makes constitutional claims, asserting that current legislation discriminates based on "species" (arguing an Equal Protection violation) and that the absence of tax acknowledgment signifies an improper "taking" (a contention under the Fifth Amendment).
Current Status and Legal Outlook
The case is currently lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Notably, the process has temporarily halted as a result of a federal magistrate's decision to stay discovery pending the IRS's motion to dismiss.
The judge’s order emphasizes the "novel yet urgent query" of whether pets could be considered "dependents." Nevertheless, the judge remarked that the challenge shows signs of being "unmeritorious" from the outset, casting doubt on its future success.
While the case garners considerable attention, the judicial system's skepticism suggests a victory is distant.
Tax Law’s Stance on Pets as Dependents
The central hurdle faced by Reynolds is the tax law’s description of dependents as "individuals."
According to IRC Section 152, a dependent is described as either a "qualifying child" or "qualifying relative," with "individual" consistently implying a human being.
Consequently, IRS regulations do not permit pet declaration as dependents. Dependents are human beings given Social Security or taxpayer ID numbers. The associated benefits—credits and deductions—revolve around human familial and household dynamics.
Therefore, Reynolds’ argument, asserting Finnegan passes the functional dependency test (incurring no income, residing with and being supported by her), does not align with federal tax code that views dependents as human "individuals."
Existing Tax Relief for Animals
Even though routine pet expenses are largely non-deductible, knowledgeable tax planning reveals special cases that apply.
1) Service animals as medical deductions
If an animal qualifies as a trained service animal, aiding in disability, certain expenses count as medical expenses provided you itemize them.
The IRS specifies that medical expenses might be deductable if you exceed the AGI threshold. Costs covering procurement, training, and upkeep of a service animal may qualify within the medical expense category when directly linked to healthcare needs.
Key consideration: Emotional support animals generally do not qualify as service animals under federal rules; service animals must be specially trained.
2) Animals as business expenses
Certain scenarios exist where animals are integral to business operations, such as:
a guard dog protecting business premises, or
animals deployed for pest control within a business.
In these situations, particular ongoing costs may qualify as ordinary business expenses, demanding stringent documentation and a valid business purpose.
Your documentation underscores this as a rare category for animal-related IRS tax breaks.
3) Fostering animals and charitable deductions
Fostering animals through certified organizations may allow some unreimbursed expenses to be deducted as charitable contributions—subject to rigid guidelines and record-keeping.
Conclusion for Tax Filers
The crux of this lawsuit hits an emotional chord: pets embody family for innumerable Americans, and their costs are significant. Yet, tax legislation is defined by statutes—not sentiment.
For the time being:
- You cannot list pets as dependents on federal returns.
- Routine pet outlays (fed, grooming, standard veterinary care) remain personal, non-deductible expenses.
- Animal-related deductions are possible under narrowly defined conditions: service animals, business-related animals, and certain charitable expenses related to fostering.
Following the Reynolds lawsuit is worthwhile—not for the likelihood of the IRS issuing pet ID numbers—but for the light it sheds on how deeply families now depend on their pets and how clearly tax policy separates family from property.
Ultimately, it's a prime opportunity to remember: prior to assuming deductibility, consult IRS guidelines to determine what they acknowledge.
Want tax & accounting tips and insights?
Sign up for our newsletter.