The ripple effects of divorce on taxes can be far-reaching and both lasting and recurring. Yet often glossed over during the divorce process. Clear, succinct and comprehensive summaries do not abound.

Some conceptual highlights to keep in mind:

• Tax deductions and credits will have a greater impact to the ex-spouse with greater earnings. In the abstract, this means more benefit to parents and child collectively. Therefore, who takes these deductions and credits can be optimized to extract the maximum benefit for that collective.
• The Internal Revenue Service expects exes to follow their divorce decrees and agreements correctly. It isn’t equipped to delve into those documents and make sure that deductions and credits are applied to the correct party.
• This can make for a mess that will require going back to family court for a divorce judge to set right. Cooperation between exes can avoid hassles and expenses related to more litigation and dealings with the IRS.

Some practical highlights to keep in mind:

1. The ex who pays court-ordered and/or contractually-mandated alimony gets a deduction, so the ex who receives it must include it in their income … sooner or later, with or without penalties and/or interest
2. Unlike alimony, actual child support is tax neutral or irrelevant
3. The dependency exemption is worth several thousand dollars … but only one parent is allowed to take it in any particular year
4. Tax credits (child tax, earned income, dependent care), which add up cumulatively, vary in amount but, again, only one parent may claim the same credit for the same child in any particular year
5. There is a tax credit for college expenses but that is outside the scope of child support in Florida
6. the deductions for interest on the home mortgage and property taxes require that the taxpayer is the one who pays the expense and is an actual owner of the home

Read more in this Wall Street Journal article: Divorced Couples, Put Aside Your Differences…for the Tax Break .

American Man (Father) wishes to become a father. After due consideration, he decides upon using a surrogate mother as the means to this end.

After investigating the options, he hires a Mexican woman (Surrogate) from the state of Tabasco for this purpose.

Eventually the times comes, Father travels to Mexico and Surrogate gives birth to Baby.

Father and Surrogate enjoy the moment – almost literally – before Mexican authorities take Baby away.

The laws of this Mexican state have recently changed, outlawing surrogacy for foreigners.

To the mutual detriment of Mexican women hoping for the income and of foreigners hoping for less expensive and time-consuming surrogacy paths than they would face at home.

Father is eventually reunited with Baby, about six weeks and four attorneys later. The Tabasco government didn’t make it easy for him. Or his Surrogate.

And won’t make it any easier for the next would-be parents and surrogates.

The nonprofit agency that intervened on Father’s behalf recommends that states in the US improve access to surrogacy within the US to avoid problems such as Father encountered in Mexico.

Read more in this New York Times article: As Mexican State Limits Surrogacy, Global System Is Further Strained .

You’ve heard the story. “Oh, my ex and I, we had an amicable divorce. We’re still good friends.”

Your eyes roll. “Yeah, right, get real”, you think silently. How could anyone really feel that way?

Well, if you’re nodding your head at this point, imagine this.

Husband and Wife have Boy and Girl together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Husband gets the marital residence (House).

Husband gets Girlfriend.

Girlfriend moves in with Husband.

Girlfriends helps out with Boy and Girl during Husband’s timesharing.

Oh … and Wife lives in a little apartment built on to the House.

And Husband, Wife and Girlfriend divvy up child care responsibilities and cooking up family meals which … they all eat together.

Well, statistically, you probably don’t know anyone living a post-divorce lifestyle such as this.

But, truth be told, this may not be the exclusive province of the Sci Fi Channel either.

Husband is real. But he is the first to admit “I’m probably the luckiest divorced man on the planet”.

Yet, reportedly, he and his situation are not entirely unique.

This is an emerging trend. Well, “trend” may be overstating it.

But it seems that this is a real thing. Some people are actually doing this.

And, once / if you can wrap your head around it, like most things in life, it may have its pros, for children, and cons, for the exes.

Well, at the very least, it may make getting through exchanges of the kids and meeting the ex’s new significant other – without incident – seem a lot less daunting.

Read more in this New York Post article: ‘I’m probably the luckiest divorced man on the planet’ .

Kentucky Boyfriend and Girlfriend are in relationship. Girlfriend has a Son.

A picture of Girlfriend and Son can reportedly be seen on the Facebook page of some other man.

And see it Boyfriend does. And it sets him off.

He allegedly assaults Girlfriend, not only commanding his dog to attack her … but also himself using a knife to scalp her.

Boyfriend is arrested on two counts of assault.

Boyfriend is tried and convicted, and the jury recommends the maximum sentence of twenty years for his brutality.

During a post-conviction hearing, Boyfriend reportedly blames Girlfriend’s injuries entirely on his dog … and advises the presiding judge that “I don’t need a lecture”.

Girlfriend sustained severe injuries to one of her ears as well as extensive tissue damage to her scalp, and has since undergone six surgeries. She also suffered permanent nerve damage.

For all of which Boyfriend is sentenced to twenty years in prison (plus additional time for an unrelated parole violation). Boyfriend’s dog is euthanized as well.

Read more in

• this People magazine article by way of Yahoo News: Kentucky Man Who Scalped His Ex-Girlfriend Tells Sentencing Judge ‘I Don’t Need a Lecture’ and
• this WLWT NBC TV 5 article: Man sentenced in girlfriend’s scalping: ‘I don’t feel responsible’