Apply Oregon, Maine and Hawaii rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent

[MaxGhenis]

Summary

Oregon, Maine and Hawaii each deny a filer who can be claimed as a dependent their own exemption, and several of their credits require dependents that a return with a claimable filer cannot have (IRC 152(b)(1)). The model applied none of these. On a joint return the exemption rules work per spouse.

Which fact each rule reads (#10024 separates them): own exemptions, Maine's rebate and Hawaii's claimant test read whether a filer can be claimed; the rules that need dependents (Maine's dependent credit, Oregon's Kids Credit, disabled child exemption and care-credit child, Hawaii's dependent qualifying individuals) and Maine's childless EITC read whether a filer can be claimed and the filing exception does not apply (Pub. 501, Pub. 596).

Stacked on the federal claimable-filer PR (which corrects exemptions_count, and with it Oregon's and Hawaii's ordinary exemption counts) and on #10024.

Formula	Rule now	Source
me_personal_exemption_deduction	Each filer who may not be claimed: one exemption on a joint return with one claimable spouse, none if both	36 MRSA 5126-A; 1040ME line 13: "If married filing jointly AND only ONE spouse may be claimed as a dependent ... 1" (same 2021-2025; 2026 estimated-tax worksheet)
me_dependent_exemption_credit_amount_person	No dependents when either filer can be claimed	36 MRSA 5219-SS: each "qualifying child and dependent" for whom the federal child or other-dependent credit can be claimed
me_pro_forma_childless_eitc	No expanded-age childless credit when either filer can be claimed	36 MRSA 5219-S(6) keeps IRC 32(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III); Pub. 596 Rule 12
me_relief_rebate (2021)	One $850 payment per filer who may not be claimed	P.L. 2021, c. 635, Part L-3: a recipient "May not be claimed as a dependent on another taxpayer's return"
or_disabled_child_dependent_exemptions	None when either filer can be claimed	ORS 316.099: "a dependent of the taxpayer"
or_eitc	The 12% rate (17% from 2026) needs a dependent under three; a return on which a filer can be claimed (outside the filing exception) has none and gets the ordinary 9% (14%) of its federal credit	ORS 315.266: "a dependent under the age of three"; Form OR-40 instructions p.22: 9 percent for "At least 3 years old, or no dependents"
or_ctc (Oregon Kids Credit)	No qualifying dependents when either filer can be claimed	HB 3235 (2023) counts dependents under IRC 152(a), disregarding only 152(b)(3)
or_wfhdc_qualifying_individual (new), or_wfhdc_has_qualified_individual_eligible, or_wfhdc_eligibility_category, or_cdcc_relevant_expenses	A child counts only as a dependent (none when a filer can be claimed and the filing exception does not apply); a disabled dependent or either disabled spouse counts. A dependent child aged 12 or under who is not a qualifying individual no longer sets the credit's column. Childcare expenses on a return with a claimable filer count only if a child is still a qualifying individual (one incapable of self-care, at any age under 18)	ORS 315.264 takes IRC 21's qualifying individuals and uses the youngest one; Schedule OR-WFHDC instructions p.1: a child who "could be claimed as your dependent"; "the word 'you' also refers to your spouse". The disabled-spouse route is now label-free: before, a disabled spouse counted only if labelled spouse. One existing test expected "not eligible" for a disabled head with a spouse while the mirrored labelling was eligible; its expectation is now eligible.
hi_regular_exemptions	No age-65 exemption for a filer who can be claimed	HRS 235-54(a): the exemption of a claimable individual "shall be zero"
hi_disabled_exemptions	A disabled filer keeps the $7,000 exemption even if claimable; a claimable nondisabled spouse adds nothing	HRS 235-54(c) and HAR 18-235-54(c) (no dependency bar); 235-54(a)
hi_cdcc_qualifying_individual, hi_cdcc_qualifying_individuals (new), hi_cdcc_eligible, hi_dependent_care_benefits, hi_cdcc_min_head_spouse_earned	Needs a filer who cannot be claimed. On a return with a filer who can be claimed (and outside the filing exception) no dependent is a qualifying individual, not even one incapable of self-care; a filer who cannot be claimed can still claim for an incapacitated claimable spouse. The qualifying individuals now also drive the expenses, the expense limit and the income floor	HRS 235-55.6(a)(1): "is not claimed or is not otherwise eligible to be claimed as a dependent"; (b)(1)(A)-(B): "A dependent of the taxpayer", without IRC 21(b)(1)(B)'s exception to 152(b)(1); (b)(2): expenses "for the care of a qualifying individual"
Oregon and Hawaii dependent-exemption reforms	Same rules in their copies of the formulas	—

Not changed: The contributed state dependent-exemption repeal reform (repeal_state_dependent_exemptions) is not fixed here: its overrides still give a claimable filer the Hawaii exemptions. A separate branch (repeal-state-dep-exemptions-claimable-filer) is changing them; that work is pending and must read the "can be claimed" input. Oregon's severe-disability exemption survives claimability (OR-17: "You may qualify for the additional exemption even if someone else can claim you as a dependent"); Maine's property tax fairness credit has no claimable-filer bar (36 MRSA 5219-KK), though its dependent-based base follows the federal CTC child count corrected in the federal PR.

Readings for Max (queue via the US + core hub)

1. Hawaii exemptions, one claimable spouse. HRS 235-54(a) is per individual (the other spouse keeps $1,144). From 2023 the N-11 line 6a instruction tells a claimable filer to leave both 6a and 6b blank, which read for a joint return would give $0. This PR follows the statute.
2. Hawaii disability exemption for a claimable filer. HRS 235-54(c) and HAR have no bar (kept here); TIR 89-3 barred someone actually claimed, but TIR 2022-01 superseded it without that rule.
3. Hawaii child care credit, who may claim it. HRS 235-55.6(a)(1) allows the credit to a taxpayer who "is not claimed or is not otherwise eligible to be claimed as a dependent". This PR follows the N-11 instructions, which bar a taxpayer who is claimed or eligible to be claimed, and reads the "can be claimed" input. A literal reading of "or" would let a filer who can be claimed but is not claimed take the credit.
4. Hawaii child care credit, incapacitated claimable spouse. Allowed to the spouse who cannot be claimed (recommended); a whole-couple bar is the alternative.
5. Hawaii disability exemption on a joint return with one disabled spouse. As before this PR, the disabled spouse takes $7,000 and the other spouse keeps the regular and age exemptions ($9,288 in the test household), following HAR 18-235-54(c) and the N-11 instructions. Revised TIR 2022-01 says the deduction for one disabled joint spouse "is $7,000".

Known limits (follow-ups)

• Childcare expenses are a tax-unit total. When one child is still a qualifying individual and another is not, all of the childcare counts; the model cannot leave out the second child's share.
• Oregon's instructions define disability for this credit as being incapable of self-care. The model's Oregon formulas read is_disabled, as before; the federal credit reads is_incapable_of_self_care.
• The Oregon credit's employment test (or_wfhdc_employment_eligible) still reads only the head's earnings, so the credit as a whole is not yet label-free.
• or_wfhdc_eligibility_category takes the minimum age over every member except the excluded children above, so another member who is not a qualifying individual (for example a nondisabled 15-year-old) can still set the column; and it decides "the youngest is disabled" with a rank test that looks inverted. This PR changes neither.

Invariants

1. Swap invariance of every changed output under either head/spouse labelling.
2. Monotonicity. Marking another filer as claimed never raises any changed output.
3. Unchanged when no filer can be claimed (a filer who can be claimed but is not claimed does trigger these rules), except two Oregon refinements: the working-family qualifying individual now requires a child to be a dependent and counts a disabled spouse under either label, and the EITC's higher rate now requires the member under three to be a dependent of the return.

The property test checks 1 and 2 for the outputs it lists (exemptions, the Kids Credit, the working-family qualifying individual, Maine's four amounts, and Hawaii's exemptions and child care credit). Oregon's EITC rate, care expenses and column are covered by YAML cases. Invariant 3 is checked by the microsimulation below, where no filer can be claimed.

Tests

• YAML: variable-named cases for every changed formula. Each joint case with a claimable spouse appears under both head/spouse labellings. Run locally at f020367295: the changed YAML files and the test folders next to every changed variable (56 files): 434 passed, 0 failed.
• Property test policyengine_us/tests/core/test_claimable_filer_or_me_hi_invariants.py for 2021, 2025 and 2026. Hypothesis batches check invariant 1; a seeded population and crafted couples with members incapable of self-care check 1 and 2, including the Hawaii credit amount. The Oregon and Hawaii dependent exemption reforms each have a YAML case with a claimable filer; the Oregon column is covered by YAML only. 4 tests passed, 0 failed, in 42 s with a peak memory footprint of 2.0 GB (/usr/bin/time -l).

Microsimulation impact

Real microsimulations on the default dataset (hf://datasets/policyengine/populace-us/populace_us_2024.h5@populace-us-2024-spm-20260909) for 2025 and 2026, compared record by record. In that dataset no person can be claimed as a dependent on another return (claimable_as_dependent_on_another_return is true for 0 of 166,321 people), so every rule gated on it is inactive there; the runs check that nothing else moves.

This stack's federal branch (35a2cbcbb9) against a local merge of the four state branches onto it (13d24ac157). Each state branch changes only its own state's variables, so the comparison is split by state.

• 2025: no record changes in this PR's states.
• 2026: no record changes in this PR's states.

Axiom parity

axiom: us-or/statutes/316/099 queued (OR1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1690) | us-or/statutes/315/273 queued (OR1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1690) | us-or/statutes/315/264 queued (OR1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1690) | us-or/statutes/315/266 queued (OR1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1690) | us-me/statutes/36/5126-A queued (ME1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1686) | us-me/statutes/36/5219-SS queued (ME1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1686) | us-me/statutes/36/5219-S queued (ME1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1686) | P.L. 2021 c. 635 Part L-3 n/a: historical one-time payment, no Axiom module found, retained outside these drafts | us-me/statutes/36/5219-KK queued (ME1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1686) | us-hi/statutes/235-54(a),(c) queued (HI1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1685) | us-hi/statutes/235-55/6 queued (HI1: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1685) | Hawaii mixed-spouse disability amount not filed: official sources conflict, see TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1685

Every queued item is a pe-parity issue filed in TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us on 2026-10-12 (verbatim law, required outputs, review finding, companion tests).

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[MaxGhenis]

Hand-off to the US + core hub

• Head: f020367295
• Independent review: APPROVE at f020367295 (GPT-6.1 Sol, round 5). Verdict file: ~/reviews/us-hub/claimable-filer-rules/reviews/r5/out-or-me-hi.md.
• Passed locally: 56 YAML files: 434 passed, 0 failed; property test 4 passed. Also: a sweep of every YAML file in the repo that sets a dependent-elsewhere input (115 files) on a merge of all five branches, 0 failed; microsimulations for 2025 and 2026 (details in the PR body).
• Note: The test wrapper for this branch's YAML run exited 1 although every one of its nine batches printed only passes (no failed or error line in the log); a later runner logs each batch's exit code and gave 0 for every NM and NY batch.
• Depends on: Apply the federal rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10087 and Make rules for a filer claimed elsewhere independent of which spouse is labelled head #10024.

Pending (not mine to do):

• Merge order: this stack lands after Make rules for a filer claimed elsewhere independent of which spouse is labelled head #10024 (approved at c7f969f872, on the hub's CI queue), then Apply the federal rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10087 (federal), then the four state PRs. CI does not run on PRs whose base is not main, so each needs a CI run after it is retargeted to main and marked ready.
• Readings for Max are listed in the PR body under "Readings for Max" for the hub to queue (none queued by me).
• Axiom parity: the axiom: line marks each provision needed (draft, held for Max); filing the eleven drafted rulespec-us issues is decision d1341 (drafts in ~/reviews/us-hub/claimable-filer-rules/axiom/drafts/).

Follow-ups: listed in #10087 under "Follow-ups"; the hub holds the regional state PRs stacked on the federal branch.

Session local_0143a3e8-4ab1-4492-8aab-9140b74e67e5 is closing; the hub owns this PR from here.