[MaxGhenis]

Summary

We apply the dependent-filer rules in New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania, and retain North Dakota's stillborn subtraction when a filer can be claimed elsewhere. We check both spouses on joint returns.

The formulas distinguish claimability, an actual claim, and the would-be claimant's refund-only filing exception:

• Oklahoma regular exemptions and Pennsylvania forgiveness eligibility read claimable_as_dependent_on_another_return.
• State dependent counts and childless EITC eligibility read head_or_spouse_is_dependent_elsewhere_without_filing_exception.
• New Jersey's additional childless EITC condition reads claimed_as_dependent_on_another_return for either filer.

State	Behavior
New Jersey	Exclude dependents from the dependent exemption, college-dependent exemption and child tax credit when either filer fails the federal dependent-taxpayer test. Apply the dependency conditions to the childless EITC age fallback.
North Dakota	Allow the stillborn subtraction without a dependency condition.
Ohio	Count nonpublic-school tuition and medical expenses for dependents the filers can claim. Retain the head's and spouse's medical expenses when either filer can be claimed elsewhere.
Oklahoma	Remove each claimable filer's regular exemption and exclude dependents the filers cannot claim. Retain the separate special and blind exemptions. Use allowable exemptions for the sales tax credit and apply the frozen federal dependency conditions to childless EITC eligibility.
Pennsylvania	Exclude dependents the filers cannot claim from the forgiveness allowance. Allow forgiveness only on an eligible head or spouse's tax, using claimability to determine eligibility. Remove pa_tax_forgiveness_parent_qualifies.

The New Jersey and Oklahoma dependent-exemption reforms, Oklahoma's count in repeal_state_dependent_exemptions, and TAXSIM's Pennsylvania forgiveness rate follow the corresponding formulas.

Source readings and results

North Dakota stillborn subtraction

North Dakota allows the subtraction for each stillbirth with a filed fetal death certificate under N.D.C.C. 57-38-30.3(2)(p), without a dependency condition. Its tax department adds that condition in Schedule ND-1SA. Statute, PDF page 35; 2025 schedule, line 8.

For one stillbirth in 2025, a single filer receives $5,241 whether claimable or independent. Joint filers receive $5,241 whether neither, one or both spouses can be claimed: 1 × $5,241 = $5,241. North Dakota’s tax department would give a claimable filer $0 under the schedule’s added dependency condition.

We record the statute–instructions conflict in source_conflicts/candidates.yaml and update the source-conflict ratchet.

Pennsylvania claimant eligibility

Pennsylvania excludes a head or spouse who can be claimed elsewhere under Tax Reform Code 301(c.2) and 304. We remove the parent-qualification input and actual-claim test; Pennsylvania provides no parental exception in those sections. Tax Reform Code, PDF pages 112 and 127–128.

The tax department asks about an actual claim and permits a parental route in Schedule SP. We record that conflict in source_conflicts/candidates.yaml and update the source-conflict ratchet. 2025 Schedule SP.

With $6,000 each of eligibility income and adjusted taxable income, tax before forgiveness equals $6,000 × 3.07% = $184.20:

Single filer	Forgiveness
Claimed and claimable	$0
Claimable and not claimed	$0
Neither claimed nor claimable	$184.20

Under Schedule SP’s actual-claim test, the tax department would forgive $184.20 for the unclaimed but claimable filer. It would also forgive $184.20 for the claimed filer under the parent exception if the parent qualifies. We apply the statutory exclusion.

Pennsylvania with one claimable spouse

We exclude the claimable spouse and retain forgiveness on the other spouse's own tax. We use joint eligibility income and the married table, following Schedule SP where lawmakers leave the allocation unspecified. Schedule SP, Sections I and IV; PIT guide, married claimants.

The tax department requires separate Pennsylvania returns when another taxpayer claims one spouse on a federal return. The model retains one federal joint tax unit and approximates the eligible spouse's separate liability.

With $3,000 per spouse, the eligible spouse receives $3,000 × 3.07% = $92.10 of forgiveness. Pennsylvania would forgive $0 if it denied the joint claim, or $184.20 if it forgave the whole return.

With $7,500 per spouse, each eligible spouse applies a 20% forgiveness rate under the married table. We allocate $15,000 × 3.07% × 20% × 50% = $46.05 to the eligible spouse. Pennsylvania would forgive $0 if it denied the joint claim, or $92.10 if it forgave the whole return.

The model approximates each spouse's tax using their share of person-level Pennsylvania taxable income. It assigns us_govt_interest to neither spouse and omits the tax-unit 529 deduction from that allocation.

Oklahoma special and blind exemptions

We retain the additional exemptions. Oklahoma allows them separately from regular personal exemptions under §2358(E)(1)(b)–(c), without a dependency condition. Its tax department follows the same distinction in Form 511. 2024 SB1452, §2358(E), PDF pages 19–20; 2025 Form 511 instructions, pages 8–9.

A claimable, nonblind single filer aged 66 within the income limit keeps one special exemption: 0 regular + 1 special = 1, a $1,000 deduction.

Ohio medical dependents

Ohio filers use the IRC definition of dependents under R.C. 5747.01(O). A filer whom another taxpayer can claim has no dependents under IRC 152(b)(1).

Ohio lawmakers import IRC 213's meaning of medical care in (A)(10)(c). They widen dependency solely for (A)(10)(a), waiving the gross-income and support conditions in IRC 152(d)(1)(B) and (C). They retain IRC 152(b)(1). R.C. 5747.01(A)(10).

The Ohio Department of Taxation directs filers to include expenses paid for themselves, their spouse and their dependents. It supplies no broader dependency test. 2025 IT 1040 instructions, page 41.

We apply the PR's existing dependent-taxpayer test and claimant filing exception. When either filer fails that test, we count only the head's and spouse's premiums and medical care under (A)(10)(a) and (b). We exclude dependents before applying the medical-expense floor and allocating the deduction among people.

For example, a claimable filer who pays $1,000 of a child's unsubsidized, after-tax health-insurance premiums deducts $0 for them. The same household with an independent filer deducts $1,000. We assume no Medicare eligibility, employer subsidy, reimbursement or duplicate deduction.

Changes that do not depend on claimability

• Ohio filers can claim the tuition credit for tuition recorded on dependents only. We exclude tuition recorded on a filer. R.C. 5747.75.
• We test the ages of New Jersey filers when computing the childless EITC. A dependent's age cannot qualify a filer. P.L. 2021, c.130.
• We test the ages of Oklahoma filers when computing the frozen childless EITC. A dependent's age cannot qualify a filer. 2020 Publication 596, PDF page 16.

Invariants and coverage

test_claimable_filer_nj_pa_invariants.py checks generated and seeded couples across New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania:

• Swapping head and spouse labels preserves the listed outputs.
• Marking another filer claimed never raises the listed exemptions, credits, deductions or forgiveness amounts.
• Pennsylvania's eligible share stays in [0, 1] and equals one when neither filer can be claimed.
• Forgiveness stays between zero and tax before forgiveness.

We check Oklahoma's child care/child tax credit for swap invariance only; its federal tax-liability limit can rise when claimability changes. The generated populations contain no stillborn children; North Dakota's YAML cases cover the stillborn subtraction.

YAML cases cover single and joint claimability patterns, swapped spouse labels, claimable-but-unclaimed filers, the filing exception, Pennsylvania's statutory eligibility, Oklahoma's additional exemptions, and the filer-only age tests. Regression cases cover North Dakota’s dependency bar, Pennsylvania’s actual-claim test and parent route, and Ohio’s dependent medical expenses.

Tests

The latest Pull request run at aa18655572 concluded success, with all 36 jobs passing. It passed all 450 cases in the 23 test files this PR changes:

Test file	CI job	Passed
policyengine_us/tests/code_health/test_source_conflicts.py	Python tests / Full Suite - Rest (Python shard 4)	103 passed
policyengine_us/tests/core/test_claimable_filer_nj_pa_invariants.py	Python tests / Full Suite - Rest (Python shard 3)	5 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nc/tax/income/deductions/nc_child_deduction.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	15 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nd/tax/income/subtractions/nd_stillborn_subtraction.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-2)	16 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nj/tax/income/credits/ctc/nj_ctc.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	31 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nj/tax/income/credits/eitc/nj_childless_eitc_age_eligible.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	9 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nj/tax/income/credits/eitc/nj_eitc.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	36 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nj/tax/income/exemptions/nj_dependents_attending_college_exemption.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	10 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/nj/tax/income/exemptions/nj_dependents_exemption.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	14 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/oh/tax/income/credits/oh_non_public_school_credits.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	17 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/oh/tax/income/deductions/medical_expense/oh_claimable_filer_medical_expenses.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1)	8 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/ok/tax/income/credits/eitc/federal_credit/ok_federal_eitc_demographic_eligible.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-2)	6 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/ok/tax/income/credits/eitc/ok_eitc.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-2)	19 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/ok/tax/income/ok_child_care_child_tax_credit.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-2)	15 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/ok/tax/income/ok_count_exemptions.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-2)	26 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/ok/tax/income/ok_stc.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-2)	29 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/pa/tax/income/credits/pa_cdcc.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-4)	12 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/pa/tax/income/credits/pa_eitc.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-4)	9 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/baseline/gov/states/pa/tax/income/forgiveness/pa_tax_forgiveness_amount.yaml	Baseline tests / Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-4)	20 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/contrib/state_dependent_exemptions/repeal_state_dependent_exemptions.yaml	Contrib tests / Full Suite - Contrib (other-shard-1)	27 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/contrib/states/nj/dependent_exemption_reform_test.yaml	Contrib tests / Full Suite - Contrib (states-shard-2)	8 passed
policyengine_us/tests/policy/contrib/states/ok/dependent_exemption_reform_test.yaml	Contrib tests / Full Suite - Contrib (states-shard-3)	11 passed
policyengine_us/tests/test_eitc_marital_eligibility_properties.py	Python tests / Full Suite - Rest (Python shard 4)	4 passed

The new Ohio premium regression failed at 27ead422bb8269723dba05537437c73a5ed8a3a8: it deducted $1,000 against the expected $0. That run reported one failed case.

We verified the three earlier mutant logs and ran the new Ohio mutant at 5f363a010d. Each mutant failed its selected regression:

Restored behavior	Regression	Mutant result
North Dakota dependency bar	2025 single filer who can be claimed as a dependent: North Dakota stillborn child subtraction in nd_stillborn_subtraction.yaml	$0 against $5,241; one failed
Pennsylvania actual-claim eligibility	2025 single filer claimable and not claimed with $6,000 Pennsylvania income in pa_tax_forgiveness_amount.yaml	$184.20 against $0; one failed
Pennsylvania parent input and qualification route	test_pa_tax_forgiveness_has_no_parent_qualification_input	The restored input violated the absence assertion; one failed
Ohio dependent medical premiums	Claimable filer cannot deduct a child's $1,000 premiums in oh_claimable_filer_medical_expenses.yaml	$1,000 against $0; one failed

The three earlier runs used 547ab47c024f44f16f6ab0a6e635861f82157edd, 2 GB caps and 2,400-second timeouts. We verified their logs, drivers and unchanged formulas without repeating those runs. The parent-route check rejects the restored input; it does not compute a forgiveness award.

The Ohio mutant changed one eligibility line in a scratch worktree at 5f363a010d. We unset GitHub tokens, set loopback proxies, and used a 6 GB cap and a 2,400-second timeout. A Python audit hook denied sockets, subprocesses and writes outside the worktree. Every restore returned zero from git diff --exit-code.

Formatting and lint passed through make format with the locked Ruff version.

Microsimulation impact

We estimate that this branch changes none of the outputs we measured in 2026 on the default dataset. We compared main at the merge base cc8f4c9d90 with this branch at 5f363a010d. The later merge of main didn't change this branch's own diff.

Every claimability rule here reads claimed_as_dependent_on_another_return, directly or through claimable_as_dependent_on_another_return, which defaults to it. That input has no formula, and the default dataset doesn't carry it, so no record counts as claimable. The dataset also carries no stillbirths and no nonpublic-school tuition, so North Dakota's subtraction and Ohio's tuition credit stay at $0 on both sides. The New Jersey and Oklahoma filer-only age tests changed no record.

Output	Main total	Change	Records changed (weighted)
nd_stillborn_subtraction	$0	$0	0 (0)
nd_income_tax	$319.3m	$0	0 (0)
nj_dependents_exemption	$4.05bn	$0	0 (0)
nj_ctc	$385.6m	$0	0 (0)
nj_eitc	$643.4m	$0	0 (0)
nj_income_tax	$29.5bn	$0	0 (0)
oh_non_public_school_credits	$0	$0	0 (0)
oh_income_tax	$10.3bn	$0	0 (0)
ok_stc	$45.9m	$0	0 (0)
ok_eitc	$34.1m	$0	0 (0)
ok_income_tax	$5.22bn	$0	0 (0)
pa_tax_forgiveness_amount	$218.7m	$0	0 (0)
pa_income_tax	$18.1bn	$0	0 (0)
state_income_tax	$578.0bn	$0	0 (0)
income_tax	$2,595.1bn	$0	0 (0)
household_benefits	$2,060.0bn	$0	0 (0)
household_net_income	$17,161.7bn	$0	0 (0)

impact: no change in 2026 on the default dataset to these states' exemptions, credits, forgiveness or income taxes, or to federal income tax, benefits or household net income.

Axiom parity

AXIOM_PLACEHOLDER

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[MaxGhenis]

Status (owner session resumed 2026-10-11 ~16:00Z; not for adoption):

• Merged Apply the federal rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10087 (claimable-filer-federal 35a2cbc); no conflicts. nj_childless_eitc_age_eligible keeps the section 911 condition from Deny the refundable CTC and the EITC to section 911 filers (26 U.S.C. 24(d)(3), 32(c)(1)(C), 6012(c)) #9750/Add excluded foreign earnings to Massachusetts gross income #9976.
• Reads repointed to the split inputs: the 152(b)(1) and childless-EITC gates use head_or_spouse_is_dependent_elsewhere_without_filing_exception; Oklahoma's own exemption uses claimable_as_dependent_on_another_return; NJ line 58 and Pennsylvania's Schedule SP rules use claimed_as_dependent_on_another_return. New cases cover a filer who can be claimed but is not, and a claimant who files only for a refund.
• In progress: YAML and property tests under the shared heavy lock, microsims (federal vs this branch, 2025 and 2026), and an independent review (Subfleet 20261011-122316-cf-nj-pa-review-r1). The body's placeholders are filled when these finish; then the PR goes to the US + core hub.
• Axiom: 16 provisions, all queued; 6 dispatch-ready drafts are held for Max's go (claimable-filer-rules/axiom/nj-pa.out.md plus nj-pa-addendum.md).

[DTrim99]

PR Review: Apply New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent

Summary

I read each state's statute and the claimed years' instructions first, then the code. The PR uses only existing dependency variables:

• head_or_spouse_is_dependent_elsewhere_without_filing_exception covers two things. It applies IRC 152(b)(1)'s "no dependents" rule to the NJ dependent and college exemptions, the NJ CTC, Ohio tuition and medical expenses, the Oklahoma exemptions and sales tax credit, and the PA dependent allowance. It also applies the childless-EITC bar in NJ and OK.
• claimable_as_dependent_on_another_return is used where the rule turns on § 151 allowability: Oklahoma's own regular exemption and the PA claimant test.
• claimed_as_dependent_on_another_return is used only for NJ's worksheet "listed" test (S1).
• The federal exemptions_count supplies Oklahoma's "allowable personal exemptions".

The two new PA variables (pa_tax_forgiveness_eligible and pa_tax_forgiveness_eligible_share) hold PA-specific facts, so nothing is reinvented. North Dakota's formula is unchanged from main, which never had a dependency bar. The PR adds references, rewords the documentation and records the statute-against-schedule conflict.

These changes match the governing text for the claimed years:

• the NJ dependent, college and CTC counts and the filer-only childless age test;
• Ohio's medical and tuition dependents;
• Oklahoma's per-filer regular exemption, the retained special and blind exemptions, the $40-per-allowable-exemption sales tax credit, and the frozen 2020 childless-EITC bar;
• Pennsylvania's claimant exclusion and its dependent allowance.

CI is 35/35 green at head 611ebd6c75, and the head merges cleanly with current main.

Nothing critical is open. Four should items are open:

1. NJ: a new term follows the NJ-1040 worksheet's "not listed as a dependent" condition where the statute requires only the federal qualifications. The PR doesn't record this, and its own case turns main's $259.60 into $0.
2. All three candidates.yaml items the PR writes cover 2025 only, but the code runs from 2021.
3. The new gate in the TAXSIM reform's PA forgiveness rate is unpinned.
4. The PR body's axiom: section is still AXIOM_PLACEHOLDER, and rulespec-us has no issue for any of these provisions.

Critical (must fix)

None.

Should address

S1. NJ childless EITC: the "not listed as a dependent" term follows the worksheet, not the statute, and isn't recorded (nj_childless_eitc_age_eligible.py: listed_elsewhere = tax_unit.any(filer & person("claimed_as_dependent_on_another_return", period)). The nj_eitc.yaml case "2025 single filer listed as a dependent by someone who files only for a refund" pins it, expecting false and $0.)

• The statute. P.L. 2021, c.130, §1a(4) (N.J.S.A. 54A:4-7(a)(4)): "The resident individual shall meet all qualifications, except for the minimum or maximum age, for the federal earned income tax credit in order to be eligible". It has no listing condition.
  • The federal qualification is IRC 32(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III). The PR already applies it, with the claimant filing exception, through dependent_elsewhere, just as the model's federal eitc_demographic_eligible does.
• The instructions. 2025 NJ-1040 instructions, PDF p.44, line 58: "You are not listed as a dependent on another tax return."
• Where the two differ. listed_elsewhere decides an outcome only when a filer is listed but dependent_elsewhere is false. That happens in two cases:
  • The filer is listed but isn't claimable. No deduction is "allowable ... to another taxpayer", so (III) is met. This is a plain statute-against-instructions conflict.
  • The filer is listed by a would-be claimant who meets the filing exception (the PR's case). This one is arguable. Pub 596 (2025), p.18 states the exception for someone who "can claim you as a dependent on their return, but doesn't".
• Witness: the PR's own case. It is a 2025 single filer who is claimed and claimable, whose claimant meets the filing exception, below age 25 and childless.
  • Main has no dependency test, so it gives eligible and nj_eitc = 40% × $649 = $259.60.
  • The head gives false and $0. dependent_elsewhere is false, so the result comes from listed_elsewhere alone.
• No record covers it. candidates.yaml has no NJ item for this. The comment ("The NJ-1040 line 58 worksheet also requires ...") doesn't trip the ratchet. rulespec-us's us-nj/statutes/54a:4-7.yaml has no listing condition: it composes "meets all federal EITC qualifications except age".
• Fix. Drop listed_elsewhere and change that case to true/$259.60. The statute and dependent_elsewhere already bar a claimable filer, including one who is claimable but unclaimed.
  • If you want the worksheet's reading instead, add a candidate (CONTRIBUTING.md#source-conflicts, step 1). It would set 54A:4-7(a)(4) with IRC 32(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III) against NJ-1040 p.44, give the listed-by-a-refund-only-filer example, and say follows: conflicting-source.
  • Then take it to the project lead, and keep the statutory result until it's ruled.

S2. The three candidates.yaml items understate their years

• us-nd:stillborn-subtraction-dependency-condition, us-pa:tax-forgiveness-dependent-parent-exception and us-pa:tax-forgiveness-one-claimed-spouse-table all say years: from: 2025, to: 2025.
• None of the deciding formulas has a year gate:
  • nd_stillborn_subtraction runs from 2021, the parameter's first value; the statute has allowed the subtraction since 2018.
  • pa_tax_forgiveness_eligible, pa_tax_forgiveness_eligible_share and pa_tax_forgiveness_amount apply in every year.
• North Dakota's added condition isn't new in 2025. The 2022 Schedule ND-1SA, PDF p.2, line 5, says: "You would have been eligible to claim the child as a dependent on your 2022 federal income tax return if the child had been born alive." The 2025 schedule, p.2 repeats it.
• Fix:
  • Set the ND item to from: 2021 (open-ended).
  • Extend both PA items to the years the formulas cover, after checking that the 2021–2024 Schedules SP ask the same dependency question and offer the same parent route.
  • Otherwise the register entries written after merge will pin a single year.

S3. The TAXSIM reform's new PA dependent gate is unpinned (reforms/taxsim.py, pa_tax_forgiveness_rate: child_dependents = where(filer_is_dependent, 0, tax_unit.sum(is_child_dependent)))

• The only test that runs the TAXSIM reform on PA (pa_income_tax.yaml) has no claimable filer, so deleting the term fails no test.
• Witness (static trace). Under the TAXSIM reform: 2025, joint return, head claimable, $7,500 of income each, a child aged 5.
  • With the gate, the excess is 15,000 − 13,000 = 2,000, so the rate is 1 − 0.1 × (2,000 / 250) = 0.2. Forgiveness is 460.50 × 0.2 × 0.5 = $46.05.
  • Without the gate, the limit is 13,000 + 9,500 = 22,500, so the rate is 1 and forgiveness is $230.25.
• Fix: add this case under reforms: policyengine_us.reforms.taxsim (expect pa_tax_forgiveness_rate: 0.2), or drop the term. TAXSIM itself has no claimability input.

S4. The axiom: section is a placeholder, and no queued issue exists

• The body. The "Axiom parity" section reads AXIOM_PLACEHOLDER. It is the only unfilled placeholder in the body.

• The author's claim. The 2026-10-11 comment says "16 provisions, all queued; 6 dispatch-ready drafts are held".

• What exists in rulespec-us.

  • No issue names this PR or covers its provisions. I searched for the PR number and for stillborn, forgiveness, Oklahoma exemption, sales tax relief, New Jersey dependent, Ohio medical and nonpublic tuition.
  • Related issues that don't cover this PR: #1621 (the federal (III) gate, a composition source), Basic income taxability is misrepresented #1689 (Ohio 5747.025, for Apply the federal rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10087), PolicyEngine app update #1523 (Ohio's medical deduction, from another PR), #1965 (NJ 54A:4-7 companions, for Apply the federal EITC qualifications to Maryland, Maine and New Jersey EITC recomputations #10525) and Make SNAP EAs monthly #1637 (OK Form 538-S line 11).
  • rulespec-us has no module for N.J.S.A. 54A:3-1, 3-1.1 or 4-17.1, for 68 O.S. 2358, 5011 or 2357.43, for PA Tax Reform Code 301 or 304, or for N.D.C.C. 57-38-30.3. It has us-nj/statutes/54a:4-7 (no listing condition) and us-oh/statutes/5747/025 and /71, which this PR doesn't change.

• Fix. The line needs one item for each provision whose result changes from main:

  • NJ 54A:3-1(b), 3-1.1, 4-17.1 and 4-7(a)(4);
  • Ohio 5747.01(A)(10)(a)–(b) and 5747.75;
  • Oklahoma 2358(E)(1), 5011 and 2357.43;
  • Pennsylvania 301(c.2), 301(e.1) and 304, including the mixed-spouse allocation.

  Each queued issue must be OPEN, labelled pe-parity, dispatch-ready (module path, corpus citation, verbatim law, required outputs, and companion tests from the same external sources as the YAML tests) and pinned to head 611ebd6c75. NJ 54A:4-7(a)(4) could extend Add miscellaneous income #1965, which uses the same module, with the dependency-bar companions once S1 is settled. The remaining items can use:

  • North Dakota: n/a: no behavior change (the formula is unchanged from main; only references, documentation and the candidate change);
  • the NJ, OK and repeal contributed reforms: n/a: PE-only reform;
  • TAXSIM: n/a: emulator mapping.

Suggestions

1. The changelog and body describe changes that main never had.
   • "Allow North Dakota's stillborn subtraction without a dependency condition": main's formula already had no bar, and this PR leaves it unchanged.
   • "Remove pa_tax_forgiveness_parent_qualifies": that variable was never on main.
   • "Regression cases cover North Dakota's dependency bar, Pennsylvania's actual-claim test and parent route": these are mutants of earlier branch states.
   • test_pa_tax_forgiveness_has_no_parent_qualification_input asserts the absence of a name main never had.
   • Reword the changelog (for example, "Document that North Dakota's stillborn subtraction has no dependency condition") and the body. Consider dropping the absence test (CLAUDE.md, "Justify Python coverage").
2. The filing exception's restoration of dependents is unpinned in some formulas. No case sets dependent_claimant_filing_exception: true for nj_ctc, nj_dependents_attending_college_exemption, ok_stc's has_dependents, or the NJ and OK dependent-exemption reforms. Swapping their helper for the ordinary head_or_spouse_is_dependent_elsewhere would pass every test. Add one exception case each, as nj_dependents_exemption, ok_count_exemptions, the Ohio files and pa_tax_forgiveness_amount already have.
3. Test location. oh_claimable_filer_medical_expenses.yaml isn't named after a variable (CLAUDE.md, "Test design and CI cost"). Move its eight cases into the existing oh_unreimbursed_medical_care_expense_deduction.yaml, oh_uninsured_unreimbursed_medical_care_expenses.yaml and oh_long_term_care_insurance_premiums.yaml.
4. Oklahoma references.
   • ok_stc.py cites 68 O.S. 5011 through an introduced 2023 bill (HB 1013XX, PDF p.5). That page shows the subsection relettered H and a proposed $500 amount, while the code comment says "5011(D)". Cite the codified section (OSCN) instead.
   • ok_count_exemptions.py (and the repeal reform's comment) quote only Form 511 for the own-exemption bar. Add 68 O.S. 2358(E)(1)(a), SB 1452, PDF p.19 ("personal exemptions of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) in lieu of the personal exemptions allowed by the Internal Revenue Code") and IRC 151(d)(2), which carry the rule.
5. CLAUDE.md "Test design and CI cost". The body gives no CI time or memory for the new property file. Cite this head's run 42386513660:
   • The file ran in the Rest Python "core-3" group (shard 2), with 14.47 s + 2.35 s + 1.61 s + 1.48 s ≈ 19.9 s of test calls.
   • The group ran 749 tests in 22:12.
   • The log reports no peak RSS, so say so.
6. The body is stale or unclear in places.
   • "Tests" cites run 42313238972 at aa18655572 (36 jobs). The head's run is 42386513660 at 611ebd6c75, with 35 jobs.
   • The Ohio section's "We apply the PR's existing dependent-taxpayer test" reads oddly.
   • The title doesn't mention North Carolina, although the property file and nc_child_deduction.yaml cover it (the formula is on main).

Verified correct

The law, read first.

• New Jersey.
  • The 2025 instructions, lines 10 and 11 (PDF p.9): "You can claim a $1,500 exemption for each child who qualifies as your dependent for federal tax purposes." Line 12: "Student must be claimed as a dependent on line 10 or 11." N.J.S.A. 54A:3-1(b) likewise keys the exemption to federal dependency, so IRC 152(b)(1) leaves a claimable filer with none.
  • 54A:4-17.1 (P.L. 2022, c.24) allows the credit for each child under six "for which the taxpayer is allowed a deduction under N.J.S.54A:3-1", so the CTC gate follows.
  • The filer-only childless age test follows 32(c)(1)(A)(ii)(II), and the (III) bar with the claimant exception is statutory (see S1 for the extra term).
• North Dakota. N.D.C.C. 57-38-30.3(2)(p), PDF p.35: "Reduced by an amount ... for each birth resulting in stillbirth, as defined in section 23-02.1-01, for which a fetal death certificate has been filed". It has no dependency condition; the schedule adds one. The statute-first result is main's, and the conflict is recorded.
• Ohio.
  • R.C. 5747.01(A)(10)(a)–(b) covers premiums and medical care "for the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, and dependents". (O): "'Dependents' means dependents as defined in the Internal Revenue Code." (A)(10)(c) widens only (a), for a would-be qualifying relative failing 152(d)(1)(B)–(C), so 152(b)(1) still applies. Excluding dependents before the 7.5% floor is right.
  • R.C. 5747.75 allows the tuition credit to "taxpayers with one or more dependents who attend a nonchartered nonpublic school", so tuition recorded on a filer is rightly excluded.
  • Unchanged and consistent: 5747.025 sets a filer's exemption to zero where an exemption "is allowable to another taxpayer" (main reads claimability). 5747.055 has no dependency condition, and the Ohio EITC follows the federal credit.
• Oklahoma.
  • 68 O.S. 2358(E)(1)(a) is quoted in Suggestion 4. (b) and (c) give an additional $1,000 "for each taxpayer or spouse who is blind" or "sixty-five (65) years of age or older" (SB 1452, PDF p.19), with no dependency bar. So the claimable filer's regular exemption follows 151(d)(2) spouse by spouse, while the special and blind exemptions stay.
  • 68 O.S. 5011 (as codified in 2021): the claim is "Forty Dollars ($40.00) multiplied by the number of allowable personal exemptions". These are the exemptions "to which the taxpayer would be entitled pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma Income Tax Act", except the blind and 65-or-older ones. The $50,000 route needs "one or more allowable personal exemptions other than the allowable personal exemption for that individual or the spouse".
  • OAC 710:50-15-96 says the same, and the 2025 Form 538-S, p.3 step 3 reads "You can claim an exemption for your dependent".
  • 2020 Pub 596, p.16 sets ages 25–64 for both students and nonstudents, and its Rule 12 is the dependency bar. Both carry into the frozen OK credit.
• Pennsylvania.
  • Tax Reform Code 301(c.2), PDF p.112: "'Claimant' means a person who is subject to the tax ..., is not a dependent of another taxpayer for purposes of section 151". That is allowability, read as claimability, with no parent route.
  • (e.1), PDF p.113: "'Dependent' means a child who is the dependent of a claimant for purposes of section 151".
  • 304(d)(1), PDF p.127 gives $6,500, or "joint poverty income" of $13,000 for "a married claimant", plus $9,500 per dependent.
  • The older regulation (61 Pa. Code § 101.1, a support-test claimant definition) has no parent route either. The parent route comes only from the 2025 Schedule SP, PDF p.3 ("A dependent child may also be eligible ...").
  • The mixed-spouse allocation follows p.5 ("When one spouse is claimed as a dependent ... otherwise qualifying married taxpayers must file separately"), recorded as a gap-fill.
  • Give a separated Pennsylvania filer the unmarried tax forgiveness base #10666's separated-filer base, already merged, coexists cleanly in pa_tax_forgiveness_rate.

The code.

• Mutation rule. Apart from S3, removing any new gate or term fails a YAML case:
  • New Jersey: the exemption, college exemption and CTC zeros; the 17-year-old filer with a 40-year-old dependent; the claimable-but-unclaimed childless case; the listed-by-a-refund-only-filer case.
  • Ohio: the tuition on a filer, the claimable filer's tuition, the medical [100, 200, 0] / [10, 20, 0] / [1000, 1000, 0] vectors, and the 1,430 total.
  • Oklahoma: the per-filer regular exemptions in both label orders, the child exclusion, the income-limit sales tax case of 0 against $40, and the 20-year-old filer with a 40-year-old dependent.
  • Pennsylvania: the eligible share, the amount, and the 0.4 rate.
  • The NJ and OK reforms, and both labelings of the repeal reform's OK case.
• Construction.
  • Vectorization is sound: where, &, ~, tax_unit.any and person.tax_unit broadcasts.
  • Entities and periods are correct.
  • There is no new state-gated int or enum key, so the NH Add New Hampshire state supplementation for 2026 #10156 pattern doesn't arise.
  • pa_tax_forgiveness_eligible_share sums only person-level non-taxable sources, consistent with pa_total_taxable_income.
• Hand-checks (15).
  • PA single unclaimable, $3,000: 3,000 ≤ 6,500, so 100% × 3,000 × 3.07% = 92.10.
  • PA joint with one claimable spouse, $3,000 each: 6,000 ≤ 13,000, so 184.20 × share (3,000 / 6,000) = 92.10.
  • PA joint with one claimable spouse and a child, $7,500 each: the child is excluded; 15,000 − 13,000 = 2,000, so the rate is 20%. 460.50 × 0.2 × 0.5 = 46.05.
  • PA single claimable with a child, $8,000: 8,000 − 6,500 = 1,500, so the rate is 0.4, with share 0 and forgiveness $0. Single unclaimable: 8,000 ≤ 16,000, so 100% × 245.60.
  • OK EITC: 5,000 × 7.65% = 382.50 (below the 2020 cap of 538) × 5% = 19.125, single or joint.
  • OK exemptions: neither claimable with a child = 1 + 1 + 1 = 3; one claimable spouse with a child = 1; claimable with the filing exception and a child = 0 + 1 = 1; claimable filer aged 66 = 0 + 1 special = 1.
  • OK sales tax credit: 3 × $40 = 120; one claimable spouse = $40; claimable single at $30,000 with a child: over $20,000 and no dependent, so 0.
  • OK reform, one claimable spouse: 1 × 1,000 = 1,000.
  • NJ EITC below the federal age: 40% × 649 = 259.60. At federal ages: 40% × 3,000 × 7.65% = 91.80.
  • NJ CTC: NJ taxable income 5,000 − 1,000 − 1,500 = 2,500 ≤ 30,000, so $1,000.
  • NJ exemptions: 1,500 (dependent) and 1,000 (college).
  • Ohio medical: (400 + 600) + (500 + 500) − 7.5% × 8,000 = 1,400, split 700/700, plus long-term care 10/20, giving 710/720 and a total of 1,430. Without the gate: 8,000 − 600 = 7,400.
  • Ohio tuition: min(400, 1,000) = 400.
  • ND: 1 × 5,241 = 5,241.
• References. These show the cited text: NJ-1040 PDF p.9 and p.44; SB 1452 p.19; Schedule SP p.3 and p.5; Tax Reform Code p.112, p.113 and p.127; 2020 Pub 596 p.16; 2025 ND-1SA p.2. Multi-page variable references carry the # PDF pages comment.
• Housekeeping.
  • The changelog changelog.d/claimable-filer-nj-pa.fixed.md is top-level.
  • No partner-contract or .github files are touched.
  • The two new KNOWN_UNMARKED lines (one comment each in nd_stillborn_subtraction.py and pa_tax_forgiveness_eligible.py) match recorded candidates, as CONTRIBUTING.md step 1 requires.
  • The three candidates naming this PR are updated (apart from S2).

Axiom line assessment

There is no line: the section reads AXIOM_PLACEHOLDER. rulespec-us has no issue, open or closed, covering this PR's NJ, Ohio, Oklahoma or Pennsylvania provisions, and no module for most of them. The "6 dispatch-ready drafts" the author mentions haven't been filed. The line needs the items listed in S4. Each queued issue must be OPEN, labelled pe-parity, dispatch-ready and pinned to 611ebd6c75. The valid n/a items are North Dakota (no behavior change), the contributed reforms (PE-only) and TAXSIM (emulator mapping).

CI status

gh pr checks 10043 at head 611ebd6c75: 35 of 35 pass in run 42386513660 (2026-11-07). That covers every Baseline and Contrib shard, all eight Rest Python shards, Microsimulation, Household API Partners and PR validation. Nothing fails or is pending.

Branch status

• Position. The branch is 32 commits ahead of main and 2 behind (merge base c03a44d498, which already includes Give a separated Pennsylvania filer the unmarried tax forgiveness base #10666 and Leave tax unit dependents' income out of Arkansas, Mississippi, New Jersey and Iowa income #10667).
• Merge with main. git merge-tree --write-tree PolicyEngine/main 611ebd6c75 exits 0 (tree a6f2a77e). Main's two new commits (Forward branches through Social Security period discovery #10676 and a version bump) touch only Social Security period-discovery files, none of this PR's files.
• Open siblings.
  • Apply the RI, SC, UT, VT, WV and WI rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10044 and Apply Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana and Maryland rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10045 conflict with this PR in repeal_state_dependent_exemptions.yaml, where all three append cases at the end. Keep every block; the .py auto-merges.
  • Apply the federal EITC qualifications to Maryland, Maine and New Jersey EITC recomputations #10525 conflicts in nj_childless_eitc_age_eligible.py, nj_childless_eitc_age_eligible.yaml and nj_eitc.yaml. Its code notes "Not yet applied here: the bar on a filer who is a dependent of another taxpayer", which this PR supplies. Whichever merges second must reconcile the two (and S1).
  • Apply District of Columbia, Georgia and Idaho rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10050 merges cleanly, including candidates.yaml.
  • Apply Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois and Indiana rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10049, Keep a filer who can be claimed as a dependent out of the premium tax credit family, and apply each state premium program's rule #10041 and Leave dependents' capital income out of state lines on the filers' return #9894 share no file with this PR.

Verdict: REQUEST_CHANGES

[DTrim99]

Requesting changes per the review above: 0 critical, 4 should (NJ childless EITC 'listed as a dependent' term follows the worksheet over 54A:4-7(a)(4) without a record; candidates understate their years; unpinned TAXSIM PA gate; axiom section still a placeholder with no queued issue), 6 suggestions.