Apply Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana and Maryland rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent

[MaxGhenis]

Summary

Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana and Maryland each have rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent on another return that the model never applied. A return on which the filer (or, if joint, either spouse) can be claimed has no dependents unless the would-be claimant meets the filing exception (IRC 152(b)(1); Publication 501: "you and your spouse can't claim any dependents on your joint return"), and these states also have their own rules for the claimable or claimed filer. This PR applies the ones the federal fixes do not already cover. Each rule is symmetric between head and spouse and reads the fact its law names, using #10024's split inputs:

• IRC 152(b)(1) "no dependents" rules read head_or_spouse_is_dependent_elsewhere_without_filing_exception, as the federal formulas do.
• Rules whose text says "claimed" read the claim (claimed_as_dependent_on_another_return).
• Maryland's filing status 6 ("Any person who can be claimed") reads claimability.

It also fixes one related error in the same formulas (last row of the table). Kentucky needs no code change.

Stacked on the federal claimable-filer PR #10087 (claimable-filer-federal, merged in at 35a2cbc) and on #10024. The 2026-10-09 audit (Subfleet research, sweep_s2) was written before those changes. The rows they already fix are listed below, with the YAML cases that now pin them.

Formula	Rule now (fact read)	Source
ia_exemption_credit	No $40 dependent credits on a return with a claimable filer, outside the filing exception; each filer keeps the personal credit	Iowa Code 422.12(1)(a), (2)(a)(3): "Dependent" has its Internal Revenue Code meaning; 2025 IA 1040 instructions: "You may claim a $40 personal exemption credit even if you are claimed as a dependent", and the dependents "you are claiming for federal income tax purposes"
ia_is_tax_exempt (+ new parameters tax_exempt/dependent/income_limit, income_sources)	A claimed single filer is exempt only with income below $5,000 (line 26 net income through 2022; line 4 Iowa taxable income, without add-backs, from 2023). Any other return with a claimed filer (joint, head of household, surviving spouse, married filing separately) is not exempt	2021-2025 instructions (2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025): "less than $5,000 and you are claimed as a dependent"; other statuses: "You are not claimed as a dependent on another person's Iowa return"
ia_reduced_tax	No tax reduction for a claimed single filer	Tax Reduction Worksheet: "Single taxpayers, who are not claimed as a dependent on another person's Iowa tax return" (2025 p.18)
ks_count_exemptions (2021-2023)	Zero when either filer is claimed; otherwise dependents only outside a claimable filer (152(b)(1))	K-40 instructions 2021-2023, p.6: "If you are claimed as a dependent by another taxpayer, enter '0' in the Total Kansas exemptions box"
ks_exemptions (2024+)	The filing-status allowance stays; no $2,320 dependent exemptions on a return with a claimable filer, outside the filing exception	K.S.A. 79-32,121b: "for each dependent for which such taxpayer is entitled to a deduction ... for federal income tax purposes"; 2024 K-40 p.6: "enter '0' in the number of dependents box"; KDOR FAQ: a claimable taxpayer "will qualify for the personal exemption allowance of $9,160"
ks_fstc (2021-2024)	Exemptions as on K-40 Line E: zero for a claimed filer through 2023, the filing-status count in 2024; no dependent or dependent-child route on a return with a claimable filer, outside the filing exception	K-40 Line E: "Enter your total number of exemptions"; the child must be claimed "as a personal exemption"
la_dependents_exemption (2021-2024)	No dependent exemption on a return with a claimable filer, outside the filing exception; own exemptions unchanged	IT-540 instructions: Line 6C "dependents claimed on your federal return"; Line 6A "even if someone else claimed you"
md_personal_exemptions_count (new), md_total_personal_exemptions	An exemption for each filer who is not claimable, plus dependents only outside a claimable filer (152(b)(1), with the exception); counted locally, not from federal exemptions_count	Tax-General 10-211(a)-(b); 2025 Resident Booklet p.12, filing status 6: "You do not get an exemption for yourself ... You and your spouse must file separate returns"; Instruction 8 (p.13): "Each spouse must claim their own personal exemption" and may split "the overall number of dependents"
md_aged_dependent_exemption	None on a return with a claimable filer, outside the filing exception	10-211(b)(2): "each dependent, as defined in § 152" who is 65 or older
federal_eitc_without_age_minimum	The childless route also needs no claimable filer outside the filing exception, as in eitc_demographic_eligible	10-704: only "the minimum age requirement" is waived; booklet p.22: "otherwise eligible for the federal credit"; IRC 32(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III); Publication 596
md_ctc, md_ctc_eligible	No qualified child on a return with a claimable filer, outside the filing exception	10-751(a)(2)(i): "a dependent for purposes of § 152"
is_eligible_md_poverty_line_credit, md_poverty_line_credit_potential, md_local_poverty_line_credit (+ new md_poverty_line_credit_earned_income, md_poverty_line_credit_income_level)	No credit when every filer is claimable (filing status 6, whatever the filing exception). On a joint return with one claimable spouse, it uses the other spouse's own earned income and the poverty level for that spouse's exemptions	10-709(a)(2): the poverty level "that corresponds to the number of exemptions which the individual is allowed and claims under § 10-211(b)(1)"; (a)(3)(iii); booklet p.23: "not eligible ... if you checked filing status 6"
md_aged_dependent_exemption (related fix)	Limited by federal AGI like every other (b)(1)-(2) exemption: $1,600/$800/$0 above $100,000 ($150,000 joint)	10-211(c): "the amount allowed for each exemption under subsection (b)(1) or (2)"; booklet chart: "This reduction applies to the additional dependency exemptions as well"

The Iowa, Kansas and Maryland dependent-exemption contrib reforms and the state dependent exemption repeal keep these rules (YAML cases added). In repeal_state_dependent_exemptions.py this PR changes only the Maryland and Kansas entries and lands first in that file's order: this PR, then #10043, then #10053.

Audit rows already fixed by #10024 or the federal branch (not changed here)

• IA: EITC (federal eitc) and care credit (cdcc_potential). Pinned in ia_eitc.yaml and ia_cdcc.yaml.
• KS: EITC (eitc) and care credit (cdcc). Pinned in ks_total_eitc.yaml and ks_cdcc.yaml.
• KY: care credit and tuition credit.
  • The care credit reads cdcc, and from 2026 pre_obbba_cdcc. Both are built on cdcc_relevant_expenses, which now reads cdcc_qualifying_childcare_expenses, capped by cdcc_limit from capped_count_cdcc_eligible. Pinned in ky_cdcc_potential.yaml.
  • The tuition credit reads the federal AOC/LLC, barred when either filer is claimed.
  • The family size credit already keeps qualifying children under 152(c) ("even if you are claimed as a dependent").
• LA: EITC (eitc), refundable and nonrefundable care credits (cdcc_potential, cdcc), and through them the school readiness credit. Pinned in la_eitc.yaml and la_refundable_cdcc.yaml.
• MD: care credit (cdcc), dependent care subtraction (count_cdcc_eligible, cdcc_relevant_expenses) and local EITC (eitc). The subtraction is pinned in md_dependent_care_subtraction.yaml.

Each claim was verified by reading the formula on this branch. No tax formula in these five states reads raw childcare expenses; the raw-expense readers are the CCAP and TANF benefit programs.

Maryland's separate returns: how far this models them

Maryland requires a married filer who can be claimed to file separate Maryland returns (filing status 6 for that spouse). The model keeps the federal joint tax unit and applies each rule per filer where the rule is per filer:

• Exemptions: each filer who cannot be claimed gets their own; the spouses split the federal return's dependents, of which it has none outside the filing exception.
• Poverty line credit: computed on the other spouse's earnings and poverty level.
• EITC and CTC: no childless EITC and no qualified child.

It does not compute two separate Maryland returns. These still use the joint unit:

• filing status;
• the standard deduction;
• the Schedule I rates;
• each spouse's own AGI for the exemption phase-down;
• the poverty line credit's tax limit (its AGI test expressly uses joint federal AGI after a joint federal return, even when Maryland returns are separate);
• the EITC split ("a combined total of up to one-half the federal credit").

A married person can be claimed only if the couple's joint return is "filed only to claim a refund of withheld income tax or estimated tax paid" (Publication 501), so these are low-income couples. From 2025 the two separate flat standard deductions sum to the joint one ($3,350 x 2 = $6,700), but the separate rate schedules can still give a different tax. Computing the two returns needs each spouse's income as on a separate federal return (Instruction 8), a split the Maryland model does not have.

Review r1 (Sol, at 704a604): responses

1. Should-fix: Maryland exemptions followed a federal-only reform. Fixed. Maryland counts its own exemptions in md_personal_exemptions_count, with the same rule as the federal count, and both md_total_personal_exemptions and md_poverty_line_credit_income_level read it. The federal repeal_dependent_exemptions reform no longer reaches Maryland.
2. Should-fix: the changelog left out the aged dependent AGI limit. Fixed; the fragment names it.
3. Nit: invariant 5 was untested, and max_examples was 2. The property test now checks the nobody-claimable identities: the Maryland count equals tax_unit_size, the poverty earned income equals eitc_earned_income, the poverty level equals tax_unit_fpg, and The tested la_dependents_exemption amount is $1,000 per dependent. max_examples is now 3, and a filing-exception scope test is added. The pending hub microsimulation will check the remaining outputs.
4. Nit: Iowa wording and anchors. The body now names every non-single status. The 2021 anchor is page 38 in the code too. 422.13(1)(a) is labelled as the filing requirement it is.
5. Nit: no Louisiana 2023 reference. Added.
6. Nit: duplicated earned income sources. Kept, with a comment pointing to eitc_earned_income. Sharing the list would mean changing the federal variable.

Response to the independent review

The supplied review examined 704a604a29; the assigned head 228b34ad938e9773c1a76bf02ffd0f9e75f948be already contains the six implementation/documentation responses above. This follow-up independently rereads the cited primary passages and adds the missing reform regression, rather than repeating those fixes.

1. Fixed — Maryland federal-reform coupling: retain the local md_personal_exemptions_count in both consumers; add registered federal-repeal cases proving that four Maryland exemptions remain $12,800 and that the filing-exception poverty level remains $21,150 under both spouse labellings.
2. Fixed — aged-dependent changelog: verified the existing fragment explicitly names the federal-AGI limit in Tax-General 10-211(c), and the aged-dependent tests exercise the phase-down.
3. Fixed — invariant 5: verified its explicit assertions and nonempty deterministic no-claim population; the existing property test now uses three Hypothesis examples and includes filing-exception scope. The new reform cases also protect the nobody-claimable Maryland result without relying on a microsimulation.
4. Fixed — Iowa wording and anchors: rechecked 2021 PDF page 38 and Code 422.13(1)(a) PDF page 46; retain the accurate filing-requirement label, and align the remaining formula comment and parameter description with all non-single statuses and actual claiming.
5. Fixed — Louisiana 2023 reference: rechecked the already-added IT-540 instructions PDF page 3, lines 6A and 6C. The readings below also correct the attribution of “qualified dependent” to the instructions.
6. Fixed — earned-income source duplication: retain the review's permitted short-comment approach; the five person income sources match eitc_earned_income exactly and the comment points there. A shared tax-unit calculation cannot supply the per-person allocation required here.

Partial validation results from the direct foreground file runs are appended below. No microsimulation is run in this follow-up.

Readings for Max (for the US + core hub to batch)

These preserve the PR's existing choices. Items 3 and 6 identify missing inputs/return representation rather than discretion to ignore an explicit legal requirement. Amounts below illustrate the rule at issue, before unrelated tax limits unless stated.

1. Kansas 2021–2023 exemptions. Keep the K-40 actual-claim rule: either claimed spouse makes the total count zero (2022 K-40 instructions, PDF p.6). The alternative reads 2023 K.S.A. 79-32,121(a) and IRC 151(d)(2) per person, based on claimability. Worked 2023 joint return, one claimed spouse, other spouse unclaimable, no dependents: PR $0; alternative 1 × $2,250 = $2,250. A claimable but unclaimed single filer receives $2,250 under the PR versus $0 under the alternative.
2. Kansas food sales tax credit, 2021–2024. Keep K-40 Line E's count, including the 2024 filing-status allowance (2024 instructions, “Exemptions and Dependents” and “Lines E through H”). The alternative follows federal exemptions in K.S.A. 79-32,271(d). Worked otherwise-eligible 2024 joint return with one claimable spouse and no dependents: PR 2 × $125 = $250; alternative 1 × $125 = $125. An otherwise-eligible claimable single filer has $125 versus $0, before the general tax-liability cap.
3. Iowa low-income exemption: external claimant income and Iowa return. Keep the instructions-based simplification because the model lacks the claimant's income and return jurisdiction. Iowa Code 422.5(2)(a), PDF p.7 conditions the dependent exclusion on the claimant exceeding the income limit; the 2022 instructions, PDF p.37 use the $5,000 dependent test and an Iowa-return claim. Worked 2022 claimed single filer with $6,000 net income and a single claimant with $8,000 net income: PR not exempt ($6,000 ≥ $5,000); claimant-income alternative exempt (both incomes below the ordinary $9,000 limit), so tax after the exemption is $0. A non-Iowa claimant creates the analogous jurisdiction-input choice.
4. Iowa alternate tax. Keep the alternate tax for a joint return with a claimed spouse: the 2024 alternate worksheet repeats no dependent bar. The alternative applies the whole-subsection dependent exclusion in 2024 Code 422.5(2)(a)–(b), PDF p.7. Worked 2024 joint return, one claimed spouse, modified income $20,000, ordinary tax $500, external claimant income $30,000: PR min($500, ($20,000 − $13,500) × 5.7%) = $370.50; alternative $500.
5. Maryland dependents on separate returns. Keep Instruction 8's overall dependent pool as the federal joint return's, which has no dependents when either filer is claimable outside the claimant filing exception (2025 booklet, PDF p.13; Publication 501, PDF p.11). The alternative computes a pro forma separate federal dependent pool for the unclaimable spouse. Worked 2025 couple with one claimable spouse, an otherwise qualifying child age 4 and AGI $2,000: PR $3,200 basic exemptions and $0 CTC; alternative $6,400 and $500 CTC, under 10-211(a)(3), (b) and 10-751(a)(2)(i).
6. Maryland separate returns — model limitation. Keep the existing per-filer rules on one federal joint unit; a full two-return computation remains outside this PR. Filing status 6 and Instruction 8, PDF pp.12–13 explicitly require separate Maryland returns. Worked 2025, no children, claimable spouse earnings $10,000, other spouse earnings $5,000, no adjustments: current aggregate taxable income $15,000 − $6,700 − $3,200 = $5,100; separate taxable incomes total max(0, $10,000 − $3,350) + max(0, $5,000 − $3,350 − $3,200) = $6,650. The poverty-credit AGI test still expressly uses joint federal AGI for separate Maryland filers following a joint federal return (booklet, PDF p.23).
7. Louisiana school readiness credit, incapable child. Keep the inherited Louisiana care-credit route: IRC 21(b)(1)(B) disregards 152(b)(1) for an incapable qualifying person; R.S. 47:297.4(A) imports that credit and 47:6104(A) multiplies it by facility rating. The alternative imposes a separate legal-dependent gate from the 2023 instructions, PDF p.16, which use “qualified dependent” (the phrase is not in 47:6104 itself). Worked 2023 claimable filer, incapable child age 4, $1,000 qualifying care, $10,000 AGI/earnings, five-star facility: PR federal credit $350, Louisiana care credit $175, school readiness $175 × 200% = $350; alternative school readiness $0.
8. Maryland filing exception and the dependent-taxpayer chart. Keep the PR's statutory reading: 10-211(a)(3), (b)(1) allows an actual IRC 152 dependent even when the filer's own exemption is denied, if the claimant filing exception preserves that dependent. An alternative reads Chart 10A's dependent-taxpayer “Each Exemption” $0 column as denying all exemptions on that taxpayer's return (2025 booklet, PDF p.12). Worked low-AGI 2025 single claimable filer, claimant filing exception true, one otherwise qualifying child: PR 1 × $3,200 = $3,200; broad chart reading $0. The existing filing-exception YAML cases pin the retained reading.

Not modeled (listed, not implemented)

• IA: early childhood development credit and tuition/textbook credit (per dependent, 422.12(2)(b), 422.12C(2)); rent reimbursement program ("not ... claimed as a dependent").
• KS: 2025+ additional newborn allowance and stillbirth exemption; the homestead refund's dependent-child route.
• LA: school tuition, homeschool and public-school expense deductions (claimed dependents, current or preceding year).
• MD: 2021 RELIEF Act payment (excluded "Persons claimed as a dependent").

Other findings (not fixed here)

• ks_fstc 2021-2023 leaves out the head of household extra exemption that K-40 Line E ("total number of exemptions") would include. The 2024 instructions exclude it explicitly: "Head of Household is not allowed an additional exemption for food sales tax credit".
• federal_eitc_without_age_minimum omits the federal separate-filer and section 911 conditions that eitc_eligible applies.
• In repeal_state_dependent_exemptions, the overrides for other states (HI, OH, RI, VT, VA, WV and others) are left to the hub's repeal-state-dep-exemptions-claimable-filer branch, Apply New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10043 and Apply Arizona, Arkansas and California rules for a filer who can be claimed as a dependent #10053.

Invariants

1. Swap invariance. Every changed output, and each of the five states' income taxes, is the same under either head/spouse labelling.

2. Monotonicity. Marking another filer as claimed never raises:

   • the dependent-based amounts;
   • the Kansas exemptions and food sales tax credit;
   • the Maryland exemption count and amount, CTC, pro forma EITC and poverty-credit earned income.

   Left out by design:

   • Taxes and the Iowa exemption: a claimed single filer's $5,000 test uses a different income measure, so it can newly exempt.
   • Maryland's poverty line credit amounts: they rise when lost exemptions raise the tax they offset.

   The poverty earned income holds only for non-negative self-employment income. On separate returns a claimable spouse's loss no longer offsets the other's earnings, which is intended.

3. Identities. With a filer claimable outside the filing exception: no Louisiana dependent exemption, no Maryland aged dependent exemption or CTC, and no pro forma EITC without a child. With every filer claimable: no poverty line credit.

4. Differential. Wherever the federal EITC's eligibility holds, Maryland's federal_eitc_without_age_minimum equals the federal credit before take-up and filing.

5. Unchanged when nobody can be claimed. The Maryland count equals tax_unit_size. The poverty earned income and poverty level equal eitc_earned_income and tax_unit_fpg. The tested la_dependents_exemption amount is $1,000 per dependent. The pending hub microsimulation will check the remaining outputs; the only exception is the aged dependent AGI fix.

6. Filing-exception scope. The exception never lowers the 152(b)(1) amounts. It does not change Iowa's exemption (an actual-claim rule) or Maryland's poverty earned income (a claimability rule).

Tests

• YAML. Variable-named cases cover every changed formula and the inherited state readers above:

  • a single claimable filer, with an unclaimed single control where it differs;
  • a joint return with one claimable spouse, under both head/spouse labellings;
  • a joint return with both spouses claimable;
  • a joint return with nobody claimable;
  • claimable-but-unclaimed cases for the actual-claim rules;
  • filing-exception cases for the 152(b)(1) rules.

  Expected values are computed from the law and the repository parameters, with the arithmetic in each case's comments. Current-checkout results are in the partial verification table below; the remaining required file runs were not completed.

• Property test. policyengine_us/tests/core/test_claimable_filer_ia_ks_ky_la_md_invariants.py checks invariants 1-6 with Hypothesis (claimable, claimed and filing-exception draws), a seeded population in the five states for 2022, 2024 and 2026, and an exception-scope population for 2022 and 2025. Results: 6 cases pass in the direct foreground file run, recorded below.

Microsimulation impact

Pending: default dataset, 2025 and 2026, claimable-filer-federal (35a2cbc) vs this branch. The dataset sets the dependency flags for nobody, so only the Maryland aged dependent AGI limit can move totals.

axiom: Iowa Code 422.12(1)(a),(2)(a)(3), 422.5(2)(a),(3)(a), 422.13(1)(a) queued (draft IA1) | K.S.A. 79-32,121, 79-32,121b queued (draft KS1) | K.S.A. 79-32,271 n/a: expired after 2024 and unencoded | Louisiana 2021-2024 dependent exemption n/a: expired and unencoded | Md. Tax-General 10-211, 10-704(c)(3), 10-709, 10-751 queued (draft MD1) | IRC 32 childless pro forma path queued (draft F1 addendum) | state readers of the federal EITC and CDCC (Iowa 422.12B/C, Kansas EITC/CDCC, KRS 141.067/.069, R.S. 47:297.4/.8 and 47:6104, Md. 10-716/10-208(e)) queued as F1 downstream companions | contrib reforms n/a: PE-only reform. Drafts held for Max's go, not filed (claimable-filer-rules/axiom/axiom-parity-ia-ks-ky-la-md.md plus the split-input addendum). No module on rulespec-us origin/main (16a6677190) derives claimability or tests a claimable filer.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Merge with main after #10087

Merged main (6989afda4698d6c643f5dd0ef7ad19aff9f769b8) after #10087 squash-merged. Resolved nm_medical_expense_credit.py, its YAML test, and ca_cdcc_relevant_expenses.yaml with main verbatim because this PR did not change them against its federal base. For ks_cdcc.yaml, retained main's unrelated 2021 increased federal dependent-care exclusion regression and appended this PR's six 2024 claimable/nonclaimable cases unchanged. Removed two inherited federal/#10024 changelog fragments already consumed by releases on main.

The resulting 51-file diff preserves this PR's original changes against 35a2cbcbb9. Only the context around the Kansas test additions differs, because main's new regression case is retained before those additions; no inherited federal changes remain.

Verification refresh (2026-10-16): main advanced to 1ef55c1197c6b466912e2f081d548d277e04e360 with the North Carolina and Nevada supplementation changes and their release updates. Merged that main into the pushed 18240a3755 as 228b34ad938e9773c1a76bf02ffd0f9e75f948be, without conflicts or history rewriting. Those upstream changes touch none of this PR's 51 paths. The direct diff against the refreshed main still has exactly those 51 paths and identical added/deleted lines to 35a2cbcbb9..5459eee8f8; only the Kansas unchanged context differs. All 26 changed test files are unchanged by this refresh.

Historical verification at 228b34ad938e9773c1a76bf02ffd0f9e75f948be only (not validation of the current follow-up head): all 26 changed test files passed (288 cases). Reused the 24 completed files / 267 passes recorded at 18240a3755; reran the Kansas (9 passes) and Maryland (12 passes) dependent-exemption contrib files at 228b34ad938e9773c1a76bf02ffd0f9e75f948be, one foreground process per file with all requested thread caps. Ruff 0.15.5 format --check and check pass on all 23 changed Python files; make format also passes with all 6,993 Python files unchanged. No conflict markers or whitespace errors remain. The PR remains a draft.

Independent review partial verification (2026-10-16 21:44 UTC)

RESULT: BLOCKED. The required current-checkout rerun remains unfinished: 12/27 changed files completed successfully, 122 actual passed cases; 15 file runs not completed. The prescribed foreground rerun could not finish within the six-hour job limit; the active test process was stopped and joined before the deadline. This is an incomplete validation result, not an assertion that every changed file passes.

HEAD: 594045e742dce9567926b96e8e852a4ebb70260c. Current main 95ac9bd01ce349bd388f3fd77c15f40bcb31d165 was merged without history rewriting after confirming the assigned PR head 228b34ad938e9773c1a76bf02ffd0f9e75f948be. The PR remains a draft. The historical 288-pass paragraph above describes the old assigned head only; those old runs are not included in the current totals below.

Primary passages were independently reread; the existing policy readings are retained and all eight alternatives with citations and worked numbers remain in Readings for Max above. Finding dispositions:

1. Fixed — Maryland federal-only reform coupling: retain the local state exemption count in both consumers and add the three registered federal-repeal regressions.
2. Fixed — aged dependent AGI changelog: verify the existing explicit Tax-General 10-211(c) entry and retain its phase-down cases; the table below states whether this job completed that file's rerun.
3. Fixed — invariant 5: verify explicit nobody-claimable assertions and nonempty seeded coverage; retain three Hypothesis examples and filing-exception scope, with the actual current property result stated below.
4. Fixed — Iowa wording and anchors: verify 2021 instructions PDF page 38 and the Code 422.13 filing-requirement source; align descriptions with actual claiming and all non-single statuses.
5. Fixed — Louisiana 2023 reference: verify IT-540 PDF page 3, lines 6A and 6C; retain the citation and clarify the school-readiness wording's source in the readings above.
6. Fixed — duplicated earned-income sources: retain the review-permitted cross-reference comment; independently verify the five person sources against eitc_earned_income.

Fail before: temporarily replayed only the two consumer formulas from reviewed commit 704a604a29, then restored the current formulas in a finally block. The new exemption case calculated $6,400 instead of $12,800. Both poverty-threshold spouse-label cases calculated $15,650 instead of $21,150. All three failures were calculation failures, not import or collection failures.

Pass after: the three new regressions pass in completed direct file runs: the seven-case Maryland total-personal-exemption file and both new poverty-threshold cases. All 12 successful current file runs / 122 passed cases below used the prescribed interpreter and direct single-file CLI (or python -m pytest -q for the Python file), one foreground process at a time, PYTHONPATH set to this checkout, all requested numerical thread caps set to four, and OMP_WAIT_POLICY=PASSIVE. No preload/fork alternative was used. No folder runs, full suites, or microsimulations were run in this follow-up.

Ruff 0.15.5 format and check and make format passed, as recorded in the evidence logs. These formatting results and the three new regression passes do not substitute for the remaining required file runs.

Only full successful records supported by their actual pass logs contribute to the completed count. Expected cases in uncompleted files are planning counts, not passes, and do not contribute to the total.

Test file (under policyengine_us/tests/)	Current-checkout status	Actual completed passes	Expected cases if not completed
core/test_claimable_filer_ia_ks_ky_la_md_invariants.py	Completed successfully	6	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/exemptions/md_aged_dependent_exemption.yaml	Completed successfully	10	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/credits/poverty_line/md_poverty_line_credit_earned_income.yaml	Completed successfully	19	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/exemptions/md_personal_exemptions_count.yaml	Completed successfully	8	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/la/tax/income/exemptions/personal/la_dependents_exemption.yaml	Not completed	—	10
policy/baseline/gov/states/ia/tax/income/ia_cdcc.yaml	Completed successfully	17	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/ia/tax/income/ia_eitc.yaml	Completed successfully	7	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/ia/tax/income/ia_exemption_credit.yaml	Completed successfully	10	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/ia/tax/income/ia_income_tax_before_refundable_credits.yaml	Completed successfully	11	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/ia/tax/income/ia_is_tax_exempt.yaml	Completed successfully	17	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/ks/tax/income/exemptions/ks_count_exemptions.yaml	Completed successfully	8	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/ks/tax/income/exemptions/ks_exemptions.yaml	Not completed	—	10
policy/baseline/gov/states/ks/tax/income/ks_cdcc.yaml	Not completed	—	9
policy/baseline/gov/states/ks/tax/income/ks_fstc.yaml	Not completed	—	21
policy/baseline/gov/states/ks/tax/income/ks_total_eitc.yaml	Not completed	—	7
policy/baseline/gov/states/ky/tax/income/credits/dependent_care_service/ky_cdcc_potential.yaml	Not completed	—	6
policy/baseline/gov/states/la/tax/income/credits/cdcc/la_refundable_cdcc.yaml	Not completed	—	9
policy/baseline/gov/states/la/tax/income/credits/la_eitc.yaml	Not completed	—	8
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/agi/md_dependent_care_subtraction.yaml	Not completed	—	6
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/credits/ctc/md_ctc.yaml	Not completed	—	30
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/credits/eitc/federal_eitc_without_age_minimum.yaml	Not completed	—	13
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/credits/poverty_line/md_poverty_line_credit_income_level.yaml	Completed successfully	2	—
policy/baseline/gov/states/md/tax/income/exemptions/md_total_personal_exemptions.yaml	Completed successfully	7	—
policy/contrib/state_dependent_exemptions/repeal_state_dependent_exemptions.yaml	Not completed	—	11
policy/contrib/states/ia/dependent_credit_reform_test.yaml	Not completed	—	8
policy/contrib/states/ks/dependent_exemption_reform_test.yaml	Not completed	—	9
policy/contrib/states/md/dependent_exemption_reform_test.yaml	Not completed	—	12

The property/invariant file completed with 6 actual passed cases.

Required next step: complete every file marked not completed using the same direct one-file foreground process and thread caps before treating this follow-up as fully verified.