Which States Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety?

Twenty-five states and the District of Columbia recognize tenancy by the entirety, a form of joint ownership available exclusively to married couples. The protection tenancy by the entirety provides against creditors of one spouse varies enormously from state to state, ranging from absolute immunity to virtually no protection at all. Understanding these differences matters because married couples who move between states, own property in multiple jurisdictions, or hold financial accounts across state lines may find their asset protection stronger or weaker than they assumed.

This article catalogs every state that recognizes tenancy by the entirety, identifies which states extend protection beyond real estate to personal property and financial accounts, and ranks states by the strength of their creditor protections.

Every State That Recognizes Tenancy by the Entirety

The following table identifies each jurisdiction that currently recognizes tenancy by the entirety, the governing statute or common law authority, and whether the state extends protection to personal property in addition to real estate.

State	Authority	Real Property	Personal Property
Alaska	Alaska Stat. § 34.15.140	Yes	Limited
Arkansas	Ark. Code Ann. § 28-10-201	Yes	Yes
Delaware	Del. Code tit. 12 §§ 602, 703	Yes	Yes
District of Columbia	D.C. Code §§ 42-516, 46-601	Yes	Yes
Florida	Fla. Stat. §§ 689.11, 655.79	Yes	Yes
Hawaii	Haw. Rev. Stat. § 509-2	Yes	Yes
Illinois	765 ILCS 1005/1c	Homestead only	No
Indiana	Ind. Code § 32-17-3-1	Yes	No
Kentucky	Ky. Rev. Stat. § 381.050	Yes	No
Maryland	Md. Real Prop. Code § 4-108	Yes	Yes
Massachusetts	Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 184 § 7	Yes	Limited
Michigan	Mich. Comp. Laws § 557.71	Yes	No
Mississippi	Miss. Code Ann. § 89-1-7	Yes	Yes
Missouri	Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 442.450, 362.470	Yes	Yes
New Jersey	N.J. Stat. Ann. § 46:3-17.2	Yes	Yes
New York	N.Y. Est. Powers & Trusts Law § 6-2.2	Yes	No
North Carolina	N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-56	Yes	No
Oklahoma	Okla. Stat. tit. 60 § 74	Yes	Yes
Oregon	Or. Rev. Stat. § 91.020	Yes	No
Pennsylvania	20 Pa.C.S.A. § 8503	Yes	Yes
Rhode Island	R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-11-3	Yes	Yes
Tennessee	Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-1-109	Yes	Yes
Vermont	Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 § 349	Yes	Yes
Virginia	Va. Code Ann. § 55.1-136	Yes	Yes
Wyoming	Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 34-1-140	Yes	Yes

Ohio is a notable special case. The state recognized tenancy by the entirety between 1972 and April 4, 1985, then abolished it. Tenancies created during that window remain valid, but no new entireties ownership can be established in Ohio.

States That Extend Protection to Personal Property and Financial Accounts

The distinction between real property and personal property coverage determines whether tenancy by the entirety can protect a couple’s financial accounts, vehicles, investment portfolios, and other assets beyond their home. Because most families hold more wealth in financial accounts than in home equity, this distinction often matters more than whether a state recognizes tenancy by the entirety at all.

Sixteen states plus the District of Columbia allow tenancy by the entirety for both real and personal property. Florida offers the most expansive coverage in the nation. Under Florida Statutes Section 655.79, joint accounts held by married persons are presumed to be tenancy by the entirety unless the account agreement specifies otherwise. The Florida Supreme Court confirmed in Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand & Associates, 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001), that this presumption applies even without an explicit tenancy by the entirety designation on the account application. For the practical details of opening and maintaining entireties accounts in Florida, the How to Open a Tenancy by the Entirety Account article walks through specific steps for banks and brokerages.

Virginia explicitly authorizes entireties ownership of personal property under Virginia Code Section 55.1-136. Maryland extends the doctrine to personal property including LLC membership interests, as confirmed in Diamond v. Diamond, 298 Md. 24 (1983). Hawaii’s statute covers virtually every asset category, authorizing tenancy by the entirety for “any other type of property or property rights or interests” under HRS Section 509-2(a).

Nine states restrict tenancy by the entirety to real estate only. In New York, Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, Michigan, and Oregon, bank accounts and investment portfolios receive no entireties protection regardless of how they are titled. Illinois limits the doctrine to homestead property only, meaning investment real estate cannot qualify. Massachusetts provides creditor protection only when the property serves as the non-debtor spouse’s principal residence.

How Strong Is the Creditor Protection? A State-by-State Ranking

Recognizing tenancy by the entirety and actually protecting it from creditors are two different things. Some states provide absolute immunity from individual creditors, while others allow creditors to lien, attach, or even force the sale of the debtor spouse’s interest.

States With Complete Creditor Immunity

In these states, a creditor who holds a judgment against only one spouse cannot attach, lien, or force the sale of entireties property under any circumstances. The creditor must wait until the tenancy terminates through death or divorce, then pursue whatever interest the debtor spouse receives.

State	Key Authority
Florida	Beal Bank v. Almand, 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001)
Hawaii	Sawada v. Endo, 57 Haw. 608 (1977)
Maryland	Watterson v. Edgerly, 388 A.2d 934 (Md. App. 1978)
Delaware	Steigler v. Insurance Co. of N. Am. (Del. 1978)
Virginia	Oliver v. Givens, 204 Va. 123 (1963)
Missouri	Hanebrink v. Tower Grove Bank (Mo. 1959)
Pennsylvania	C.I.T. Corp. v. Flint, 333 Pa. 241 (1939)
North Carolina	L&M Gas Co. v. Leggett, 273 N.C. 547 (1968)
District of Columbia	Immunity by statute
Vermont	In re Pauquette, 38 B.R. 170 (Bankr. D. Vt. 1984)

Florida combines complete creditor immunity with the broadest property coverage of any state. Entireties protection in Florida extends to real estate, bank accounts, brokerage accounts, vehicles, tax refunds, LLC interests, and virtually any other asset that can be jointly titled. This combination makes Florida the single strongest tenancy by the entirety jurisdiction in the country. The Tenants by the Entirety article provides a comprehensive overview of how Florida law applies this doctrine.

Hawaii’s Sawada v. Endo decision remains the most frequently cited authority across all jurisdictions for the principle that neither spouse’s individual interest in entireties property is subject to creditor claims.

States With Moderate Protection

Several states allow creditor liens to attach but restrict enforcement in ways that preserve meaningful protection for the non-debtor spouse.

Massachusetts limits creditor protection to property that serves as the non-debtor spouse’s principal residence. Investment property held as tenancy by the entirety receives no protection from creditors under Massachusetts General Laws chapter 209, Section 1.

New Jersey provides complete immunity only for tenancies created after April 1988. For earlier tenancies, creditors may acquire a survivorship interest under Newman v. Chase (1976).

Tennessee permits liens to attach to the survivorship interest only. The present possessory interest remains protected per In re Arango (1993), meaning creditors cannot force a sale during both spouses’ lifetimes but can recover if the debtor spouse outlives the non-debtor spouse.

Rhode Island allows liens to attach but prohibits forced sale under Cull v. Vadnais (1979). The practical effect is that creditors must wait for the tenancy to terminate naturally.

States With Weak or Minimal Protection

In these jurisdictions, creditors of one spouse can reach that spouse’s interest in entireties property through attachment, execution, or forced sale.

State	What Creditors Can Do
Alaska	Levy and sale of debtor’s interest permitted (Alaska Stat. § 09.38.100(a))
New York	Attachment and sale of debtor’s interest, creating hybrid co-ownership with creditor
Arkansas	Execution and partition allowed; creditor entitled to half of rents and profits
Oklahoma	Attachment permitted; forced sale constitutes severance of the tenancy
Oregon	Attachment subject to survivorship contingency

New York’s approach is particularly noteworthy. When a creditor purchases the debtor spouse’s interest at execution sale, the creditor becomes a co-owner with the non-debtor spouse. This creates an awkward hybrid tenancy that eliminates the survivorship protection the couple originally intended.

The Federal Exception: IRS Liens and Entireties Property

Regardless of how strong a state’s protection may be against private creditors, the Supreme Court’s 2002 decision in United States v. Craft, 535 U.S. 274, established that federal tax liens can attach to entireties property in every state. The Court reasoned that federal law independently defines what constitutes “property” for tax lien purposes, overriding state-law protections.

This means tenancy by the entirety is not a defense against IRS collection in any jurisdiction. The How IRS Liens and Federal Creditors Affect Tenancy by the Entirety article examines how the IRS enforces liens against entireties property, including the critical role that order of death plays in determining whether the lien survives.

States That Do Not Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety

Twenty-five states do not recognize tenancy by the entirety, falling into two categories.

Community Property States

Nine states follow the community property system, which treats assets acquired during marriage as owned equally by both spouses by operation of law. These states never adopted tenancy by the entirety because their ownership framework evolved from Spanish and French civil law rather than the English common law tradition from which entireties doctrine derives.

The community property states are Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Community property provides significantly weaker creditor protection than tenancy by the entirety. In most community property states, creditors of one spouse can reach community assets to satisfy individual debts. Alaska occupies a unique position as the only state that recognizes both systems, allowing couples to opt into community property treatment through written agreements while also offering tenancy by the entirety.

Common Law States Without Tenancy by the Entirety

The remaining states simply never adopted the doctrine or have abolished it. These include Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and West Virginia.

Choice of Law: What Happens Across State Lines

Married couples who own property in multiple states or maintain financial accounts in jurisdictions other than their home state face an important question: which state’s law controls?

For real estate, the answer is straightforward. The law of the state where the property is located (the situs) governs. A couple living in Georgia, which does not recognize tenancy by the entirety, can still hold a vacation home in Florida as tenants by the entirety and receive Florida’s complete creditor immunity for that property. This is one reason Florida real estate is particularly attractive for asset protection purposes.

For personal property and financial accounts, the analysis is more complex. Courts generally apply the law of the couple’s domicile to determine their ownership rights in movable property. However, some courts have applied the law of the state where the account is maintained, particularly when the account agreement designates that state’s law as governing. In In re McNeilly, 349 B.R. 576 (Bankr. D.R.I. 2000), a Rhode Island debtor successfully claimed entireties protection for an account held at a Vermont bank, even though Rhode Island does not recognize tenancy by the entirety.

The practical implication is that couples in non-entireties states may be able to obtain some protection by opening accounts in states with strong entireties laws and ensuring the account agreement is governed by that state’s law. This strategy is not guaranteed to work in every jurisdiction, and couples should consult an attorney in their home state before relying on it.

Creation Requirements and Common Pitfalls

Every state that recognizes tenancy by the entirety requires the traditional “five unities” at the time of acquisition: unity of time (both spouses acquire simultaneously), unity of title (through the same instrument), unity of interest (equal shares), unity of possession (equal rights to the whole), and unity of marriage (the couple must be legally married).

Some states presume that a conveyance to a married couple creates tenancy by the entirety automatically. Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Michigan all apply this presumption, though explicit designation is always recommended. Other states require express language in the deed or account documentation. Massachusetts is the most rigid, requiring the specific phrase “tenants by the entirety” under Massachusetts General Laws chapter 184, Section 7. A deed that says only “husband and wife” creates a tenancy in common rather than tenancy by the entirety.

Michigan stands alone in providing automatic conversion. Any joint tenancy held by two people who subsequently marry converts to tenancy by the entirety upon marriage under Michigan Compiled Laws Section 557.71.

The Common Mistakes That Destroy Tenancy by the Entirety Protection article addresses the most frequent errors that inadvertently destroy entireties ownership, including improper account titling, bank agreement disclaimers, and unilateral transfers.

Recent Legislative Changes

Tenancy by the entirety law continues to evolve. North Carolina enacted a major recodification in 2020 through SB 481, codifying creation requirements under new Section 41-56 and clarifying trust provisions. Virginia recodified its property laws in 2019, moving tenancy by the entirety provisions from Title 55 to Title 55.1 with strengthened trust immunity provisions. Hawaii extended eligibility to reciprocal beneficiaries in 2012 and authorized transfers to qualified trusts while maintaining creditor protection.

Multiple states now allow married couples to transfer entireties property into specially designed trusts without forfeiting creditor protection. Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming all have qualified spousal trust provisions. The Tenancy by the Entirety and Trusts article examines how Florida courts have addressed the tension between trust ownership and entireties protection.