Which States Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety?

Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia recognize tenancy by the entirety, a form of joint ownership reserved for married couples that treats the two spouses as a single legal unit. At its strongest, entireties ownership keeps the property entirely away from a creditor who has a judgment against one spouse alone, because neither spouse owns a share the creditor can take.

A creditor of one spouse gets nothing out of entireties property in Florida or Pennsylvania; New York and Arkansas let the same creditor sell the debtor spouse’s interest. Roughly half the recognizing states extend entireties ownership to bank accounts; in the rest, a couple cannot count on it for an account. Half the country, California and Texas included, has no tenancy by the entirety at all.

What Is Tenancy by the Entirety?

Tenancy by the entirety is joint ownership by a married couple in which each spouse owns the entire property rather than a divisible half. Neither spouse acting alone can defeat the other’s right of survivorship. When one spouse dies, the survivor keeps the property automatically. Only married couples can own property this way, though the District of Columbia extends the ownership to registered domestic partners as well.

The creditor protection follows from each spouse owning the entire property. Where tenancy by the entirety holds its traditional form, a judgment against one spouse alone attaches to nothing, because the debtor spouse has no separate share. A couple facing a judgment against the husband alone keeps the house; a judgment against husband and wife together reaches it. The ownership itself ends if the couple divorces.

Every State That Recognizes Tenancy by the Entirety

Each state that recognizes tenancy by the entirety defines it through its own statutes and court decisions, so what property qualifies and what a separate creditor can still do both change at the state line. The chart names the controlling authority for every state along with the answer to both questions.

On the chart, Authority is the statute or decision that supplies the state’s rule. Real Property and Personal Property show what the ownership can cover there. The last column shows what a creditor holding a judgment against one spouse alone can do, taken from the controlling statute or case.

Current as of August 2026. Download the tenancy by the entirety states chart (PDF).

State	Authority	Real Property	Personal Property	What a Creditor of One Spouse Can Do
Alaska	Alaska Stat. §§ 34.15.140, 34.15.110(b), 09.38.100	Yes	No	Levy on and sell the debtor spouse’s interest, then have the property partitioned or that interest severed
Arkansas	Ark. Code Ann. §§ 23-47-204, 9-12-317; Morris v. Solesbee, 892 S.W.2d 281 (Ark. Ct. App. 1995)	Yes	Yes	Execute against the debtor spouse’s interest, subject to the other spouse’s possession, survivorship, and half the rents and profits
Delaware	Widder v. Leeds, 317 A.2d 32 (Del. Ch. 1974); Steigler v. Insurance Co. of North America, 384 A.2d 398 (Del. 1978)	Yes	Yes, and intent decides it for an account	Nothing during the joint lives; a judgment against one spouse is an inchoate lien that vests if the debtor spouse survives
District of Columbia	D.C. Code §§ 42-516, 46-601; Finley v. Thomas, 691 A.2d 1163 (D.C. 1997)	Yes	Yes	Nothing; entireties property is not subject to execution or levy for the debts of only one cotenant. Both statutes reach registered domestic partners, and debts for necessaries are excepted
Florida	Fla. Stat. § 655.79; Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand & Assocs., 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001); Loumpos v. Bank One, 423 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 2025)	Yes	Yes	Nothing on a judgment against one spouse alone
Hawaii	Haw. Rev. Stat. § 509-2; Sawada v. Endo, 57 Haw. 608, 561 P.2d 1291 (1977)	Yes	Yes	Nothing; neither spouse’s interest is subject to that spouse’s individual creditors during their joint lives
Illinois	765 ILCS 1005/1c; 735 ILCS 5/12-112	Homestead only	No	No sale on a judgment against one spouse alone, unless the property was put into entireties with the sole intent to avoid existing debts; income from the property is garnishable
Indiana	Ind. Code §§ 32-17-3-1, 34-55-10-2(c)(5), (d)	Yes	No	Nothing on a debt of one spouse; the exemption does not apply to a debt both spouses are liable for
Kentucky	Ky. Rev. Stat. § 381.050; Hoffmann v. Newell, 249 Ky. 270 (1932)	Yes, where the deed expressly provides survivorship	No	Take a lien on and sell the debtor spouse’s contingent survivorship interest now; the present possessory interest is out of reach
Maryland	Diamond v. Diamond, 298 Md. 24 (1983); Watterson v. Edgerly, 40 Md. App. 230, 388 A.2d 934 (1978)	Yes	Yes, where the spouses intended entireties ownership	Nothing; entireties property is not subject to the claims of either spouse’s individual creditors
Massachusetts	Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 184, § 7; ch. 209, § 1	Yes	No	Nothing while the property is the non-debtor spouse’s principal residence; other entireties real estate is reachable, and both spouses are liable for necessaries
Michigan	Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 557.71, 557.151, 600.5451(1)(n); DeYoung v. Mesler, 373 Mich. 499, 130 N.W.2d 38 (1964)	Yes	Bonds, stock certificates, mortgages, and notes only	Nothing on a judgment against one spouse alone; a debt both spouses owe reaches the property
Mississippi	Miss. Code Ann. § 89-1-7; Newton v. Long, 588 So. 2d 192 (Miss. 1991)	Yes	Unsettled	Neither spouse can end the estate alone. Mississippi’s appellate courts have not decided what a creditor of one spouse may do
Missouri	Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 442.450, 362.470.5; Hanebrink v. Tower Grove Bank & Trust Co., 321 S.W.2d 524 (Mo. Ct. App. 1959)	Yes	Yes, and marital deposits are presumed entireties	Nothing on a judgment against one spouse alone, bank accounts included
New Jersey	N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 46:3-17.2, 46:3-17.4; Jimenez v. Jimenez, 454 N.J. Super. 432 (App. Div. 2018)	Yes	Yes	No forced partition or sale for a tenancy created on or after April 4, 1988; the debtor spouse’s right of survivorship can still be levied on and sold
New York	N.Y. Est. Powers & Trusts Law § 6-2.2; V.R.W., Inc. v. Klein, 68 N.Y.2d 560 (1986)	Yes	Cooperative apartment shares only	Sell the debtor spouse’s interest, which the buyer takes subject to the couple’s reciprocal survivorship rights; involuntary partition is barred, and the buyer takes nothing if the debtor spouse dies first
North Carolina	N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 41-56, 41-59, 41-60	Yes	Mobile home only	Nothing during the marriage, but the debtor spouse’s half of the income is exposed, and a live lien attaches on divorce or on the other spouse’s death
Oklahoma	Okla. Stat. tit. 60, § 74	Yes	Yes	Levy on and sell the debtor spouse’s interest, which severs the tenancy
Oregon	Or. Rev. Stat. § 93.180(1)(b); Brownley v. Lincoln County, 218 Or. 7, 343 P.2d 529 (1959)	Yes	No	Reach the debtor spouse’s interest and half the rents and profits, subject to the other spouse’s survivorship; the lien follows that interest through a divorce
Pennsylvania	Madden v. Gosztonyi Savings & Trust Co., 331 Pa. 476, 200 A. 624 (1938)	Yes	Yes, bank accounts included	Nothing; neither spouse holds an individual portion a separate creditor can reach
Rhode Island	R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-11-3; Cull v. Vadnais, 122 R.I. 249, 406 A.2d 1241 (1979)	Yes	Unsettled	Attach the debtor spouse’s interest but not force a sale during the marriage; the attachment can be enforced if the debtor spouse survives
Tennessee	Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-1-109; Griffin v. Prince, 632 S.W.2d 532 (Tenn. 1982); In re Arango, 992 F.2d 611 (6th Cir. 1993)	Yes	Yes, bank accounts included	Execute against the debtor spouse’s right of survivorship but not against the present possessory interest
Vermont	Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27, § 349; RBS Citizens, N.A. v. Ouhrabka, 2011 VT 86, 30 A.3d 1266	Yes	Unsettled	Nothing; a creditor of one spouse cannot attach entireties real estate
Virginia	Va. Code Ann. § 55.1-136; Vasilion v. Vasilion, 192 Va. 735, 66 S.E.2d 599 (1951); Oliver v. Givens, 204 Va. 123 (1963)	Yes	Yes, including the proceeds of a sale of entireties real estate	Nothing on a judgment against one spouse alone
Wyoming	Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 34-1-140, 34-14-202; Lurie v. Blackwell, 2002 WY 110, 51 P.3d 846	Yes	Yes, but the account has to say tenancy by the entirety	Nothing; a judgment creditor of one spouse cannot seize entireties property

Ohio is missing from the chart because it abolished tenancy by the entirety going forward. A married couple cannot create a new tenancy by the entirety in Ohio today; deeds recorded before the repeal remain valid. Even those older deeds are read narrowly. A deed from that era that used only survivorship wording created a joint tenancy with survivorship rights, not entireties ownership.

Does Alabama Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety?

Alabama does not recognize tenancy by the entirety, and no Alabama statute creates one. A deed to a married couple there creates a tenancy in common by default; each spouse owns half (First National Bank of Birmingham v. Lawrence, 212 Ala. 45 (1924)).

An Alabama couple who want survivorship must write it into the deed. State law gives survivorship rights only where the deed expressly provides for them. Even then, the result is a joint tenancy with right of survivorship, not a tenancy by the entirety. The Alabama Supreme Court held in Nunn v. Keith, 289 Ala. 518, 268 So. 2d 792 (1972), that this survivorship estate is destructible just as it was at common law, so either owner acting alone can sever it.

Alabama’s execution statute reaches a debtor’s vested interest in real estate owned in common with others. A second statute lets a court sell jointly owned property and divide the proceeds, a forced sale known as partition. So a judgment creditor of one spouse can seize that spouse’s interest and force the sale. Survivorship titling in Alabama controls who inherits; it does not keep a creditor out.

Which Other States Do Not Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety?

Twenty-five states do not recognize tenancy by the entirety, Alabama among them. Ohio, where no new tenancy by the entirety can be created, fits neither count and is the fiftieth state. Nine of the twenty-five are community property states: Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. Community property treats most assets acquired during the marriage as owned equally by both spouses, and it is generally liable for the debts of the marriage.

The other sixteen are common law states that either never adopted entireties ownership or later abolished it: Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and West Virginia. A married couple’s deed that says tenants by the entirety still works in Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, and Utah, but it creates a severable joint tenancy instead.

What Can a Creditor of One Spouse Do in Each State?

In Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia, a creditor holding a judgment against one spouse alone has no remedy against the property itself while the marriage lasts. Five states protect less than that: Kentucky, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Tennessee each stop short of full immunity in a different way. In five more, the creditor can reach and sell the debtor spouse’s interest outright: Alaska, Arkansas, New York, Oklahoma, and Oregon. Mississippi’s appellate courts have never answered the question.

States Where the Creditor Has No Remedy Against the Property During the Marriage

In Hawaii, neither spouse’s interest is subject to that spouse’s individual creditors while both spouses are alive (Sawada v. Endo, 57 Haw. 608, 561 P.2d 1291 (1977)). Pennsylvania applies the same rule to bank accounts. Under Madden v. Gosztonyi Savings & Trust Co., 331 Pa. 476, 200 A. 624 (1938), neither spouse holds an individual portion a separate creditor can reach.

North Carolina bars a judgment lien against one spouse from attaching to entireties property, but the statute leaves two openings. Income from the property becomes each spouse’s separate personal property in equal shares, so a creditor can take the debtor spouse’s half of the rent. And if a lien is still alive when the entireties ownership ends, it attaches at that moment, to the debtor spouse’s share after a divorce or to the whole property if the debtor spouse outlives the other.

Illinois shields only the entireties homestead, and even that shield has two statutory limits. The property’s income can be garnished; a transfer into entireties ownership made solely to avoid existing debts is outside the protection. Delaware protects the property fully during the couple’s joint lives, but a judgment against one spouse sits as a dormant lien that becomes enforceable if the debtor spouse outlives the other.

States Where Protection Stops Short of Full Immunity

Kentucky splits the ownership into present and future pieces. A creditor cannot touch the couple’s present right to possess the property, but Kentucky’s collection statute reaches contingent interests, so the creditor can put a lien on the debtor spouse’s chance of outliving the other and sell that chance now. The rule comes from Hoffmann v. Newell, 249 Ky. 270 (1932), and courts applying Kentucky law have followed it ever since. The buyer at such a sale collects only if the debtor spouse survives.

Tennessee draws the same line. A creditor can take and sell the debtor spouse’s right of survivorship but not the couple’s present interest (In re Arango, 992 F.2d 611 (6th Cir. 1993)). The coverage includes bank accounts. The Tennessee Supreme Court threw out a garnishment of a couple’s joint accounts in Griffin v. Prince, 632 S.W.2d 532 (Tenn. 1982).

Rhode Island lets a creditor attach the debtor spouse’s interest but not force a sale during the marriage. If the debtor spouse survives, the creditor can enforce the attachment and compel a sale of the property (Cull v. Vadnais, 122 R.I. 249, 406 A.2d 1241 (1979)). Massachusetts protects only the home the non-debtor spouse lives in; other entireties real estate is reachable.

New Jersey redrew its rule by statute for tenancies created on or after April 4, 1988. A creditor of one spouse cannot force a sale or division of those tenancies during the marriage; the court in Jimenez v. Jimenez, 454 N.J. Super. 432 (App. Div. 2018), held that the statute superseded the older case law allowing it.

What is left for a creditor in New Jersey is narrower. A creditor can still take and sell the debtor spouse’s right of survivorship, and a transfer into entireties ownership made to defeat known creditors can be unwound as a fraudulent conveyance. That exposure carries into bankruptcy. New Jersey’s bankruptcy court has held that because the survivorship right can be taken and sold, entireties property is not exempt there (In re Weiss, 638 B.R. 543 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2022)).

States Where the Creditor Has a Present Remedy Against the Property

At the weak end, the creditor gets a present remedy against the property itself. Alaska’s exemption statute lets a creditor seize and sell the debtor spouse’s interest, then have the property divided or that interest severed. Arkansas allows a sale of the debtor spouse’s interest, but the buyer takes subject to the other spouse’s possession, survivorship rights, and half of the rents and profits (Morris v. Solesbee, 892 S.W.2d 281 (Ark. Ct. App. 1995)).

Oklahoma permits a seizure and sale, and the sale severs the tenancy by the entirety. Oregon gives the creditor the debtor spouse’s half of the rents and profits along with the interest itself, subject to the other spouse’s survivorship. The lien follows that interest through a divorce (Brownley v. Lincoln County, 218 Or. 7, 343 P.2d 529 (1959)).

New York belongs in that group, but the buyer’s position is weaker than a sale suggests. A creditor can sell the debtor spouse’s interest, and the buyer becomes a tenant in common sharing possession and profits with the non-debtor spouse. The buyer takes subject to the couple’s reciprocal survivorship rights and cannot force a division or sale while the marriage lasts; if the debtor spouse dies first, the buyer is left with nothing. A divorce ends entireties ownership, and only then can the buyer seek partition (V.R.W., Inc. v. Klein, 68 N.Y.2d 560 (1986)).

Mississippi’s Unsettled Rule

Mississippi recognizes tenancy by the entirety, and neither spouse can end it alone, but no Mississippi appellate court has decided what a creditor of one spouse may do with entireties property.

Which States Extend Tenancy by the Entirety to Personal Property?

Twelve states and the District of Columbia extend tenancy by the entirety to personal property as well as real estate: Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming. Everywhere else, a couple’s home can be entireties property while the bank and brokerage accounts stay exposed to either spouse’s separate creditors.

Alaska, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, and Oregon confine the ownership to real estate, and Illinois confines it to the homestead. Three more states cover only a narrow class of assets. Michigan’s statute reaches bonds, stock certificates, mortgages, and promissory notes payable to husband and wife, but not deposit accounts. New York recognizes entireties ownership of cooperative apartment shares. North Carolina adds only a mobile home owned by husband and wife.

Mississippi, Rhode Island, and Vermont have never decided whether the ownership extends past real estate; no statute or appellate decision in any of the three covers personal property. A couple in those states cannot count on entireties protection for an account.

Florida goes furthest with financial accounts. A married couple’s joint bank account is presumed entireties property by statute unless the paperwork says otherwise. The Florida Supreme Court reached that result at common law in Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand & Associates, 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001), and the statute followed seven years later. In Loumpos v. Bank One, 423 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 2025), the same court held that a joint spousal account qualifies even though one spouse opened it. Missouri’s banking statute presumes the same for marital deposits.

The other personal property states ask more of the couple. A Wyoming account has to say tenancy by the entirety in its title. Maryland and Delaware look for proof that the couple intended entireties ownership. Maryland’s highest court accepted entireties ownership of personal property but refused it for a settlement check where that intent was missing (Diamond v. Diamond, 298 Md. 24 (1983)). Delaware’s Court of Chancery refused it for a partnership interest that had stood in the husband’s name alone for five years (Widder v. Leeds, 317 A.2d 32 (Del. Ch. 1974)).

Does the IRS Respect Tenancy by the Entirety?

No. A federal tax lien attaches to the delinquent spouse’s interest in entireties property in every state, however strong the state’s protection is against private creditors. The Supreme Court settled the question in United States v. Craft, 535 U.S. 274 (2002). State law fixes what rights a spouse holds in the property, and federal law decides whether those rights are property the tax lien can reach.

United States v. Craft came out of Michigan, where entireties land was exempt from one spouse’s creditors. The exemption did not defeat the federal lien in Craft, because exempt status under state law “does not bind the federal collector.”

Whether the IRS can then force a sale is a separate question. Federal law grants the power, a court weighs the equities first, and the non-liable spouse is compensated from the proceeds (United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677 (1983)). The Eleventh Circuit applied the same reasoning to an IRS wage levy against a Florida taxpayer in United States v. Ryals, 480 F.3d 1101 (11th Cir. 2007). Dividend income he and his wife received as tenants by the entirety counted as his own income, and he lost his exemption from the levy.

The rule stops at the federal tax collector; a private judgment creditor gets nothing from Craft. The Eleventh Circuit refused to extend the decision beyond the IRS’s own powers (In re Sinnreich, 391 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2004)).

Florida’s courts drew the same line. When Wells Fargo persuaded a trial court to award it a couple’s joint tax refunds on a judgment against the husband alone, the Second District reversed the award. Wells Fargo, the court wrote, “is not the IRS and lacks the IRS’s special authority under the Internal Revenue Code” (Gibson v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 255 So. 3d 944 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)).

Do the Protections Follow Property Across State Lines?

Real estate is governed by the law of the state where it sits, not by the law of the couple’s home state. A married couple living in Georgia, which has no entireties ownership, can still hold a Florida vacation home as tenants by the entirety and get Florida’s protection for it.

Bank and brokerage accounts are harder to place, and the clearest rule comes from bankruptcy law. The Bankruptcy Code’s exemption provision looks to the law of the state where the property is located. A Rhode Island debtor claimed entireties protection for an account at a Vermont bank in McNeilly v. Geremia, 249 B.R. 576 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2000). The appellate panel keyed the exemption to the account’s location rather than the debtor’s home state; the trustee had not proved Vermont law barred the claim, and the exemption stood.

That rule is part of the Bankruptcy Code; it does not decide which state’s law a court applies to the same account outside bankruptcy. A couple planning around another state’s stronger protection is relying on an open question.

How Is Tenancy by the Entirety Created?

Tenancy by the entirety is created by how the property is titled. The deed or account has to vest the property in a married couple in the form the state’s law requires. The common law required the couple to take the property at the same time, in the same deed, holding equal interests and equal possession while married.

Several states have dropped the old rule that an owner had to deed the property through a third person to create a tenancy by the entirety with a spouse. Statutes in North Carolina and Hawaii let an owner deed property directly to the owner and spouse. Florida allows the same deed under Fla. Stat. § 689.11, which lets the spouse holding title create a tenancy by the entirety by conveying to both spouses.

In several states the ownership arrives by default. Real estate deeded to a married couple in Alaska or Oregon becomes entireties property automatically unless the deed says otherwise. New York and Pennsylvania presume the ownership when real estate is titled in both spouses’ names. A New York transfer to two unmarried people described as spouses creates a joint tenancy instead. Florida presumes entireties ownership for both real estate and joint bank accounts.

Other states demand express words. Illinois requires the deed to declare entireties ownership expressly, limits the ownership to homestead property, and opened it to couples in a civil union effective January 1, 2026 (P.A. 104-40). A Kentucky deed carries entireties survivorship only where it expressly provides for it. Hawaii requires the deed to show the intention on its face.

In Massachusetts, a deed to a married couple that uses joint tenancy or survivorship words creates a joint tenancy, not a tenancy by the entirety, and a deed that names the couple only as husband and wife creates a tenancy in common. Property left to a couple by will becomes entireties property only where the will expressly says so. Titling slips like these are the way couples lose entireties protection without realizing it.

Which States Give a Married Couple the Strongest Protection?

Florida, Hawaii, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Virginia combine full creditor protection with personal property coverage. In those states a separate creditor has no path to the property, and the ownership covers bank accounts as well as the home. Maryland and Wyoming reach the same place with a condition attached: Maryland requires proof of the couple’s intent, and a Wyoming account has to carry the entireties title. Delaware protects fully during the couple’s joint lives but lets a judgment against one spouse become enforceable if the debtor spouse outlives the other.

The protections on the chart stop private creditors only; a federal tax lien reaches the debtor spouse’s interest in every state. A divorce ends the ownership. And titling done correctly at the start decides whether the protection ever existed at all.