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. When properly titled, entireties property is shielded from creditors who hold a judgment against only one spouse. The strength of that protection varies enormously—some states provide absolute immunity from individual creditors, while others allow liens, attachment, or forced sale of the debtor spouse’s interest.
The remaining twenty-five states do not recognize the doctrine at all, including several where married couples frequently search for it. Alabama, California, Georgia, Minnesota, and Texas are among the states that have never adopted tenancy by the entirety or use community property systems instead.
Speak With a Florida Asset Protection Attorney
Jon Alper and Gideon Alper have designed and implemented asset protection structures for clients since 1991. Consultations are confidential and conducted by phone or Zoom.
Book a Consultation
Every State That Recognizes Tenancy by the Entirety
Twenty-five states currently allow married couples to hold property as tenants by the entirety. The table below identifies each jurisdiction, its governing authority, and whether the state extends protection beyond real estate to personal property such as bank accounts and investments.
| 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.
Which States Extend Tenancy by the Entirety to Personal Property and Financial Accounts?
Sixteen states plus the District of Columbia allow tenancy by the entirety for both real and personal property. Most families hold more wealth in financial accounts than in home equity, so a state that protects the house but not the bank account leaves the bulk of a couple’s assets exposed.
Florida offers the broadest coverage of any state. 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.
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
A creditor holding a judgment against only one spouse cannot attach, lien, or force the sale of entireties property in these states. 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.
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
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). Creditors must wait for the tenancy to terminate naturally.
States With Weak or Minimal Protection
Creditors of one spouse can reach that spouse’s interest in entireties property through attachment, execution, or forced sale in these states.
| 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 illustrates the weakest end of the spectrum. When a creditor purchases the debtor spouse’s interest at execution sale, the creditor becomes a co-owner with the non-debtor spouse. This destroys the survivorship protection the couple originally intended and creates an ownership arrangement neither spouse would have chosen.
Does the IRS Respect Tenancy by the Entirety?
Federal tax liens can attach to entireties property in every state, regardless of how strong a state’s protections are against private creditors. The Supreme Court established this rule in United States v. Craft, 535 U.S. 274 (2002), holding that federal law independently defines what constitutes “property” for tax lien purposes and overrides state-law protections.
Tenancy by the entirety does not defend against IRS collection in any jurisdiction. Whether the IRS can force a sale or must wait until the tenancy terminates depends on which spouse dies first and how much tax debt is attributable to the debtor spouse.
States That Do Not Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety
Twenty-five states do not recognize tenancy by the entirety. They fall into two categories.
Does Alabama Recognize Tenancy by the Entirety?
Alabama does not recognize tenancy by the entirety. Alabama Code § 35-4-7 provides only two forms of co-ownership—tenancy in common and joint tenancy with right of survivorship. A deed naming a married couple in Alabama creates a tenancy in common unless the conveyance expressly creates joint tenancy with survivorship.
Married couples in Alabama who want creditor protection similar to tenancy by the entirety have limited options under state law. Joint tenancy with survivorship provides automatic inheritance but no creditor shield. A judgment creditor can force a sale to collect.
Community Property States
Nine states follow the community property system—Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. These states treat assets acquired during marriage as owned equally by both spouses by operation of law.
Community property provides 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. California, Texas, and Nevada are three of the most commonly searched states for tenancy by the entirety, and none of them recognizes it. Married couples in these states who want asset protection must use other tools—LLCs, trusts, or exemption planning.
Alaska is unique: it recognizes both community property (on an opt-in basis through written agreements) and tenancy by the entirety.
Other Common Law States Without Tenancy by the Entirety
Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and West Virginia have never adopted the doctrine or have abolished it. Georgia and Minnesota are among the most frequently searched, and in neither state can married couples hold property as tenants by the entirety.
What Happens When Couples Own Property Across State Lines?
Real estate follows the law of the state where it sits. A couple living in Georgia, which does not recognize tenancy by the entirety, can still hold a Florida vacation home as tenants by the entirety and receive Florida’s complete creditor immunity.
Personal property and financial accounts follow a more complicated analysis. Courts generally apply the law of the couple’s domicile to determine 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’s protection is weaker than Vermont’s.
Couples in non-entireties states may gain some protection by opening accounts where strong entireties laws apply and ensuring the account agreement designates that state’s law as governing. The strategy is not guaranteed to work everywhere, and couples should consult an attorney before relying on it.
How Is Tenancy by the Entirety Created?
Every state that recognizes tenancy by the entirety requires the traditional five unities when the couple acquires the property. Both spouses must acquire at the same time, under the same instrument, holding equal shares, sharing equal possession, and being legally married.
Several 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.
Michigan stands alone in providing automatic conversion. Under Michigan Compiled Laws Section 557.71, any joint tenancy between two people who later marry becomes a tenancy by the entirety automatically.
Errors in creating or maintaining entireties ownership are common. Improper account titling, bank agreement disclaimers, and unilateral transfers can all destroy the protection without the couple realizing it.
Recent Legislative Changes
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 entireties provisions from Title 55 to Title 55.1 and strengthening trust immunity protections. 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 that preserve entireties protection after the transfer. Florida courts have taken a more cautious approach, and the tension between trust ownership and entireties protection remains an active area of litigation.
