In the USA, do parents have the right to control their children's possessions?

Question

Let's say a minor (17 or younger) living with his parents gets a job or does chores, and with the money thereby earned, buys a video game console.

The parents decide that the console is not appropriate for the child and take it away. In fact, they sell it and put the money into their own bank account, with no plans to ever give it back to the child.

Setting aside any question of ethics or morality, is this legal on the part of the parents? If the police are called in, will they seek to charge the parents with a crime (such as theft)?

I am under the impression that there is no legal case here, as the parents are the custodians/guardians of everything for the child. Imagine a situation where the parents are very poor, and ongoingly need the fruits of their child's labor to simply put food on the table and pay for the electricity. In my mind, while parents should generally allow their children to own possessions and enjoy the fruits of their labor, they also have every right to take every last penny from their child if it is urgently needed for the basic good of the whole family.

When considering this situation, perhaps it would be easier for you to think of the purchased item as something most would agree is unhealthful for the child, though not necessarily illegal for him to possess—say, a book on how to construct a bomb or on how to commit suicide. Perhaps it is a chain saw, or a gun, or a set of lawn darts, or pornography, or anything else that most/many people would recognize is good for parents to take away from their minor children, no matter where the money came from or what previous recognition there was in the family of the item's belonging to the child. In this way, please try to avoid responding from any distaste about the parents violating your personal feelings about a child's rights, as this question is specifically about the law only.

I'd like to know if my impression here stands at odds with any laws or precedents that could inform me better.

If a more specific jurisdiction is needed, let's hear answers from Washington state, California, Florida, and Maine. Or chime in with a few other states, so we can get an idea of what the laws are throughout the nation. Feel free to add information on laws in other countries, as well, but please try to answer the USA question first.

Answer 1

The fundamental question is whether children can own property: they clearly can. See Cyclopedia of Law and Procedure (I improved the link so it can be more easily read).

As a general rule any property acquired by the child in any way except by its own labor or services belongs to the child, and not to the parent

McClosky v. Cyphert, 3 Casey (27 Pa.) 220

The right of an infant to be the owner of property is as clear and as well protected as that of a person who has arrived at full age. When anything is given to an infant to be held by him in his own right, he has the title to it, and the parent, guardian or master has in law no more right to take it (for any purpose beyond safekeeping) than a stranger.

Wheeler v. R. Co., 31 Kan. 640, 3 P. 297, 300:

As a matter of law a minor may own property the same as any other person. He may obtain it by inheritance, by gift, or by purchase; and there is nothing in the law that would prevent even a father from giving property to his minor child. A father may also so emancipate his minor child as to entitle him to receive his own wages. It is probably true that where a minor child lives with his father, and is supported by him, all things given to the child in the way of support, such as clothing, for instance, would still belong to the father and not to the child. But things given by the father to the child, not in the way of support, but with the understanding that they should become the property of the child, would, undoubtedly, become the property of the child.

Banks v. Conant, 14 Allen 497, the father

has no title to the property of the child, nor is the capacity or right of the latter to take property or receive money by grant, gift or otherwise, except as a compensation for services, in any degree qualified or limited during minority. Whatever therefore an infant acquires which does not come to him as a compensation for services rendered, belongs absolutely to him, and his father cannot interpose any claim to it, either as against the child, or as against third persons who claim title or possession from or under the infant.

However, a parent does have the right to prevent their child from using or acquiring a computer, car (also prohibited statutorily in Washington), television, cell phone; they can also prevent a child from spending their savings. Parents do retain their property right in things that they give to their children for general support and maintenance, such as a pair of shoes, or books.

There can also be specific statutes such as the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (Washington version) which partially recognize this right, making it easy for a person to transfer property to a minor, where the property is in the care of a custodian, but not owned by the custodian.

Answer 2

Moderation note: this answer was merged from a duplicate question that focused on iowa

Overview

Minors in most US states can and do own property, and their parents have no automatic right to take that property.

In some states there is a rule, dating to 18th- and 19th-centuary law, that a child owes labor to his or her father (or more recently parents) and that if the child works for wages the father may claim those wages. I do not find any indication that Iowa has such a rule. Even in states with such a rule, property, including money, received by a child as a gift or inheritance is the child's property, and may not be permanently taken by the child's parents, or either of them.

A parent may in some cases be allowed to take possession and control of child's property, provided that the action is for the benefit of the child. But the child retains ownership, and the property must be restored to the child after a predetermined time.

Sources

Iowa laws chapter 599 (minors) says in section 599.2:

A minor is bound not only by contracts for necessaries, but also by the minor’s other contracts, unless the minor disaffirms them within a reasonable time after attaining majority, and restores to the other party all money or property received by the minor by virtue of the contract, and remaining within the minor’s control at any time after attaining majority except as otherwise provided.

Section 599.4 provides that:

Where a contract for the personal services of a minor has been made with the minor alone, and the services are afterwards performed, payment therefor made to the minor, in accordance with the terms of the contract, is a full satisfaction therefor, and the parent or guardian cannot recover a second time.

Findlaw's page "Do Parents Own Their Children's Property?" says:

All children under the age of 18 have the same rights with respect to owning property. They cannot enter into a contract without a parent co-signing, unless they are emancipated minors. But assuming that a minor came into the possession of the item without having entered into a contract, as is the case with most purchases and gifts, parents have no ownership rights over the property of children. Parents do, however, have legal responsibility for their children's actions, both criminally and civilly, under the doctrine of parental liability.

Merging these two concepts of minor ownership and parental liability can be a real problem, in an age when parents are feeling like they have run out of disciplinary resources. For instance, if you don't like the way your child is behaving at home, can you legally take away their toy? Or their X-Box? Or their iPhone? The answer is, it depends, but it is never under a concept of ownership, but rather, custodial rights. But more often the real question is, are you seeing the bigger picture?

Custodial Control of Property

Parents, as legal guardians, may be allowed to take temporary custodial control of their children's property, and hold it in good care for them until a set time, and then return it. The child still owns the property, though they may not be constantly in possession.

Answer 3

A very specific case in CA is child actors. They are protected by California Code, Labor Code - LAB § 1308.9 and others. This involves setting up trusts for the child actor's wages to go into.