Which statement best contrasts tenancy in common with tenancy by the entirety?

• A. Tenants in common have separate, transferable interests with no right of survivorship; tenancy by the entirety has survivorship and creditor protections for married couples.
• B. Tenants in common include survivorship; tenancy by the entirety does not.
• C. Tenancy by the entirety allows equal ownership between unmarried partners; tenancy in common does not.
• D. Tenants in common require a deed; tenancy by the entirety is created by marriage.

Answer: (B)

Survivorship is the central difference between these forms of co-ownership. In a tenancy in common, each co-owner has a separate, transferable interest and there is no right of survivorship. If one owner dies, that owner's share goes to their heirs or appointed beneficiaries rather than automatically to the surviving co-owners. The shares can be unequal, and a deceased owner’s interest can be sold or devised independently of the others.

In contrast, tenancy by the entirety is a form of ownership reserved for married couples (in most places). The spouses hold the property as a single, undivided entity with a right of survivorship. If one spouse dies, the surviving spouse automatically owns the whole property. This arrangement also often provides creditor protections for the non-debtor spouse, meaning one spouse’s individual debt typically cannot reach the jointly owned property.

So the best contrast is that tenancy in common lacks survivorship, while tenancy by the entirety includes survivorship (and, in many cases, creditor protections for married couples).