- 4 -
Commissioner under certain prescribed conditions. We conclude
that the burden of proof remains with petitioner, since he has
not met the criteria of section 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B). Indeed,
we found petitioner’s testimony was at times inconsistent with
both Ms. Rodriguez’s testimony and documents made part of this
record.
1. Head-of-Household Filing Status
Petitioner filed as “head of household” for 2001. In
general, section 2(b)(1)(A)(i) provides that a taxpayer shall be
considered a head of a household if, and only if, such taxpayer
is not married at the close of his or her taxable year, is not a
surviving spouse, and maintains as his or her home a household
which constitutes for more than one-half of such taxable year the
principal place of abode, as a member of such household, of a son
or daughter of the taxpayer. A taxpayer shall be considered as
maintaining a household only if over half of the cost of
maintaining the household during the taxable year is furnished by
such taxpayer. Sec. 2(b)(1).
During the year in issue, petitioner was not married to Ms.
Rodriguez and was not a surviving spouse. With respect to
maintaining a household, petitioner contends that 4221 Zamora
Street was a household that constituted the principal place of
abode for Erica, Ivan, and petitioner during 2001. Petitioner
further contends that the other address of the duplex–-4219
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011