- 17 -
married at the end of 1983, and has not alleged or shown that he
was living apart from his wife during that year, he does not
qualify as the head of household for income tax purposes.
Therefore, the only filing status applicable to petitioner is
that of a married individual filing a separate return. Secs.
1(d), 2(b), 6013(a).
Dependency Exemption Deduction
Respondent determined that petitioner was entitled to one
exemption amount for himself during 1983. However, petitioner
contends that he is also entitled to an additional exemption for
his daughter, Nicole. Respondent conceded at trial that Nicole
resided with petitioner during 1983.
Section 151(e) provides that a taxpayer is entitled to an
additional exemption for each dependent who (1) has gross income
less than the exemption amount or (2) is a child of the taxpayer
who is (a) either under 19 years of age or (b) a student.
Section 152(a) provides that a dependent includes a child of the
taxpayer who receives over half of his or her support from the
taxpayer. During 1983, Nicole was 13 years of age, resided with
petitioner and Mrs. Roberts, and was unemployed. However,
petitioner failed to prove that he provided over one half of
Nicole's support during the year at issue. Because California is
a community property State, one half of the income earned by
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011