- 2 -
properties that were not their family residence.
Accordingly, we sustain R's determination that the
payments received from State O for care provided at
those three properties were not excluded from gross
income under sec. 131(a), I.R.C.
Paul A. Stamnes, for petitioners.
Wesley F. McNamara, for respondent.
OPINION
BEGHE, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies of $20,692
and $24,180 in petitioners' Federal income tax for 1992 and 1993,
respectively. The only issue for decision is whether payments
received by petitioners from the State of Oregon are to be
excluded from petitioners' income under section 131(a) as
"qualified foster care payments".1 To resolve this issue we must
answer a question of first impression: whether a house that is
not the foster care provider's residence may constitute "the
foster care provider's home" for purposes of section
131(b)(1)(B).
Petitioners Pavel Dobra and Ana Dobra, husband and wife
(petitioners), resided in Portland, Oregon, at the time the
petition was filed.
1 All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in
effect during the years at issue, and all Rule references are to
the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise
specified.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011