- 4 - that Derrell and Travis resided with him for the majority of either of those years. Moreover, petitioner testified that he did not even claim to know whether his sons spent the majority of either of the years at issue with him or with their mother. Based upon this record, we find that petitioner has failed to demonstrate that he had physical custody of the children for the greater portion of either of the years in issue. Moreover, petitioner has not provided evidence that Ms. Baker released her claim to the exemptions for Derrell and Travis. On the contrary, the record indicates that Ms. Baker claimed the exemptions for Derrell and Travis on her tax returns for 1995 and 1996. Therefore, we hold that petitioner is not entitled to dependency exemptions for Derrell and Travis for the years 1995 and 1996. 2. Head of Household Filing Status Petitioner claimed head of household filing status on his 1995 and 1996 Federal income tax returns and listed his sons as qualifying persons. Respondent has determined that petitioner's proper filing status for 1995 and 1996 is single. Section 2(b) provides that a taxpayer may be considered a head of household if the taxpayer is not married at the close of the taxable year and maintains as his or her home a household that constitutes the principal place of abode for more than half of the taxable year for a child of the taxpayer. See sec. 2(b)(1)(A)(i). As we discussed above, petitioner failed to demonstrate that Derrell and Travis resided in his home for the greater portion of either of the years in issue. Accordingly, we hold thatPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011