- 8 -
show that he cared for each child as his own child, and that each
child had the same principal place of abode as petitioner for the
entire taxable year. See sec. 32(c)(3)(B)(iii).
Petitioner has failed to offer any evidence showing that his
residence was the principal place of abode for the children other
than his self-serving testimony. He did not have legal custody
of the children, nor did he offer any documentation corroborating
that they lived in his household during any part of the years in
issue. This Court has previously recognized that the language of
section 32 shows Congress’ intent for the earned income credit to
be offered only to parents actually caring for children. See
Smith v. Commissioner, supra. Accordingly, we find that the
children were not the foster children of petitioner. Because
petitioner has failed to meet the relationship test under section
32, it is not necessary to analyze the age or identity factors of
section 32. Respondent is sustained on this issue.
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: May 25, 2011