- 2 - The issues for decision are as follows: (1) Whether petitioner included proper identifying numbers of the individuals whom he claimed as dependents on his income tax returns for 1996 and 1997. We hold that he did not; accordingly, by virtue of section 151(e),1 petitioner is not entitled to deductions for dependency exemptions for such individuals. (2) Whether petitioner, an unmarried individual, qualifies for head-of-household filing status for 1996 and 1997. We hold that he does not; accordingly, by virtue of sections 1(c), 3(c), and 63(c), petitioner’s tax liabilities for the years in issue must be determined using the tax table for “single” individuals, as well as the standard deduction appropriate to that filing status. FINDINGS OF FACT Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so found. Petitioner resided in Long Beach, California, at the time that his petition was filed with the Court. Petitioner, an unmarried Mexican national, has been a resident of California since 1988. During 1996 and 1997, the taxable years in issue, petitioner resided in Long Beach, California, and was employed as a fork lift operator by American 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for 1996 and 1997, the taxable years in issue.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011