Phil E. Anderson - Page 6




                                        - 5 -                                         
          Discussion4                                                                 
               A.  Deductions for Dependency Exemptions                               
               Section 151(a) authorizes deductions for the exemptions                
          provided by that section.  In particular, section 151(c)(1)                 
          provides an exemption for each of a taxpayer’s dependents as                
          defined in section 152.                                                     
               Section 152(a)(1) defines the term “dependent” to include a            
          taxpayer’s child, provided that more than half of the child’s               
          support was received from the taxpayer or is treated under                  
          section 152(e) as received from the taxpayer.                               
               In the case of a child of divorced parents, section                    
          152(e)(1) provides as a general rule that the child shall be                
          treated as receiving over half of his or her support from the               
          custodial parent.  In the event of so-called split or joint                 
          custody, “‘custody’ will be deemed to be with the parent who, as            
          between both parents, has the physical custody of the child for             
          the greater portion of the calendar year.”  Sec. 1.152-4(b),                
          Income Tax Regs.  Thus, in the present case, because Ms. Allison            
          had legal custody of the five children throughout 1998 (as well             
          as physical custody for more than half that year) she was the               
          custodial parent in 1998, and petitioner was the noncustodial               



               4 We decide the issues in this case without regard to the              
          burden of proof.  Accordingly, we need not decide whether the               
          general rule of sec. 7491(a)(1) is applicable in this case.  See            
          Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438 (2001).                                





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011