- 8 -
152(e)(2) work as intended, that control must be
preserved by insisting on adherence to the requirements
of section 152(e)(2) * * *.
Finally, petitioner alleges that an IRS representative
advised him that he could claim exemptions for Corey and Danan
based on the Iowa State court’s decree. However, with exceptions
not applicable to this case,4 the Commissioner is not bound by
erroneous legal advice given by his agents. Dixon v. United
States, 381 U.S. 68, 72-73 (1965); Auto. Club of Mich. v.
Commissioner, 353 U.S. 180, 183-184 (1957); McGuire v.
Commissioner, 77 T.C. 765, 779-780 (1981). In other words,
taxpayers are required to heed, and we are required to give
effect to, the law as actually enacted by Congress and not the
law as it may be misinterpreted by agency representatives.
In view of the foregoing, we sustain respondent’s
determination on this issue.
B. Child Tax Credit
Section 24(a) authorizes a $400 child tax credit with
respect to each “qualifying child” of the taxpayer. The term
“qualifying child” is defined in section 24(c). As relevant
herein, a “qualifying child” means an individual with respect to
whom the taxpayer is allowed a deduction under section 151. Sec.
24(c)(1)(A).
4 See, e.g., sec. 6404(f); Estate of Emerson v.
Commissioner, 67 T.C. 612, 618 (1977).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011