- 3 -
Respondent asserts that petitioner is not entitled to the
claimed EIC with respect to a qualifying child because during the
tax year Kenesha was living in the same household as Mrs.
Chandler, whose modified adjusted gross income was greater than
petitioner’s. A transcript of account for the tax year 1999
reflects Mrs. Chandler’s modified gross income of $60,327.
Discussion
The burden of proof is on petitioner. Rule 142(a)(1).3
Section 32(a) provides that an “eligible individual” may be
allowed an EIC equal to the credit percentage as provided in
section 32(b). The term “eligible individual” includes a
taxpayer who has a qualifying child for the taxable year. Sec.
32(c)(1)(A)(i).
A “qualifying child” includes a child who satisfies a
relationship test to the taxpayer, has the same principal place
of abode as the taxpayer for more than one-half of the taxable
year, and has not attained age 19. Sec. 32(c)(3)(A), (B), and
(C). The relationship test is satisfied if the qualifying child
is a daughter of the taxpayer or a descendant of the taxpayer.
Sec. 32(c)(3)(B)(i)(I).
3 Sec. 7491 does not apply to shift the burden of proof to
respondent because petitioner has neither alleged that sec. 7491
is applicable nor established that he complied with the
requirements of sec. 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B) to substantiate items,
maintain required records, and fully cooperate with respondent’s
reasonable requests.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011