- 4 -
The taxpayer must have identified the child on his return
under the identification rule of section 32(c)(3)(D) but need not
have so identified the child to be an eligible individual with
respect to that qualifying child. Sutherland v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2001-8.
Under section 32(c)(1)(C), the so-called tie-breaker rule,
if there are two or more eligible individuals who could receive
the EIC with respect to the same qualifying child, only the
individual with the highest modified adjusted gross income, as
defined under section 32(c)(5), for such taxable year shall be
treated as the eligible individual with respect to the qualifying
child. Sutherland v. Commissioner, supra; Jackson v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-54.
The term “eligible individual” also includes an individual
without a qualifying child if the individual’s principal place of
abode is in the United States for more than one-half of the
taxable year, the individual has attained age 25 but not age 65,
and the individual is not a dependent of another for whom a
deduction is allowable under section 151. Sec. 32(c)(1)(A)(ii).
An eligible individual without a qualifying child may be eligible
for an EIC if the individual earned income or modified adjusted
gross income does not exceed the completed phaseout amount, which
was $10,200 for the 1999 taxable year. Sec. 32(a), (b), and
(c)(1)(A)(ii); Rev. Proc. 98-61, 1998-2 C.B. 811, 814.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011