- 6 -
In this case, petitioner was not married at the close of
1997 or 1998, and it is undisputed that the children stayed with
petitioner for more than one-half of the taxable year. However,
petitioner has not established that she provided over half of the
cost of maintaining the household during each taxable year in
issue.
The record is not clear as to where petitioner and her
children resided during 1997. If we find that petitioner lived
with her former in-laws during most of 1997 at the Montebello
residence, petitioner would not prevail on this issue. We have
no evidence as to the annual cost of maintaining this household;
i.e., mortgage payments, utility bills, telephone bills, food or
grocery bills, and other expenses relating to the household.
Sec. 1.2-2(d), Income Tax Regs. Petitioner’s former in-laws did
not testify at trial. See Briggsdaniels v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2001-321.
Moreover, if we were to find that petitioner and her
children lived with her parents and siblings during most of 1997
at the Manhattan residence, the result would not change.
Based upon the testimony at trial and the stipulation of
facts, the overall monthly household expenses of the Manhattan
residence for 1997 and 1998 were as follows:
Mortgage $615
Electricity 300
Water 50
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011