Edward Reiss - Page 6




                                        - 5 -                                         
          34451 (Aug. 31, 1984).  The declaration required must be made on            
          a form provided by the Internal Revenue Service (Form 8332) or on           
          a statement that “[conforms] to the substance of such form.”  Id.           
               In Miller v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 184 (2000), we                     
          recognized that an alternative to Form 8332 may be used by the              
          noncustodial parent to substantiate his right to claim a                    
          dependency exemption for his child.  Any alternative                        
               must contain substantially the same information required by            
               Form 8332.  In particular, the document must satisfy the               
               signature requirement of section 152(e)(2).  The signature             
               of the custodial parent is critical to the successful                  
               implementation of Congress’ plan to eliminate support-based            
               disputes regarding dependency exemptions and to simplify the           
               rules regarding when a noncustodial parent may claim the               
               dependency exemptions for his or her children.  [Id. at 191-           
               192.]                                                                  
          We rejected the argument in Miller that a court decree, even if             
          executed by the former spouse, satisfied the requirements of                
          section 152(e)(2).  In this case, petitioner is the noncustodial            
          parent.  The Decree required petitioner’s former wife to execute            
          the statement required; she, however, refused to do so.  While we           
          are sympathetic to petitioner’s plight, we note that petitioner’s           
          remedy lies with the Arizona divorce court.  It is not within               
          this Court to enforce that decree.  We recognize that, as                   
          petitioner points out, enforcing the Decree may involve an                  
          expenditure of funds, but that is a decision that petitioner must           
          make.  Petitioner has not chosen that route, and he is not                  








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011