Jennifer Ann Rogers - Page 8

                                        - 7 -                                         
               William and I share custody exactly 50/50. * * *                       
               However, I don’t think that there’s any way that anyone                
               can document the amount of time that each child was in                 
               the house.                                                             
                    It’s not the intention of shared custody to try to                
               finagle a tax exemption out of it, or else we would be                 
               marking every single minute that the child was in one                  
               house or the other.                                                    
                    Diana goes to school in San Francisco, and I live                 
               in San Francisco, so she often stops by at other times                 
               in my house.  I’ve picked her up when she’s sick, and                  
               of course I’m going to let her go on vacation with her                 
               father, because that’s to her benefit to have a                        
               vacation with her father, and as I mentioned,  * * * he                
               documented what he believes was his calendar, but he                   
               has no way of documenting my calendar or of knowing                    
               Diana’s whereabouts at every minute when she’s 14 years                
                    So it completely defeats the purpose of a shared                  
               custody.  It’s for Diana’s benefit.  It’s not to try                   
               and manipulate it in order to get a tax exemption, and                 
               I think it’s ridiculous for him to even introduce that                 
          Ms. Rogers further stated “My position is that * * * she was with           
          us equally”.                                                                
               Ms. Rogers’ testimony was delivered in a convincing manner,            
          obviously without regard to tax consequences, and we believe her            
          testimony.  Mr. Lautenberger’s testimony was not delivered in a             
          convincing manner, and his documentary evidence is not                      
               These consolidated cases cried out for some reasonable                 
          settlement between petitioners, particularly since respondent is            
          merely a disinterested stakeholder concerned only that the                  
          dependency exemption and the child tax credit not be taken twice            
          for the same child.  Petitioners did not take that route despite            

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011