- 6 -
the school records and his testimony regarding where Laura Coats
lived during 1998. Under these circumstances, we afford more
weight to his testimony than to the school records.
Consequently, we find that Laura Coats had the same place of
abode as petitioner for at least 9 months during 1998. As a
result of this finding, we conclude that Laura Coats satisfied
the residency requirement. Since respondent conceded that Laura
Coats also satisfied the age requirement and the relationship
test, Laura Coats was a qualifying child of petitioner for
purposes of an earned income credit for 1998.
Respondent argues that Shawona Higgins did not satisfy the
residency requirement or the relationship test. Regarding the
relationship test, petitioner admits that Shawona Higgins is not
his biological or adopted child. Therefore, in order for Shawona
Higgins to be a qualifying child, she must satisfy the test for
an eligible foster child. Petitioner admits that Shawona Higgins
did not live with him for the entire taxable year. Consequently,
Shawona Higgins was not an eligible foster child of petitioner.
Since Shawona Higgins did not satisfy the relationship test, she
was not a qualifying child for purposes of an earned income
credit for 1998.
To reflect the foregoing and respondent’s concessions,
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Last modified: May 25, 2011