- 7 -
special circumstances. Such absence will not prevent the
taxpayer from being considered as maintaining a household if
(i) it is reasonable to assume that the taxpayer or such
other person will return to the household, and (ii) the
taxpayer continues to maintain such household or a
substantially equivalent household in anticipation of such
return.
Id. The inquiry is fact-specific; to be considered a temporary
absence due to special circumstances, the evidence must establish
that the absence was in fact temporary within the meaning of the
regulation. Cf. Ruff v. Commissioner, 52 T.C. 576, 579 (1969);
Wells v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-516. Moreover, the
special circumstances or necessity of the absence must be a type
intended by the statute. Manning v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 838,
840 (1979). Special circumstances have been found to exist, and
a taxpayer to be qualified for head-of-household status, where a
child was away at a school but returned to reside with the parent
when school was not in session. Blair v. Commissioner, 63 T.C.
214 (1975); Byrd v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-385.
Both petitioner and Ms. Kennedy provided a place of abode,
or home, for Bianca and Alexa. Since 2000 was a leap year, there
were 366 days in that year. Whoever provided the girls a home
for more than 183 days, therefore, provided their principal place
of abode for purposes of the earned income credit. The parties
stipulated to 122 days that neither Alexa nor Bianca Kennedy
resided with their mother. However, respondent urged the Court
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011