James T. Redman - Page 5

                                        - 4 -                                         
               The burden of proof is on petitioner to show that he is                
          entitled to the head-of-household filing status and that Justice            
          is a “qualifying child” with respect to petitioner for purposes             
          of the earned income credit under section 32.3  Rule 142(a).                
               1.  Filing Status                                                      
               An individual taxpayer qualifies as a head of household if             
          such individual is not married at the close of the taxable year,            
          is not a surviving spouse, and “maintains as his home a household           
          which constitutes for more than one-half of such taxable year the           
          principal place of abode” of a son or daughter of the taxpayer.             
          Sec. 2(b)(1)(A).                                                            
              Petitioner contends that he and Kim Lake had an arrangement            
          for 1998, separate from the Monongalia County court order, in               
          which he would have custody of Justice for half the week                    
          throughout the year.  His contention, even if accurate, would not           
          satisfy the requirement of section 2(b)(1)(A) that a taxpayer               
          maintain the principal place of abode for his or her child for              
          “more than one-half” of the taxable year.  In addition,                     
          petitioner’s contention is not supported by the record.  Kim Lake           

               3  Sec. 7491 does not apply to shift the burden of proof to            
          respondent because petitioner has not established that he                   
          complied with the requirements of sec. 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B) to             
          substantiate items, maintain required records, and fully                    
          cooperate with respondent’s reasonable requests.  In any event,             
          deciding who has the burden of proof is not determinative of the            
          outcome of this case.                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011