- 6 -
Petitioner argues that since the agreement explicitly grants
the dependency exemption deductions to him and states that the
agreement is enforceable even if not signed, he is entitled to
the deductions. However, language in a divorce decree
purportedly giving a taxpayer the right to an exemption deduction
does not entitle the taxpayer to the deduction in the absence of
a signed written declaration required by section 152(e)(2).
Miller v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 184 (2000), affd. on another
ground sub nom. Lovejoy v. Commissioner, 293 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir.
2002). Since petitioner attached no declaration whatsoever to
his 1999 tax return, he is not entitled to the dependency
exemption deductions claimed for the year at issue.
Petitioner further argues that he should be allowed the
deductions in 1999 because respondent allowed the same deductions
in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, even though no such written
declaration was attached to his tax return in those years.
Petitioner’s argument must fail because each taxable year stands
on its own and must be separately considered. See United States
v. Skelly Oil Co., 394 U.S. 678 (1969). Respondent is not bound
in any given year to allow the same treatment permitted in a
previous year. See Lerch v. Commissioner, 877 F.2d 624, 627 n.6
(7th Cir. 1989); Knights of Columbus Council No. 3660 v. United
States, 783 F.2d 69 (7th Cir. 1986); Corrigan v. Commissioner,
155 F.2d 164 (6th Cir. 1946). Taxpayers have no right to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011