- 6 - The parties stipulated that petitioner worked as an independent contractor during the years in issue.6 Accordingly, we hold that petitioner is liable for the self-employment tax for the years in issue. Petitioner argues that he is entitled to a dependency exemption deduction for Jessy for the years in issue. On brief, petitioner claims that “The Social Security Number was and is not to be used as identification”, and he questions how an SSN can be required for tax deduction purposes. A taxpayer is generally entitled to claim an exemption for each child who qualifies as a dependent under sections 151 and 152.7 However, no exemption is allowed for any individual unless the taxpayer identification number (TIN) of the individual is included on the return claiming the exemption. Sec. 151(e).8 A 6The parties stipulated that petitioner performed some work in 1996 as a consultant. Respondent treated all of petitioner’s 1996 earnings as self-employment income subject to the self- employment tax. Petitioner does not dispute this treatment. 7Respondent is not arguing that Jessy was not a dependent of petitioner during the years in issue. 8Sec. 151(e) was added to the Code by the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (SBJPA), Pub. L. 104-188, sec. 1615(a)(1), 110 Stat. 1853, and is generally effective for returns due after Sept. 19, 1996, Miller v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 511, 513 n.1 (2000). However, for purposes of claiming a dependency exemption deduction for the 1996 taxable year, the SBJPA requires a TIN only for children born on or before Nov. 30, 1996. SBJPA sec. 1615(d)(2), 100 Stat. 1853; Miller v. Commissioner, supra at 513 n.1. Jessy was born on Oct. 13, 1993; therefore, the above exception does not apply in this case.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011