- 6 -
“dependent” includes a son of the taxpayer “over half of whose
support, for the calendar year in which the taxable year of the
taxpayer begins, was received from the taxpayer”. Sec. 152(a).
Given the limited information as to the amount paid for
support of the children, the existence of the joint checking
account and Ms. Rodriguez’s higher income for 2001 lead us to the
conclusion that petitioner did not provide over half of the
support for Erica and Ivan. Accordingly, petitioner is not
entitled to dependency exemption deductions for Erica and Ivan
for 2001, and we sustain respondent on this issue.
3. Additional Child Tax Credit
Section 24(a)(1) provides for a “credit against the tax * *
* for the taxable year with respect to each qualifying child of
the taxpayer”. The term “qualifying child” means any individual
if three tests are satisfied. Sec. 24(c)(1).
In the present case, the only relevant test is whether the
taxpayer is allowed a deduction under section 151 with respect to
such individual for the taxable year. Sec. 24(c)(1)(A). We have
concluded, however, that petitioner is not entitled to dependency
exemption deductions for Erica and Ivan for 2001. Accordingly,
they are not qualifying children, and petitioner is not entitled
to the additional child tax credit of $22 for 2001. We sustain
respondent’s determination on this issue.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011