- 4 -
child tax credits. For convenience we combine our remaining
findings of fact and conclusions.
Discussion
Section 7491(a) provides that in a court proceeding, the
burden of proof with respect to any factual issue shifts to
respondent under certain prescribed conditions. We conclude that
the burden of proof remains with petitioner, since she has not
met the criteria of section 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B).
1. Dependency Exemption Deductions
A taxpayer may be entitled to a deduction of the exemption
amount for each dependent. Sec. 151(a), (c). The term
“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).
Upon an examination of the record, we conclude that Brandon
and James did not receive over half of their support from
petitioner.4 We find that, based upon petitioner’s testimony,
the total amount expended in 2001 to support Brandon and James
was $18,410. However, over half of this amount is attributable
to child support from Mr. Cantrell and a pro rata share of the
Section 8 housing subsidy for Brandon and James. Thus, even
accepting petitioner’s assertions as fact, we cannot conclude
4 The record does not indicate that petitioner and Mr.
Cantrell provided over half the children’s support, and thus sec.
152(e)(1) does not apply.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011