Marvin B. Hubbard - Page 9

                                        - 8 -                                         
          year.6  Respondent did not challenge petitioner’s classification            
          of his niece as a qualifying individual under section 21(b)(1),             
          or whether petitioner’s payments for child care, if actually                
          paid, were employment-related under section 21(b)(2).  Respondent           
          disallowed petitioner’s claim solely for failure to substantiate.           
               Petitioner claimed the expenses were paid to the service               
          provider “Prestigious” and attached the required Form 2441, Child           
          and Dependent Care Expenses, providing identifying information              
          with respect to it on his 2000 tax return pursuant to section               
          21(e)(9).  In addition, petitioner testified credibly about the             
          expense.  Section 1.44A-1(e), Income Tax Regs., allows the                  
          taxpayer to substantiate the child tax credit with “other                   
          sufficient evidence”.  In the absence of adequate written                   
          substantiation, this Court may, if convinced by the evidence,               
          estimate the amount of deductible expenses incurred.  Cohan v.              
          Commissioner, 39 F.2d. 540 (2d Cir. 1930).  The Court is                    
          satisfied from the record that petitioner did incur child care              
          expenses with respect to his niece, Tymiesha, that enabled him to           
          pursue gainful employment.  On this record, the Court holds that            
          petitioner is entitled to the child care credit of $480 on his              
          2000 income tax return under section 21.                                    


               6    Sec. 21(e) also requires that the taxpayer file either            
          a joint return, if married, or as a head of household to qualify            
          for the credit.  The Court has found that petitioner qualified              
          for head of household status in year 2000; therefore, further               
          discussion as to this requirement is unnecessary.                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011