Franco Robert and Linda Noel Stone - Page 6

                                        - 5 -                                         
          my divorce is clear that I am entitled to the exemption for                 
          Shane.”4                                                                    
          Discussion5                                                                 
               A.  Dependency Exemption Deduction                                     
               In general, a taxpayer may deduct a dependency exemption for           
          a dependent over half of whose support is provided by the                   
          taxpayer.  Secs. 151(a), (c)(1), 152(a).  In the case of divorced           
          or separated parents, however, special rules determine which                
          parent may claim a dependency exemption for a dependent.  See               
          sec. 152(e).  As relevant to the present case, section 152(e)(2)            
          allows the noncustodial parent to claim the dependency exemption            
          for a child if the custodial parent signs a written declaration             
          releasing his or her claim to the deduction, and the noncustodial           
          parent attaches the declaration to his or her tax return.                   
               The declaration required by section 152(e)(2) must be made             
          on either Form 8332, Release of Claim to Exemption for Child of             
          Divorced or Separated Parents, or on a statement conforming to              


               4  Notwithstanding the fact that petitioner refers,                    
          interchangeably, to the divorce decree and the order, the parties           
          have proceeded as if the order is the controlling document                  
          because it is the most recent court order concerning the                    
          dependency exemption.  We find nothing under the law of the State           
          of Washington to indicate to the contrary.  Accordingly, we find            
          that the order controls the disposition of this case.                       
               5  We decide this issue without regard to the burden of                
          proof.  Accordingly, we need not decide whether the general rule            
          of sec. 7491(a)(1) is applicable in this case.  See Higbee v.               
          Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438 (2001).                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011