Earl Griffin - Page 3

                                        - 2 -                                         

               After concessions by petitioner, the sole issue for decision           
          is whether petitioner is entitled to the earned income credit               
          under section 32(a).2                                                       
               Some of the facts were stipulated, and those facts, with the           
          annexed exhibits, are so found and are incorporated herein by               
          reference.  At the time the petition was filed, petitioner's                
          legal residence was Gary, Indiana.                                          
               Petitioner was previously married, and he and his spouse               
          divorced in either 1996 or 1997.  They had one child, a daughter,           
          who was 14 years of age as of the end of the 1998 taxable year.             
          Throughout the year at issue, the child lived with her mother in            
          California.                                                                 
               For the year at issue, 1998, petitioner claimed his daughter           
          as a dependent on his Federal income tax return.  Respondent                
          agrees that petitioner was entitled to the dependency exemption             
          deduction because petitioner obtained the necessary consent from            
          his former spouse to claim the dependency exemption deduction for           
          that year.  The dependency exemption deduction is not an                    
          adjustment in the notice of deficiency.                                     


          2                                                                           
               In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that                
          petitioner failed to report taxable interest income of $36 and              
          that petitioner was not entitled to head-of-household filing                
          status.  At trial, petitioner conceded these adjustments and that           
          his filing status was single.                                               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011