- 3 -
deductions or credits claimed. Sec. 6001; INDOPCO, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); sec. 1.6001-1(a), Income
Tax Regs. Taxpayers generally bear the burden of proving that
the Commissioner’s determination was incorrect. Rule 142(a);
Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933).2
Section 1(b) imposes a special tax rate on individuals whose
filing status is head of household. Section 2(b) defines “head
of household”, in relevant part, as an individual taxpayer who
(1) is not married at the close of the taxable year, and (2)
maintains as her home a household that constitutes for more than
one-half of the taxable year the principal place of abode of a
son or daughter of the taxpayer. Sec. 2(b)(1)(A)(i). A taxpayer
maintains a household if the taxpayer pays more than one-half of
the total cost to maintain the household, including such items as
property taxes, mortgage interest, utility charges, and food.
Sec. 1.2-2(d), Income Tax Regs.
Petitioner failed to establish adequately that she
maintained a household during 2001. She provided some
documentation, including a phone bill and rental agreement, but
she did not demonstrate her contribution to total household
expenses. Thus, regardless of petitioner’s marital status,
2Under some circumstances, the burden of proof shifts to
respondent under sec. 7491. That burden does not shift to
respondent in this case because petitioner failed to maintain
records and comply with the requirements of substantiation as
required by sec. 7491(a)(2).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011