- 3 -
In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that
petitioner’s filing status was single rather than head of
household. Respondent also determined that petitioner was not
entitled to: (1) Deductions for dependency exemptions, (2) an
earned income credit, or (3) an “additional child tax credit”.
Discussion
The Commissioner’s determinations are presumed correct, and
generally taxpayers bear the burden of proving otherwise.2 Rule
142(a)(1); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).
Dependency Exemption
Petitioner claimed dependency exemptions for RM and JM for
2003. Respondent disallowed the deductions in the notice of
deficiency.
Section 151(c)(1) allows a taxpayer to claim an exemption
deduction for each qualifying dependent. A child of the taxpayer
is considered a “dependent” so long as the child has not attained
the age of 19 at the close of the calendar year in which the
taxable year of the taxpayer begins, and more than half the
dependent’s support for the taxable year was received from the
taxpayer. Secs. 151(c)(1)(B), 152(a)(1). The age limit is
2Petitioner has not raised the issue of sec. 7491(a), which
shifts the burden of proof to the Commissioner in certain
situations. This Court concludes that sec. 7491 does not apply
because petitioner has not produced any evidence that establishes
the preconditions for its application.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011