Brooks Edward Omans and Tonya Renee Omans Rateau - Page 11

                                       - 10 -                                         
               The omission of either parent’s Social Security number is              
          not a determinative factor, as it is not required by the language           
          of section 152(e)(2).  Bramante v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-           
          228; White v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-438.  Although the              
          settlement agreement did not list each and every year to which              
          petitioner’s entitlement to the dependency exemption deductions             
          was to apply, we find it clearly refers to the separate returns             
          of petitioner and Ms. Johnmeyer “for the 1992 tax year and for              
          each year thereafter”, thus including the year at issue.  See               
          Boltinghouse v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-134.                          
               As the custodial parent, Ms. Johnmeyer’s signature on the              
          proffered written declaration is critical to the successful                 
          release of the dependency exemption deductions.  See Neal v.                
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-97; Paulson v. Commissioner, T.C.             
          Memo. 1996-560; White v. Commissioner, supra.  The signature                
          requirement demands more than a mere acknowledgment.  Miller v.             
          Commissioner, 114 T.C. 184, 193 (2000).  It must confirm the                
          custodial parent’s intention to release the dependency exemption            
          to the noncustodial parent and signify the custodial parent’s               
          agreement not to claim the dependency exemption.  Id.                       
               There is no doubt that Ms. Johnmeyer signed the settlement             
          agreement petitioner attached to his return.  Her signature                 
          appears on the settlement agreement three times.  Respondent                
          contends that her signature fails to signify her intent to not              






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011