- 6 -
In order to prevail, petitioner must show by competent
evidence: (1) The dependent claimed satisfies the definitional
requirements provided in section 152(a) (the relationship
requirement); (2) the amount of total support provided for the
child claimed, and (3) that he provided more than half of such
support (taken together, the support requirement). See secs.
151(c)(1)(A), 152(a).
The claimed individual satisfies the definitional
requirement of “dependent” within the meaning of section 152(a)
under the relationship test as the nephew of petitioner. Sec.
152(a)(6). Accordingly, the remaining issue is whether the
petitioner provided more than one-half of his nephew’s total
support for 2003.
“Support” may include: food, shelter, clothing, medical and
dental care, education, etc. See sec. 1.152-1(a)(2)(i), Income
Tax Regs. The amount of total support provided by the taxpayer
may be reasonably inferred from competent evidence. See Stafford
v. Commissioner, 46 T.C. 515, 518 (1966). However, where an
actual amount of total support of a child during the taxable year
is not shown and cannot be reasonably inferred from competent
evidence, then it is not possible to conclude that the taxpayer
has contributed more than one-half. See Blanco v. Commissioner,
56 T.C. 512, 515 (1971); Fitzner v. Commissioner, 31 T.C. 1252,
1255 (1959).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011