- 11 -
152(e)(2); see also sec. 1.152-4T(a), Q&A-3, Temporary Income
Tax Regs., supra. Further, the separation agreement was not
attached to petitioners’ 2002 Federal income tax return.
Unfortunately, regardless of what is stated in the
separation agreement, the law is clear that petitioner is
entitled to the child dependency exemption for one of the minor
children in 2002 only if he complied with the provisions of
section 152(e)(2). Petitioner has failed in this regard. It
follows, therefore, that the exception set forth in section
152(e)(2) does not apply and that the general rule of section
152(e)(1) does apply. Accordingly, petitioners are not entitled
to deduct dependency exemptions for ND and BD for taxable year
2002. Sec. 152(e)(1); Miller v. Commissioner, supra.
2. David B. D’Amours, Jr.
David B. D’Amours, Jr., attained the age of 21 prior to the
end of taxable year 2002. During taxable year 2002, David B.
D’Amours, Jr., was not enrolled in any educational courses and
did not attend any educational institution.
If a child has reached the age of majority and is
considered emancipated under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, neither parent will be considered to have
“custody” of that child within the meaning of section
152(e)(1)(B). Ferguson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-114;
see Kaechele v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-457. A child
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011