- 6 -
the father of MS and YS on their respective birth certificates.
Moreover, we do not find Ms. Starks’ testimony credible that but
for his running an errand at the time that the birth certificate
for YS was signed in the hospital, petitioner would have been
listed as the father on that birth certificate. Accordingly, we
find that the petitioner has not proven that he is the biological
parent of MS and YS.
Although petitioner has failed to sustain his biological
claims with respect to MS and YS, section 152(a) permits a
dependency deduction for a foster child or an unrelated
individual who has the same principal place of abode as the
taxpayer and is a member of the taxpayer’s household during the
taxable year at issue. Sec. 152(a)(9), (b)(2). Accordingly, the
next inquiry is whether petitioner has shown that the children
principally resided in his Orange, New Jersey, residence during
2003.
We find both inconsistency and irreconcilable vagueness in
the testimony of petitioner and Ms. Starks on the issue of where
the children principally resided during 2003. Specifically,
although Ms. Starks testified that the children only resided in
Brooklyn, New York for 2 months while she recovered from surgery,
petitioner testified that the children stayed with their mother
and grandmother in New York when he was working. Although
petitioner testified that medical costs incurred by the children
in 2003 ranged from six to seven thousand dollars, he did not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011