Michael Kevin Boltinghouse - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          II.  Settlement Attempt                                                     
               Respondent issued a notice of deficiency to petitioner on              
          October 31, 2005, and petitioner timely filed a petition for                
          redetermination with this Court.                                            
               While preparing his case, petitioner gave respondent an                
          unsigned Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return (the                  
          proposed Form 1040) for 2003 and a Schedule A, Itemized                     
          Deductions.  On the proposed Form 1040, petitioner reports his              
          income and dividends consistently with his Form W-2, Wage and Tax           
          Statement, and Form 1099-DIV, Dividends and Distributions.  He              
          also claims a personal exemption for himself, a dependency                  
          exemption, and itemized deductions of $12,999.  Respondent                  
          concedes that petitioner has allowable itemized deductions of               
          $920.94, which is less than the standard deduction of $4,750 for            
          2003, and therefore respondent asserts that petitioner is                   
          entitled only to the standard deduction.3                                   
               A.  Dependency Exemption Deduction for Petitioner’s Daughter           
               Petitioner and his ex-wife have a daughter, Brandi, who was            
          born in March 1985.  In 1991, petitioner and his ex-wife                    
          divorced.                                                                   




               3 There is a slight discrepancy between the total amount of            
          deductions that respondent concedes and our calculation, which is           
          based on respondent’s brief of the total amount of deductions he            
          concedes, but the discrepancy does not alter our conclusions.               





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007