Daye Calvert - Page 3

                                        - 2 -                                         

               Respondent determined a deficiency of $2,835 in petitioner’s           
          Federal income tax for the year 2002.                                       
               The sole issue for decision is whether Social Security                 
          benefits received by petitioner during 2002 are includable in               
          gross income under section 86(a).2                                          
               Some of the facts were stipulated.  Those facts and the                
          accompanying exhibits are so found and are incorporated herein by           
          reference.  Petitioner’s legal residence at the time the petition           
          was filed was Shreveport, Louisiana.  Petitioner was married and            
          lived with his wife at Shreveport, Louisiana.                               
               Petitioner has a degree in architectural engineering and,              
          during the year at issue, was employed as construction                      
          superintendent on a 2-year project at Reno, Nevada.  For the                
          duration of his employer’s construction contract, which included            
          the year 2002, petitioner rented an apartment at Reno, Nevada.              
          His spouse did not move to Reno but continued occupying their               
          residence at Shreveport, Louisiana.  At trial, petitioner                   
          acknowledged that, from time to time, he visited his spouse at              
          their Shreveport home during the 2-year period he was at Reno.              
          He also acknowledged that he and his spouse were not separated              



               2In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that               
          petitioner earned interest income of $26 during the year at                 
          issue.  Petitioner did not address this determination at trial;             
          consequently, it is considered to be conceded by petitioner.                




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011