-5- an issue at trial. In their computation, petitioners point out that alternative minimum tax of $1,553 was reported on their return for 2002, but no alternative minimum tax was determined “per exam”. In effect, petitioners’ computation suggests that alternative minimum tax is not applicable because none was computed in the notice of deficiency. We disagree. There is nothing in the record to suggest that respondent conceded the alternative minimum tax in this case, and petitioners have shown no reason why the alternative minimum tax is not applicable. No alternative minimum tax was determined by respondent in the notice of deficiency because there was no excess of tentative minimum tax over regular tax, based upon the adjustments determined in the notice of deficiency. See sec. 55(a). Based upon the adjustments redetermined in these proceedings, the situation is different. This is simply a computational matter. We agree with respondent that alternative minimum tax is applicable, and we agree with the amount computed in respondent’s revised computation, $1,688. Item No. 5: Petitioners claim a child tax credit of $500, the same amount claimed on their return, whereas respondent’s revised computation allows zero. Respondent disallowed the child tax credit in the notice of deficiency as a result of the application of the limitation based on petitioners’ adjusted gross income. See sec. 24(b)(1). Similarly, based upon thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008