- 9 -
in the head of household regulations.3 See id.; sec. 1.2-
2(c)(1), Income Tax Regs.
D. Reasonableness of Assumption That Petitioner Would
Return
Temporary absences, like those outlined in the regulations
as well as jail confinement after an arrest, are permitted if it
is reasonable to assume the taxpayer will return to his or her
home after the temporary absence. See sec. 1.2-2(c)(1), Income
Tax Regs. We therefore now consider whether it is reasonable to
assume that petitioner, who was temporarily absent from her home
in 2002 due to her arrest and jail confinement but before her
conviction, would return to her home.
We have previously established factors to rely on in making
this determination. Hein v. Commissioner, 28 T.C. 826 (1957).
In Hein, we were asked to consider whether a taxpayer and his 72-
year-old sister, Emilie, had the same principal place of abode.
Id. at 830. The taxpayer and Emilie had lived together for
approximately 30 years, but Emilie had been confined in a mental
health facility for the 6 years before the year at issue and
therefore was absent from the taxpayer’s home during the year at
3We also note that the Commissioner has indicated that
“detention in a juvenile facility” is a temporary absence that
counts as time lived at home for purposes of the EIC. See Serv.
Ctr. Advice 200002043 (Jan. 14, 2000); 2002 Instructions to Form
1040, line 64, Earned Income Credit; cf. sec. 1.6015-3(b)(3),
Income Tax Regs. (spouse’s temporary absence from household due
to incarceration does not prevent spouses from being considered
members of the same household).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011