- 15 -
Regs., which provides that an absence will be disregarded “if * *
* it is reasonable to assume that the taxpayer or * * * [other
household occupant] will return to the household”. This Court
refused to apply a reasonable assumption of return standard in
the case of a dependent who was absent due to an extended
illness, concluding instead that in these circumstances “the true
test is not whether the return may be prevented by an act of God,
but rather whether there are indications that a new permanent
habitation has been chosen.” Hein v. Commissioner, supra at 835.
The Commissioner subsequently acquiesced in Hein, 1958-2
C.B. 3, and then, in 1966, adopted it in a revenue ruling. In
Rev. Rul. 66-28, 1966-1 C.B. at 32, the Commissioner, relying on
Hein, ruled that “confinement” to a nursing home due to illness
would be considered a “temporary absence due to special
circumstances” for purposes of the dependency exemption
regulations (section 1.152-1(b), Income Tax Regs.),
notwithstanding the extended length of the absence or the
probability, given the dependent's age and condition, that return
would not occur:
In view of the decision in the Hein case, a period
of time during which a dependent is confined to a
nursing home because of illness will likewise be
considered a temporary absence due to special
circumstances for the purpose of section 152(a)(9) of
the Code, even though such absence is for an extended
period of time. There must, of course, be an absence of
an intent on the part of the taxpayer and the dependent
to change the dependent's principal place of abode.
The possibility or probability that death might
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011