Cynthia L. Rowe - Page 24

                                       - 24 -                                         
          passing, before the dependent is able to return to the home                 
          should not prevent eligibility for relief where there is no                 
          evidence she intended to change homes.  While not finding the               
          regulation invalid, we stated: “[W]e are unwilling to conclude              
          that it was the intention of the Congress that, where a child or            
          other dependent is sent to a hospital under circumstances that              
          make it likely he will die, this, in itself, is sufficient to               
          change the principal place of abode.”  Id.                                  
              The dissent’s criticisms apply equally to the result reached           
          by this Court in Hein.  Yet in the many years since Hein was                
          decided, the Commissioner first acquiesced in our holding, 1958-2           
          C.B. 3, 6, and later adopted our holding in Rev. Rul. 66-28,                
          1966-1 C.B. 31.  See also Serv. Ctr. Advice 200002043 (Jan. 14,             
          2000) (citing Hein in indicating that “detention in a juvenile              
          facility” pending trial is a temporary absence for purposes of              
          the earned income credit).  In turn, Congress has cited the                 
          Commissioner’s position in Rev. Rul. 66-28, supra, in several               
          statements of the present law with respect to residency                     
          requirements.  See H. Conf. Rept. 108-696, at 56 n.42 (2004); S.            
          Rept. 108-257, at 81 n.120 (2004); H. Conf. Rept. 108-126, at 179           
          n.327 (2003).   Thus, whatever the merits of the criticism of               
          Hein may have been, the Commissioner and Congress now seemingly             
          agree with its result.                                                      
               I believe Hein applies to the very limited facts before the            
          Court today.  Where an accused is involuntarily detained in jail            

Page:  Previous  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011