- 31 -
whether an absence is to be considered temporary or permanent.
We were interpreting language virtually identical to that in
section 1.2-2(c)(1), Income Tax Regs. The taxpayer in question
had claimed head of household status predicated on his
maintaining a common household with his invalid sister. The
sister was his dependent, and, although confinement was not
absolutely necessary (she could have been maintained elsewhere
with 24-hour nursing care), she had been confined for many years
to a sanatorium on account of mental illness and had little, if
any, chance of recovering. If she did recover, however, the
taxpayer intended that she would again live in his home. The
Commissioner’s principal argument was that, because of the
seriousness of the sister’s illness, it was unreasonable to
assume that she would return to the taxpayer’s household. We
answered: “[T]he 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.
E. The Commissioner’s Pronouncements
In 1958, the Commissioner announced his acquiescence in
Hein. 1958-2 C.B. 3, 6. The boilerplate accompanying the
announcement states, among other things, that the Commissioner’s
acquiescence in an adverse decision can be relied on only with
respect to the application of the law to the facts in the
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011