- 7 -
demonstrate that he provided more than 50% of the overall
household expenses in order to be entitled to the dependency
exemption for any of his dependents. Since he did not
fulfill the abode requirement relative to the dependency
exemptions and since he is not entitled to claim a
dependency exemption for any of the minor children, he is
not entitled to the earned income credit.
Respondent’s statement with respect to the abode requirement
is in error because petitioner’s unchallenged testimony at trial
was that the children lived with him for 7 months during the year
at issue. Under section 32(c)(1)(A)(ii), over 6 months of
sharing a place of abode with the taxpayer is necessary to
qualify for the earned income credit. Moreover, there is no
support requirement under section 32, nor is it required that the
taxpayer be entitled to the dependency exemption deductions for
the children. In response to respondent’s argument, quoted
above, that petitioner failed to establish that he provided more
than 50 percent of the overall household expenses relative to the
claimed dependency exemption deductions, the flush language of
section 2(b)(1) provides that an individual shall be considered
as maintaining a household if over half the cost of maintaining
the household during the taxable year is furnished by that
individual, a requirement which petitioner satisfied.
Petitioner, therefore, is sustained on this issue.
The next issue is petitioner’s claim to the child tax credit
and the additional child tax credit under section 24. In the
notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed both credits.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011