T.C. Memo. 2009-56

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

MARTIN WADE GORDON, Petitioner v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

Docket No. 28271-07. Filed March 16, 2009.

Martin Wade Gordon, pro se.

Jeanne Gramling, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

 COHEN, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency of $5,709

in petitioner’s Federal income tax for 2006. The issues for

decision are whether petitioner may claim dependency exemptions

for two minors who were not relatives and whether he is entitled

to head of household filing status, an earned income tax credit,

and an additional child tax credit. Unless otherwise indicated,
- 2 -

all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect

for the year in issue.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated, and the stipulated

facts are incorporated in our findings by this reference. 

Petitioner resided in North Carolina at the time that he filed

his petition. 

For 7 months during 2006, petitioner provided a home for two

children whose family had lost their home. Petitioner was not

related to either of the children but was a friend of their

parents. 

On his Federal income tax return for 2006, petitioner

reported total income of $15,109. Petitioner claimed dependency

exemptions for the two minors. He reported head of household

filing status and claimed an earned income credit of $4,470 and a

child tax credit of $571.

Respondent determined that petitioner was not entitled to

the dependency exemptions, changed his filing status to single,

and denied him the earned income credit and the child tax credit. 

 One of the children filed a Federal income tax return for

herself for 2006, reported income of $4,545, and claimed a

personal exemption.
- 3 -

OPINION

The Internal Revenue Code allows as a deduction an exemption

for each dependent of a taxpayer in computing taxable income. 

Sec. 151(c). Section 152(a) defines a dependent as a qualifying

child or a qualifying relative of the taxpayer. In addition to

other requirements, a qualifying child must be a child, brother,

sister, stepbrother, stepsister, or a descendant of such

relatives, of the taxpayer. Sec. 152(c). A qualifying relative,

however, may be an individual who, for the year in issue, has the

same principal place of abode as the taxpayer and is a member of

the taxpayer’s household, and for whom the taxpayer provides over

one-half of the support. Sec. 152(d).

Section 1(b) establishes a special income tax rate for

individuals filing as head of a household. Section 2(b) provides

the requirements for head of household filing status. In order

to qualify as head of a household, petitioner must have been

unmarried at the end of 2006 and maintained a household that was

the principal place of abode of at least one dependent for more

than one-half of the taxable year. Sec. 2(b)(1). A taxpayer is

considered as maintaining a household in a given year only if the

taxpayer furnishes over one-half of the cost of maintaining the

household during that year. Id.

Section 32(a)(1) allows an eligible individual an earned

income credit against the individual’s income tax liability. 
- 4 -

Section 32(a)(2) limits the credit allowed through a phaseout,

and section 32(b) prescribes different percentages and amounts

used to calculate the credit. The limitation amount is based on

the taxpayer’s earned income and whether the taxpayer has any

qualifying children. Sec. 32(b). To be eligible to claim a

higher earned income credit with respect to a child, the taxpayer

must establish that the child meets the definition of “qualifying

child” under section 152(c). Sec. 32(c)(3)(A). Additionally,

section 24(a) allows a child tax credit with respect to a

“qualifying child” of the taxpayer described in section 152(c).

 Petitioner acknowledged at trial that he did not satisfy the

statutory requirements for the exemptions and credits in issue,

all of which were described in detail in respondent’s pretrial

memorandum. Petitioner did not dispute any facts or legal

principles asserted by respondent, and he did not provide any

evidence of amounts expended by him or by others for support of

the children or maintenance of the household in 2006. He refused

to concede this case, however, because he believes that the

result is “unfair”.

 Petitioner should have the satisfaction of helping out

friends in time of need. He is not, however, entitled to the tax

benefits that he claimed, because he has not satisfied the

statutory requirements.
- 5 -

To reflect the foregoing,

Decision will be entered

for respondent.