TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Stephen Alan Carey
Docket Number: 2674-09
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 03/17/2010
Pages: 7

UNITED STATES TAX COURT' WASHINGTON, D.C. 2021 7 STEPHEN ,;,ALAN CAREY , Petitioner , v . ) Docket No . 2674-09 ) . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent . O R D E R Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it i s ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transmit to petitioner and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript of the proceedings of the above case before Judge Diane L' Kroupa at Seattle, Washington, on February 24, 2010, containing her oral findings of fact and opinion . In accordance with the oral findings of ;fact and opinion decision will be entered for respondent . (Signed ) Diane L. Kroupa Judge Date : Washington,D .C . March 17, 2010 I SERVED MAR 18 2010 1 BENCH OPINION BY JUDGE-DIANE L . KROUPA 2 STEPHENALAN CAREY V . COMMISSIONE R 3 DOCKET NO . : 2674-09 4 FEBRUARY 24, 201 0 5 THE COURT : The Court has decided to render 6 oral findings of fact and opinion in this case and the 7 following represents the court's oral findings of fact 8 and opinion . These oral findings of fact and opinio n shall not be relied upon as precedent in any othe r 10 case . 11 This bench opinion is made pursuant to th e 12 authority granted in section 7459(b') and Rule 152 . 13 All section references are to the Internal Revenu e 14 Code as amended and in effect for 2'007, the year a t 15 issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Cour t j i16 Rules of Practice and Procedure . 17 Stephen Carey appeared on his own behalf . 18 Kristen Joe appeared on behalf of respondent . 19 Respondent. determined in 'a statutory notic e 20 of deficiency dated December 8, 200'8,,that there was a 21 $3,501 deficiency in income tax from petitioner for 22 2007 . Respondent determined that petitioner was not 23 entitled to claim his youngest child as a dependent 24 because he did not include a waiver from his forme r 25 spouse who had custody . Respondent . also disallowe d Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 4 1 petitioner's claimed child tax credit and head of 2 household filing status . 3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINIO N 4 Some of the facts have been stipulated and 5 they are so found . 6 Petitioner resided in Washington at the time 7 he filed the petition with the Court . 8 Petitioner filed a Form 1040A for 2007, 9 claiming his youngest daughter as a dependent . H e 10 also claimed a child tax credit and head of household 11 status . Petitioner did not attach a signed copy of 12 Form 8332, entitled Release/Revocation of Release of 13 Claim to Exemption for Child by Custodial Parent . 14 Subsequently, petitioner provided respondent 15 a copy of the Child Support order specifying that 16 petitioner was entitled to claim the oldest child as a 17 dependent in even numbered years and the younges t 18 child . as a dependent in odd numbered years . 19 Petitioner also provided respondent a copy of .the 20 divorce decree filed in Superior Court of Washington, 21 Pierce County . Neither the divorce decree or th e 22 child support order was signed by petitioner's ex- 23 spouse . 24 Petitioner at some point got his ex- spouse 25 to sign the Form 8332 . The form is dated February 14, Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 5 1 2007, but someone must have backdated the form as the 2 date of the form is February 2009 . Thus the Form 8332 3 was signed sometime after 2009 . Petitioner sought to 4 use the backdated form to assert that he was entitled 5 to claim the youngest child as a dependent in 2007, an 6 odd numbered year, as specified in the agreement with 7 his former,spouse . 8 Burden of Proof . We begin with the burden of proof . The burden of proof is generally on th e 10 taxpayer . Rule 142(a)(1) . This principle is no t 11 affected by section 7491 . Accordingly, petitioner has 12 the burden of proof . 13 14 Non-custodial Parent Not Entitled t o Dependency Exemption . We now address whether a non- 15 custodial parent is entitled to a dependenc y 16 exemption . The parties do not dispute that the child 17 is the biological child of petitioner and tha t 18 petitioner was not married in 2007 to the child' s 19 mother . Pet t ei a sus wi=f=e was the custodial parent OWL 20 of the two children from their previous marriage . 21 Petitioner's ex-wife did not provide 22 petitioner with a written waiver of her right as 23 custodial parent to claim the youngest child as a 24 dependent in 2007, an odd numbered year . Moreover, 25 the Form 8332 that petitioner provided to responden t Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 6 1 that was signed by petitioner's ex-wife was not signed 2 by her at the time the return was filed . Nor can the 3 divorce decree or child support order suffice a s 4 neither was signed by the ex-wife . They were only 5 signed by petitioner . 6 Petitioner asks us to enforce the language 7 of the child support order to allow him to claim his 8 youngest child notwithstanding the lack of consen t -from--the custodial parent . This we cannot do . 10 The law is clear . A taxpayer may generall y 11 claim a dependency exemption for a dependent over half 12 of whose support the taxpayer provides . Secs . 151(a), 13 (c)(1), 152(a) . Special rules apply to allow the non- 14 custodial parent to claim the dependency exemption for 15 a child if the custodial parent signs a writte n 16 declaration releasing his or her claim to the 17 deduction, and the non-custodial parent attaches the 18 declaration to his or her tax return . Sec . 152(e)(1) . 19 Here, no signed waiver existed at the time petitioner 20 claimed the youngest child as a dependent for 2007 . 21 Although we are sympathetic to petitioner's 22 position, we are bound by the language of the statute 23 as it is written . Michaels v . Commissioner , 87 T .C . 24 1412, 1417 (1986) . The statute prescribes the precise 25 circumstance in which a non-custodial parent i s Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 7 1 entitled to a dependency exemption . See Neal v . 2 Commissioner , T .C . Memo . 1999 - 97 . Petitioner has not 3 shown that he qualifies . Moreover , if we ruled in 4 petitioner ' s favor, we may find ourselves in the 5 middle of a child custody fight similar to those which 6 congress intended to remove from the Federal court s 7 when it amended section 152 ( e) in 1984 . See Miller v . 8 Commissioner , 114 T .C . 184 , 196 (2000 ) . Accordingly, 9 petitioner is not entitled to claim his youngest child 10 as a dependent for 2007 . 11 Head of Household Filing Status . We also 12 conclude that petitioner may not file as head o f 13 household for the year at issue . An individual will 14 qualify for head of household status if the taxpayer 15 maintains as his or her home a household that is the 16 principal place of abode of a dependent for moree than 17 one-half of the taxable year . Sec . 2 (b) (1) (A) GWC 18 Here, petitioner has failed to prove that the child 19 lived with him the requisite amount of time, if at 20 all . 21 Child Tax Credit . We next address the child 22 tax credit . Section 24 ( a) authorizes a child tax 23 credit with respect to each "qualifying child" of the 24 taxpayer . The term "qualifying child" is defined in 25 section 24(c) . As relevant here, a "qualifying child " Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 8 1 means an individual with respect to whom the taxpayer 2 is allowed to claim as a dependent under section 152 . 3 Sec . 24(c) (1) (A) . 4 We have already held that petitioner is not 5 entitled to claim a dependency exemption for hi s 6 youngest child and therefore this child is not a 7 "qualifying child" within the meaning of section 8 24(c) . It follows, therefore, that petitioner is not 9 entitled to a child tax credit under section 24 . 10 To reflect the foregoing, decision will be 11 entered for respondent . 12 This concludes the Court's oral findings of 13 fact and opinion in this case . 14 (Whereupon, at 9 :19 a .m ., the bench opinion 15 in the above-entitled matter was concluded . ) M 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 2 23 2 4 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888