TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Dahir Y. Aidid
Docket Number: 30977-08S
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 11/18/2009
Pages: 6

UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, D.C . 2021 7 DAHIR Y . AIDID, Petitioner , v . ) Docket No . 30977-08S 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 San Diego, California, on October 27, 2009, . containing her oral findings of fact and opinion . In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered pursuant to Rule 155 . (Signed ) Diane L. Kroupa Judge Date : Washington, D .C . . November 18, 2009 SERVED NOV 19 2009 1 Bench Opinion by Judge Diane L . Kroupa OctoJer 27, 200 9 Dahir Y . Aidid Docket Nd . 30977-08 S 3 THE COURT : The Court has decided to render ora l 4 findings of fact and opinion in this case, and the following 5 represents the Court's oral findings of fact andl opinion . 6 These oral findings of fact and opinion shall not { be relied 7 upon as precedent in any other case . { 8 This case was heard as a small tax case pursuant to 9 the provisions of Section 7463 and Rules 170 throigh 175 o f 10 the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . Afll section 11 references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as anended and 12 in effect for 2007, referred to as the year at issue, and 13 all rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practic e 14 and Procedure . 15 This bench opinion is made pursuant to th e 16 authority granted in Section 7459(b) and Rule 15 2 17 Dahir Aidid appeared pro se with the assistance o f 18 a Somalian interpreter , Fanik Jama . Jimeel Hamud appeared 19 on behalf of Respondent . 20 FINDINGS OF FACT 21 Certain facts have been stipulated . Th e 22 stipulation of facts filed by the parties , with accompanying 23 exhibits , is incorporated by this reference . Petitione r 24 resided in California at the time he filed the petition in 25 this case . Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 3 1 Respondent determined a $6,188 deficienc in Petitioner's federal income tax for 2007 in a notice o f 3 deficiency dated November 3rd, 2008 ("the deficienc y 4 notice") . Respondent made the following adjustments in the 5 deficiency notice . First, Respondent denied Petitioner' s claimed dependency exemptions for two "nieces," who we shal l 7 refer to as the "children" in this bench opinion :or privacy 8 reasons . The children are daughter's of Petitione r's second 9 cousin, who all lived with Petitioner during 2007 Second, 10 Respondent changed Petitioner ' s filing status fror . head of 11 household to single . Third, Respondent denied Pe t.ltioner ' s 12 claimed child tax credit . And fourth, Respondent denie d 13 Petitioner ' s claimed earned income credit . Petit ioner 14 contests all adjustments Respondent determined inthe 15 deficiency notice . 16 Respondent now concedes that the two children 17 qualify as a "qualifying relative" of Petitioner' . under 18 Section 152 because the children had the same principa l 19 place of abode as Petitioner, and he provided fo r their 20 support . Respondent also concedes that Petitione r i s 21 entitled to claim head of household filing status instead o f 22 single . Petitioner provided an elementary school studen t 23 profile for each child and pharmacy records that ow the 24 children lived in the same apartment as Petitioner , in 2007 . 25 Petitioner was single during 2007 . Peti t loner was Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 employed during 2007 at various manufacturing com?anies . He 2 earned $19,364 in wages during 2007 . 3 OPINION 4 We are asked to decide whether Petitioners is 5 entitled to the earned income credit and the chip ta x 6 credit if the children lived with him during the rear and he 7 provided their support . The issue revolves aroundnth e 8 definition of "qualifying child" under these two provisions, 9 which has a different definition of 'qualifying child" for 10 dependency purposes under Section 152 . 11 We first address the earned income credits: 12 Petitioner claimed on his return for 2007 ..Eligi]pl e 13 individuals may claim an earned income credit on thei r 14, federal tax return . Sec . 32 ( a) . An individual is eligible 15 if they have a qualifying , child for the taxable year . Sec . 16 32 ( c)(1)(A) A qualifying . child is one who satisfies &OL, 17 three requirements set forth in Section 32(c)(3 ) relating t o 18 the age , principal place of abode , and relationshp to the 19 taxpayer claiming the credit . 20 Here, Petitioner has substantiated that he 21 maintained as his home a household that constituted the 22 'principal place of abode for the children during 1007 . 23 Petitioner fails to satisfy , . however, the relationship test . 24 A qualifying child for this purpose is a child of th e 25 taxpayer , or .a de t of such a child, or a brother , Heritage Reporting Corporation . (202) 628-4888 5 1 sister, stepbrother or stepsister of the taxpayer,E or a 2 drt of any such relative . Sec . 152(c) . As Stated dDl- 3 previously, the children are daughters of Petitioner' s 4 second cousin . As such, neither child meets the requirement 5 to be a "qualifying child" for earned income credi t 6 purposes . Accordingly, Petitioner has no qualifying 7 children for 2007 . 8 Even though we find Petitioner did not have any 9 qualifying children, Petitioner could also be an e ligible 10 individual . See Sec . 32(c)(1)(A)(ii) . In this case , 11 however, Petitioner is still not entitled to the earne d 12 income credit for 2007 because his total income of 1 $19,364 13 exceeded the completed phase-out amount of $ 12,5901 . See . 14 Rev . Proc . 2006-53, 2006 - 2, C .B . 996, Sec . .07 . Therefore, 15 we sustain Respondent ' s determination that Petitioner is not 16 entitled to an earned income credit for 2007 . 17 We next address the child tax credit . Seection 18 24(a) authorizes a child tax credit with respect to eac h 19 "qualifying child" of the taxpayer . Sec . 24(c)(1) . The 20 term "qualifying child" for this purpose means a gualifyin g 21 child of the taxpayer who has not attained age 17, as 22 defined in Section 152(c) . As relevant here, the Ichildre n 23 do not qualify under Section 152(c) because they are 24 daughters of Petitioner's second cousin . Accordingly , 1 25 neither of the children is a "qualifying child" wi thin the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 6 1 meaning of Section 24(c) .. It follows , therefore that 2 Petitioner is not entitled to a child tax credit under 3 Section 24(a) regarding the children . 4 The Court therefore sustains Respondents adjust- 5 ments in the deficiency notice, except regardin g 6 Petitioner ' s filing status and dependency exemptions . 7 To reflect the foregoing , a decision will be 8 entered under Rule 155 . 9 This concludes the Court ' s oral finding s of fact 10 and opinion in this case . 11 (Whereupon , at 1 :22 p .m ., the bench opinion in the 12 above-entitled case was concluded . ) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2 1 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888