TAX COURT OPINION

Case: John Douglas Thomas
Docket Number: 17922-08
Judge: Vasquez
Opinion Type: memo
Filed: 01/19/2010
Pages: 10

Memo . 2010-1 1 UNITE) STATES . TAX COURT JOHN DOUG S THOMAS, Petitioner v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent , Docket No . 17922 - 08 . Filed : January :19 ,, 2010 . John Douglas Thomas ; Pro se . Heather D . Horton, for respondent . MEMORANDUM, FINDINGS OF ' FACT'' AND OPINIO N VASQUEZ, Judge : Respondent determined a $1,593 deficienc y in petitioner's Federal i come tax for 2006 . The issues for decision are whether peti ioner is .entitled to a dependency exemption deduction and a child tax credit for his daughter , S .R .T .1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . FINDINGS OF FAC T Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found . The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference . Petitioner resided in Arizona when the petition was filed . ? Petitioner married Karen J . Thomas (Ms . Thomas) . In 199 1 they had a daughter, S .R'T . On June 6, 1994, the Arizona Superior Court, Maricopa County, entered a decree of dissolution of marriage (decree) ;, dissolving petitioner and Ms . Thomas' marriage . Petitioner an d Ms . Thomas signed the decree . The .. decree does not:,contai n petitioner's or Ms . Thomas' Social Security number_,or the,date that she signed it . The decree awardedMs . Thomas custody of S .R .T . It awarde d petitioner up to 30 days summer visitation and reasonabl e visitation during his visits to S .R .T .'s State of residence . The decree required petitioner to pay child support of $400 per month through the Arizona , Superior Court, Maricopa County . 1 It is the policy of the Court to refer to a-minor byher initials . See Rule 27(a),(3) . Further, it required-petit oner and'Ms ..,_Thomas to alternate . claiming the dependency ex mption deduction and thechild tax ; credit . Ms . Thomas was en itled'to claim the dependency exemption'deduction and-th odd year thereafter . Peti ioner was entitled to claim the dependency exemption deduc ion and the child . tax credit in even years, provided he,was cur ent in his payment of total child . support for-the current' c a endar .year by'December 31' . Under, . the decree, if .petitioner wa s urgent on his child support . obligations, then Ms . Thom s was required to execute al l necessary forms to allow titioner to .claim the dependency . .. .exemption deduction and th child tax credit .. During 2006petitions lived, in Arizona-and was current in his child-support obligati ns . S .R .T . was°15 years old-and live d with Ms . Thomas in Ohio . A certified public ac ountant .( C .P .A .) prepared petitioner's Form 1040, U .S .-.Individual Income Tax Return, for 20,06 . The C .P .A . advised petitioner that respondent, rejected, his . electronically filed Form 040'because'someone else had-already claimed S .R .T . as a depend nt . After inquiry petitio,per'learne d that Ms . Thomas had claime4 S .-R .T . as a dependent . Thereafter , the C .P .A filed a paper Farm 1040 . for petitioner claiming-th e dependency exemption deduc ion and .the child tax credit,for' S .R .T . Petitioner did not attach Form 8332, Release of Claim to Exemption for Child of Divorced . or Separated Parents . Instead, 4 - he attached a copy of the decre e OPINION Petitioner ' hasneither claimed nor shown . that . he .satisfied the requirements of section 7491 ( a) . to shift the burden of proo f to respondent with regard to any factual issue ., I . Dependency Exemption Deductio n Section 151(a) and (c) allows taxpayers an annual exemptio n deduction for each "dependent" as defined in section 152 .. dependent is either a, qualifying child or a qualifying, relative . Sec . 152(a), The requirement is disjunctive,-and, accordingly, satisfaction of either the qualifying child- or,the ; ' qualifying relative requirement allows the -individual to b e claimed as a dependent . A qualifying child must meetthe following four requirements : (cid:127) Relationship .--The individual ..(dependent) .is .a child of the taxpayer, . .descendant of .a child of-the .taxpayer , a brother, sister, stepbrother, , or . stepsister' of the taxpayer, or a descendant of any .such relative ., Sec . 152 (c) (1) (A) (2) . (cid:127)'Residence . -The individual has the same , principa l place of abode as the . taxpayer for more than one-hal f of the taxable year ., Sec . .-152(c) (1 .),(B) :, . - 5 - (cid:127) Age .--The individua must not yet have attained th e age,of 19, or the individual is a student who has no t -yet attained the age f 24 . Sec . ' 152 :(c) (1) (C)°,_„ :,(3) (A)"4(cid:127) (cid:127) Support .--Theindiv dual has not provided''over one-half of . such -indi idual' s , .own support . Sec . , 152 (c) (1) (D), . During 2006 S .R .T . re4ided with Ms . Thomas in Ohio .2 Thus , S .R .T . did not have the same principal place of abode as petitioner for more than o e-half of the taxable year, and she is not petitioner's qualifyin child :under section 152(c) .-' : See-sec . 152 (c) (1) (B) . A qualifying,relativelmust meet the following -four requirements : :.Relationship .'--The individual (dependent) is°the taxpayer's child, a d scendant of the taxpayer's child , the taxpayer's brothe_sister , stepbrother,-o r stepsister ; the(cid:127)taxp a er'as father== or mother .kor ,an = ancestor= of either,' t taxpayer's stepfather o stepmother, a .sonor aughter of the taxpayer's brothe r or sister, a brother' r sister of the taxpayer's - ,fathe r or mother, a son-in-1 w, daughter-in-law , father-in--law, mother in-law, brother.-in- aw,,or sister-in-law ; or an individual (other than an individual who at any time during ."the taxable year was the taxpayer's spouse determined without regard to section 7703) who has the_same principal place of abode as the taxpayer and is a member of the ; taxpayer's household during the taxable year . Sec . 152(d) (1) (A) (2 ) (cid:127) Gross Income .--The, individual's gross income for the taxable year is less than - the :: exemption amount .,-($3, :3,00 for 2006) Sec . 152 (d),(1) (B) . (cid:127) Support .--The taxpayer provides over one-half of the individual's support for the taxable year . Sec .. 152(d) (1) (C) . (cid:127) Not a Qualifying Child .--The individual ;is not a qualifying child of-the taxpayer or of any othe r . taxpayer .for the taxable year . Sec . 152(d) (1)_(D) Petitioner did not substantiate the,amount of S .R .T .'s support from all sources in 2006 . ..A in, addition, petitioner has not established that S .R .T . was not a, qualifying child .of any other taxpayer for 2006 (e .g ., Ms,. Thomas) . , ..See sec . 152(d) (1) (D) . S . R . T,. , therefore, is not petitioner's qualifying relative under . section-152(d), . Section 152(e), however, provides a special rule applicabl e to divorced parents where a,noncustodial parent may be entitled to claim''a dependency :exem tion deduction for the-chil d .notwithstandingthe,resid e y'requirement of section 152(c),(l)(B), the suppor t equi.rement of' section' . 152 (d)°(1) (C) ., or the so called tie-breaking rule of section 152 (c) (4) . The . following requirements mus t be met in order for the child to be treated as ,the noncL parent' .s qualifying 'child o r qualifying relative . (cid:127) Support .,-.-The child child's support durin the calendar year from,the child's parents .rz ; Sec 152(e) (1) (A) *'Parents .--The paren s are divorced or legall y separated under a dec maintenance, are sepa =agreement, or live ap rt at all times during the-'last . 6 months of' the calenda r year . ., Sec 152 (e) (1) (A) _ (cid:127) Custody .--The child .parents for°more tha n Sec . 152(e) (1) (B) . (cid:127) Custodial'Parent Re custodial parent sign mariner'and form as th the custodial parent' dependent for the tax+ble year . Noncustodial Parent Attaches .-Release t noncustodial parent' attaches--th e the.. noncustodial parent's. Sec...' 152 (e) (2) (B) (cid:127) ; _The,written declaration document that- conforms to, its substance' .;- Miller- v . Commissioner., 114 T .C . 184, 190-191 (2000) (citing section 1 . .152-,4T(a) Q&A-=3, . affd . on other= grounds' sub nom . .-Lovejoy=v. . Commissioner , 293 1208 (10th Cir . 2002 ) . In order . for a document to,-, quality as a statement conforming to the substance of Form 833 .2 , Id . at 191 . Form . 8332 requires . a taxpayer wto furnish :",' (1) Th e children'. s .,names and the years for which exemption 'claims ar e released ; (2) the, .,;"custodial parent' s_ signature and : the thereof,; '°'(3) ,the,,=-custodial .parent's Social :,,Security number ; an d (4) the noncustodial parent's name , and Social Security ;,number . Id . at 190 . Petitioner did not attach. Form 8332 to .his :-',paper Form 1040 ; instead, he attached a,copy of the .decree Under the 'petitioner' s, entitlement, to .,the.,dependency ;; exemption deduction was conditioned on .his ,payment .of_the 'total child'-"support,for th e year . The 'decree, ,therefore, does not conform to the-substanc e of Form 8332 or satisfy the . requirements of section 152(e)(2)1 . See Boltinghouse v . Commissioner , T .C . .Memo : 2003-134 (only, a release-that is .-unconditio al conforms .°to the substance of For m 8332,and meets the require ents of section ..152 (e) (2)) . addition, the decree does t containtpetitioner's or..Ms . Thomas ' Social Security . number or he date of her-signature . ;;See Miller . v . Commissioner , su ra a 92 (order did not containcustodia l parent's signature or Soci 1-Security-number ; thus, it did not substantially conform to F rm 8332) ; . ;White v . Commissioner, T . C . . ed to state the years released and did cial Security numbers ; thus, it di d not substantially conform 1 o Form 8332) . Accordingly, the Court finds that S .R .T . is not t eated as petitioner's qualifying chil d or qualifying relative and ,not entitled to the depen d II . Child Tax Credi t A taxpayer : may clai m child tax credit for ."each qualifyin g child" . Sec . 24 (a) . A qu lifying child for purposes, ; of section 24 is a "qualifying child" as defined in section 152(c) who ha s not attained the age of 1 7 Because S .R .T . is not petitioner's qualifying child unde r section 152(c) nor treate d as=such under section 152(e), he is not entitled to the chil d ax credit for her . We are not unsympathe is to petitioner's position . We also realize that the statutory requirements may seem to work harsh results .. to - taxpayers , such , as petitioner, ; :who .are 11 current-In,,' , 1 0 - dependency exemption #aeductions or child- taxi credits . under,,, the ; % terms of a divorce decree :~ However, we ..are°boundby'the languag e .of the',-statute,- as it xis written And, the accompanying ; regulation s when consistent therewith .°:;' Mchaels v : Commissioner ,-°,,87 T C . « 14412 ;- 1417''°( 1986 ) ,-, Brissett v . Commissioner,, T .C,. Memo,: = 2 .003--310 . To ..reflect the'forego.ing,