TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Micheal Holmes
Docket Number: 25066-06S
Judge: Cohen
Opinion Type: summary
Filed: 04/29/2008
Pages: 6

ADM . R ECORD ED 2 ?ICE STAT . JUDGE 7 FILE S T .C . Summary Opinion 2008-47 UNITED STATES TAX COUR T MICHEAL HOLMES, Petitioner v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Responden t Docket No . 25066-06S . Filed April 29, 2008 . Micheal Holmes, pro se . Julie A . Jebe , for respondent . COHEN, Judge : This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect when the petition was filed . Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case . Unless otherwise indicated, all section references, an d SERVED APR 2 9 2008 - 2 - all Rule references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue . Respondent determined a deficiency of $2,811 in petitioner's Federal income tax for 2005 . The issues for decision are : (1) Whether petitioner is entitled to a dependency exemption deduction of $3,200 ; (2) whether he is entitled to head of household filing status ; and (3) whether he is entitled to an earned income credit of $2,662 . Background Some of the facts have been stipulated , and the stipulate d facts are incorporated in our findings by this reference . Petitioner resided in Illinois at the time that he filed his petition . During 2005 , petitioner resided with Angela Tucker, whom he married in 2006 . Ms . Tucker had received legal guardianship over her nieces , G .F . and T .F ., in 2003 . Ms . Tucker was unemployed during 2005 , but she received disability payments that year . Ms . Tucker also received food stamps and cash from the Department of Child and Family Services to aid her in caring for the children . 3 - Petitioner was not related to T .F . or G .F . Petitioner purchased clothes and groceries for T .F . in 2005 and gave her spending money for school if she needed it . Petitioner claimed a dependency exemption of $3,200 for T .F . on his 2005 return . He also filed his 2005 return reporting head of household status and claimed an earned income credit of $2,662 for 2005 . Respondent determined that petitioner was not entitled to the dependency exemption, changed his filing status to single, and denied him the earned income credit in full . However , respondent now concedes that petitioner meets the requirements for the earned income credit as a taxpayer without a qualifying child and is entitled to an earned income credit of $159 for 2005 . Discussio n The Internal Revenue Code allows as a deduction an exemptio n 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 - 4 - the taxpayer ' s household , and for whom the taxpayer provides over one-half of the support . Sec . 152(d) . Respondent determined that petitioner was not entitled to the dependency exemption that petitioner claimed for the year in issue because he did not establish that either T .F . or G .F . was a qualifying child or qualifying relative . Because T . F . and G .F . were not petitioner ' s children , brothers , sisters, stepbrothers, stepsisters , or descendants of any of those relatives during the year in issue , neither was a qualifying child of petitioner for that year . See sec . 152(c )( 2), (f)(1) . However , because T .F . and G .F . were members of petitioner's household in 2005, T .F . and G .F . might have been qualifying relatives of petitioner if he provided over one-half of the support for either child . See sec . 152(d) . Petitioner argues that he is entitled to claim T . F . as his dependent because he spent his own money to take care of T .F . and G .F . during 2005 . He testified at trial that he purchased food and clothing for T .F . in 2005 and gave her spending money for school, but he could not state how much he spent . Although petitioner ' s testimony is credible , he has not shown that he provided over one-half of T .F .'s support for 2005 . Ms . Tucker received disability income and food stamps and payments to be used in providing for the children . Petitioner did not provide any receipts or other substantiation showing the respective used to calculate the credit . The limitation amount is based o n the taxpayer's earned income and whether the taxpayer has any qualifying children . To be eligible to claim a higher earned income credit with respect to a child, the taxpayer mus t establish that the child meets the definition of "qualifying child" under section 152(c) . Sec . 32(c) (3) (A) . Because, for the reasons stated above, neither T .F . nor G .F . was a qualifying child of petitioner during the year in issue, his earned income credit is limited to the amount respondent has conceded . To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entere d under Rule 155 . - 5 - contributions to the support of T .F . Thus, he is not entitled to claim T .F . as his dependent for 2005 . See sec . 152 ( d)(1)(C) ; Blanco v . Commissioner , 56 T .C . 512, 514-515 (1971) . Respondent also determined that petitioner ' s correct filing status for 2005 was single rather than head of household . 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 2005 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)(ii) . 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 . Sec . 2(b) . Because T .F . was not a dependent of petitioner in 2005 and petitioner has not shown that he furnished over one-half . the cost of maintaining the household in which he, Ms . Tucker, T .F ., and G .F . resided, petitioner is not entitled to head of household filing status . Section 32 ( a)(1) allows an eligible individual an earned income credit against the individual ' s income tax liability . Section 32(a)(2 ) limits the credit allowed through a phaseout, and section 32(b) prescribes different percentages and amounts