TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Thomas Edward O'Neill
Docket Number: 10710-11
Judge: Goeke
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 03/21/2012
Pages: 4

UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, DC 20217 THOMAS EDWARD O'NEILL, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent . ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER Docket No. 10710-11. Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is ORDERED that the Clerk ofthe Court shall transmit herewith to petitioner and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript ofthe trial in the above case before Judge Joseph Robert Goeke at Hartford, Connecticut, on February 29, 2012, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of the trial. In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, a decision will be entered for respondent. (Signed) Joseph Robert Goeke Judge Dated: Washington, D.C. March 21, 2012 Sl!BVED MAR 2 7 2012 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Bench Opinion by Judge Joseph Robert Goeke O'Neill v. Commissioner Docket No. 10710-11 February 29, 2012 THE COURT: The Court has decided to render oral findings of fact and opinion in this case, and the following represents the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion. The oral findings of fact and opinion shall not be relied upon as precedent in any other·case. In this bench opinion section references will be to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year 2008. This is a deficiency case before the Court for the taxable year 2008. Respondent issued a notice of deficiency to the Petitioner asserting a deficiency in federal income tax in the amount of $2,343. The only issue relates to Petitioner's claim of a dependency exemption for a child he had by his former spouse. The facts of the case are stipulated and straightforward. The Petitioner and his former spouse were divorced before 2008, and at the time he filed his petition in this case, he resided in Connecticut. He timely filed a federal income tax return for 2008. As stated previously, he divorced his former spouse before 2008, and he and his former spouse entered into a dissolution of marriage Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 agreement in January of 2006. The parties have stipulated that the Petitioner is not the custodial parent of the minor child of this marriage. The parties have also stipulated that Petitioner's former spouse did not sign a Form 8332 Release of Claim of Exemption for Child by Custodial Parent for 2008 or a statement conforming in substance to such form, and the Petitioner did not attach any such documentation to his 2008 federal income tax return. · Section 151(c) provides an exemption and a deduction from taxable income for each allowable dependent. A child of a taxpayer generally qualifies as a dependent if the child shares the same principal place of :abode as the taxpayer for more than one half of the taxable year in issue. Section 153(a) and (c). However, Section 152(e) (1) limits the. dependency exemption when a child's parents live apart. In the case of divorce or separated parents, special rules determines which parent may claim a dependency exemption deduction for a child. As relevant to the present case, Section 152(e) (2) allows the noncustodial parent to claim a dependency exemption deduction for the child only if the noncustodial parent·signs a written declaration Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 releasing the claim for the exemption related to the child. Section 152 (e) (2), Miller v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 184, 190-191 (2000), aff'd. Loveioy v. Commissioner, 293 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. 2001) . Petitioner could not obtain a waiver from his former spouse as she claimed the exemption for the child in dispute in this case herself. We have no alternative under the law but to deny the exemption to the Petitioner. See Thomas v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2010-11. Given our holding, a decision will be , entered for Respondent. This concludes the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion in this case. . (Whereupon, at 8:40 a.m., the bench opinion in the above-entitled matter was concluded.) // // // // // // // // // // Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888